[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-music-discuss] Re: Tie issues...

From: Peter Chubb
Subject: Re: [Gnu-music-discuss] Re: Tie issues...
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 15:09:05 +1100 (EST)

>>>>> "Werner" == Werner Icking <address@hidden> writes:

>> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 12:06:01 -0400
>> From: David Raleigh Arnold <address@hidden>

>> Bach used a flat sign, not a natural, to change a fis to f. Do you want
>> to go back to that?

Bach didn't use this as far as I know (as Werner points out) but
earlier authors did until around 1650 in Italy, later elsewhere.
(before that the natural sign was used only for B-natural, and
accidentals were always relative -- a d# would be a semitone above the
last notated d, whether that was a d-flat or a d-natural)

Werner> The greatest mistake in this context is IMHO that some readers
Werner> seem to believe that accidentals within a bar do not belong
Werner> only to the note they preceed but to all octaves. So editors
Werner> revoke accidentals never written. Again Bach's handwriting
Werner> shows that this problem is solved by Bach depending on the
Werner> context.

In music written since the early 19th century this is in fact the case ---
an accidental applies to all subsequent notes of the same name on the
same stave whatever the octave until the next bar line.  In the 20th
century, some composers prefer to notate all possibly ambiguous
accidentals (e.g., see Berg's piano Sonata Op 1. -- he also adds the
accidental on the second of a tied pair after a barline)

Peter C

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]