Hello guys, what’s up?
I’m a newbie on Dorico and I wanted to know how I can write this chord circle in red on Dorico.
Thanks in advance for your help
Peace,
Maxime
You have to create a crotchet/ quarter note 7:2 tuplet over the second half of the bar
then hide brackets and numbers in the properties (lower zone)
4 Likes
I simply made a time signature change for that bar, used crotchets and hid time signature and barline. And also hid the rest after the pedal minim.
1 Like
Gergely, yes, that’s a possibility, but it feels kind of messy.
After all these notes are a notated slow arpeggio, thats why Vadians tuplet solution feels musically on the point. In other words, Dorico likes Vadians approach 
In case playback is an issue:
The arpeggio goes during the last quarter of a 4/4 measure.
Hence the quarter rest is a real quarter rest, and the arpeggio quarternotes make a sextuplet: 6 Quarters in the space of 1 Quarter.
1 Like
That’s an interesting view. But wait: there is no real rest on beat 3. One could argue as well that the arpeggio starts with the pedal d; a septuplet would then depict the musical content more correctly.
This is a manuscript copy by J. Rinck
The upper system is in soprano clef (c1) - and on first sight it looks, as if Johannes Rinck got the accidentals wrong. But two accidentals are actually placed above the notes, so everything is fine
The version of the score that I have is the Bärenreiter version available at this link: https://imslp.eu/files/imglnks/euimg/d/d7/IMSLP873472-PMLP153090-bachNBAIV,6toccataconfugaindBWV565.pdf
Yes, the Bärenreiter edition must have used the above manuscript as the main or only source.
As one can see, there is an added (smaller) fermata which doesn’t exist in the source.
That’s the way Bärenreiter edited at that time, using smaller items for editorial additions. They did the same for editorial accidentals, which can be a pain to read for the performer.
But the problem with Bärenreiter is that we don’t know the software they use and that’s make the process harder when it comes to reproducing things like this or adding tiny fermatas ou editorial accidentals. that’s why I copy but make it more Henle style because we know exactly which software Henle use.
1 Like
I think they used SCORE and later Sibelius.
I saw newer editions that they seemed to have outsourced, and they did not match up to their prior standards (as an example a new edition of Bach’s b Minor Mass).
2 Likes
The music notation font I’ve always wanted (would buy if it existed) is the old Boosey & Hawkes one before they switched to SCORE and then (I think?) Sibelius. Have to get to work on building some movable type I guess.
1 Like
I don’t really understand what you mean. Do you mean that the best way to make the playback more “real” is to make a sextuplet instead of a 7:2 tuple ?
and the other question, do you think that we ca know the musical font they use ? if yes can you tell me which font it is please?
Yes.
Most of the performances I have heard, interpret the rhythm notation as a (real) quarter rest followed by a sextuplet of 6 quarters in the space of 1 quarter (but freely).
but will it be identical if I make this a 7:2 tuplet or the better option is to make it a sextuplet?
Both playback and layout will be different - since the 7-tuplet will make all 7 quarters even, and the {quarter rest + 6-tuplet} will make the quarter rest longer than each of the following 6 quarters.
It is interesting to see, how the arrangers of this famous organ piece transcribed the arpeggio.
I had a look at Busoni, Cortot and less known arrangers. I couldn’t find Stokowski’s arrangement for Disney’s “Fantasia”.
All of those interpret them musically correct = totally free, improvised.
I agree the Boosey fonts are the best (at least for band works) but as a publisher they were atrocious for the band world. Some awesome music, but scores and parts were riddled with errors.
BTW–I think that was likely hand-engraved, so any digital font would have to be created anew from the punches. And I’d love to see if anyone has made one.
1 Like