I am told that by “default,” making enharmonic changes (spelling) to notes in score layouts also affects their spelling in all other layouts, but respelling notes in part layouts only affects their spelling in the current part layout. This is good.
However, as a concert composer for schools, I have requirements to deliver both Concert Key scores and Transposed scores. I’m running into an issue, and I’m hoping I can get educated!
For instruments like Bb Clarinet and Eb Alto Saxophone, it’s not unusual for their keys in their transposed key to be in sharps and in the concert key in flats. For example, Eb Alto Saxophone in the transposed key of G (one sharp) should show sharp accidentals in the instrument part and the transposed score layouts. However, when going to the Concert score layout (in Bb), changing an accidental like C# to Db also changes the transposed score and instrument part from A# to Gb (in the transposed key of G).
I’m left with no choice but deliver a Concert score with sharp accidentals in flat keys (and vice versa), UNLESS… someone could share a feature/option that would allow for enharmonic spellings to be independent between score layouts.
There would be other options you’d need to amend for it to look like other scores, including changing the appearance of staff labels and perhaps multi-bar rest consolidation, for example.
I’m not sure I could say reliably at this time of night – why not add a custom score layout and see? You can easily undo your changes and delete the layout afterwards, or indeed test it out in a saved-as version of your project, separate from the original.
Hi @Lillie_Harris
I’ve setup a Custom Score Layout, and the results are the same. The enharmonic spellings are inextricably linked in all “score” layouts. Your suggested workaround may work with a lot of fiddling, but I may need some assistance thinking through a workflow that would work.
I compose in concert key, so naturally I will spend the majority of my time in the concert score. Then, when I’m ready to review instrument parts I will need to review each one separately (as I do today) and make the enharmonic changes. I would also need to make the same changes again in the transposed score (the new “all players” instrument layout).
Surely there is a better way without introducing rework and potential for errors/inconsistencies.
Aren’t there other composers out there that need to be prepared to provide a concert or transposed score for each work?
I expect adapting a parts layout to show your transposed score would be the best current option of those suggested above.
I frequently have both a concert Working Score (which often includes a piano reduction for a P/V part) and a transposed Conductor’s Score, but I have not had to deal with the enharmonic transpositions in the parts yet.
I am told that by “default,” making enharmonic changes (spelling) to notes in score layouts also affects their spelling in all other layouts, but respelling notes in part layouts only affects their spelling in the current part layout. This is good.
However, as a concert composer for schools, I have requirements to deliver both Concert Key scores and Transposed scores. I’m running into an issue…
For instruments like Bb Clarinet and Eb Alto Saxophone, it’s not unusual for their keys in their transposed key to be in sharps and in the concert key in flats. For example, Eb Alto Saxophone in the transposed key of G (one sharp) should show sharp accidentals in the instrument part and the transposed score layouts. However, when going to the Concert score layout (in Bb), changing an accidental like C# to Db also changes the transposed score and instrument part from A# to Gb (in the transposed key of G).
The enharmonic spellings are inextricably linked in all “score” layouts. A suggested workaround of using a new Instrument Part Layout, assigning all players and applying Score Layout Templates works with a lot of fiddling. But this method introduces a ton of tedious rework and brings potential for errors/inconsistencies. Try it (every accidental for every part and the second “workaround score” has to be reviewed).
FEATURE REQUESTS:
I would like to suggest an option for all Score Layouts to allow independent enharmonic spelling.
I would also like to suggest an option for the default enharmonic spelling to be compatible with the key signature of the instrument’s part, whether an Instrument Layout or Score Layout (concert or transposed).
I’ve taken the liberty of moving your new thread to your existing one, since there’s really no need to create a new thread for the same issue.
We have discussed at various points in the past the ability to have different spellings for notes based on whether a layout is currently shown in concert or transposed pitch, and this is something we would like to add in a future version.
someone could share a feature/option that would allow for enharmonic spellings to be independent between score layouts.