I’m aware - and have read the docs on - respelling automatically.
But am still not always sure how to proceed.
Is it possible and wise to use one of Dorico’s ‘factory’/default setting to respell every note in a shortish score that might need it in order to clarify intervals, please; to make the score more immediately readable - especially for less experienced players?
For instance and interval of A# to F natural (which is an Augmented Fifth) is better spelled as Bb to F natural because the latter two notes (a Perfect fifth):
are more likely to be in the same scale, and
form a more common, simpler interval
with which musicians are familiar than the former… it looks more like a fifth itself - etc.
IOW is one of Dorico (Pro 6)'s (automatic?) respelling settings more appropriate for this operation than any other; and can whichever that is be relied upon to come closest to what musicians expect?
Hey Mark, allow me to be picky! An interval from A to F is always some kind of 6th even in this case (a diminished 6th), despite sounding like a perfect 5th (and looking like one on a piano keyboard). An example of an augmented 5th would be Bb to F#.
The semantics often cause results to vary from intentions when transposing.
— Jim
As a pianist, I would much prefer all accidentals to be congruent to the key signature. For example, in D major, I would much prefer an A# (or in Db major, Bb) over a Bb (A#) 95% of the time. The other 5% of the time, I’m not picky when it is more atonal or Schoenberg-ish.
To me, since I’m going through something like this right now with a new piano work and I never use key signatures, I generally avoid A#, unless the passage is something where everything else gets sharps (in which case, Bb seems out of place). And I totally avoid things like B#, Cb, Fb, e# for obvious reasons. I also avoid ## and bb (which Feldman used liberally in his string works, perhaps to hint at quarter tones, although I don’t like it when folks make that assumption and play it that way).
Clearly I need to do something about measure 373 and the beginning of 374:
Here’s where cmd-R, or as I’ve now found, hitting shift and double-clicking a note to select all downstream occurrences and then changing the spelling en masse, can really help. The latter, about which I only learned yesterday in this forum, is super helpful.
That said, Finale had the ability to select “favor sharps” or “favor flats” that could be applied to a selection if needed by then hitting Respell, and it would be nice to have something like that in Dorico. Maybe it’s there and I don’t know about it, in which case, never mind.
No ‘allowing’ or ‘pickiness’. You kindly corrected me. I was wrong, of course. Thanks!
It’s exactly that kind of ‘choice’ between apparent alternatives, where one is infinitely preferable to players, that I want to focus on - and understand the best way to do so in Dorico’s automatic respelling options.
Indeed. And I know that respect for key signatures and achieving that congruence goes a long way. Is that something which Dorico’s automatic respelling dialogues can help with?
In fact, that is exactly my case here. I’m writing something with a hexachord that’s not ‘in’ any key. Because it’s for brass, I’m favouring flats (over sharps); but still unclear as to whether I’d be better off attending to each interval on its merits manually - or trusting Dorico’s automatic respelling?
Mark, I was a brass player (albeit not really great ) so I tend to prefer flats. But my Alto Sax friends would prefer sharps since that is more common with the transposition for their instruments (from a HS Band perspective). So the end user should be considered.
Another thing to be careful with is mixing sharps and flats in runs as well as confusing neighbor tones that are “out of the key.” Imagine something like having a Bb key signature with a set of notes being E natural - E flat - E natural. Some may prefer the D# to show the motion and alleviate the extra accidental. (Just my thinking on that — I’ll leave it for better players to make that call!)
— Jim
Well, context is everything. In most cases, we choose C over B# - but what about a figure that oscillates between C# and B#/C - which is easier to read? I would opt for the B#. And, in tonal music, spelling indicates function. In the case of the interval of a minor 7th, the implication for voice leading is one way; respelled as an Aug. 6th, the voice leading moves differently. Asking Dorico to parse which we want is daunting!
I doubt I’m telling you anything you don’t already know, but my inner pedantic self just had to chime in…
Thanks. Yes, that’s actually exactly how I have it set up, but forgot about the other options for all flats or all sharps. I’ve also now checked the box to allow Dorico to allow retrospective note spelling, so I’ll see how that works. Much appreciated!
Yes, I’ve read that about Feldman, but only for (some of) his late string works like Composition for Violin (there’s a recording of Marc Sabat choosing to interpret it in quarter tones, but I prefer my friend Christina Fong’s recording without them):
Definitely! Yes, that’s what I’m prioritising. Which is going to be more readable to the player. Not fair of me to ask them to do all the hard work when I can respell with intervals that are more recognizable.
What I really want to know is whether the Dorico automatic respelling routines are the best way to carry this out - especially in music without a key signature, please.
Yes. I’m intrigued by the latitude which enharmonic spellings offer. Not being a player I’m hoping that Dorico can make the right choices. If not, then I shall learn the other way by making necessary changes manually.
That’s certainly how I’m approaching it: how far apart are any two notes from the one(s) preceding, and those coming next, for instance?
And what happens with a group of three adjacent notes where to get the most comfortable spelling for the first two of necessity makes a jarring second pair?
And should whether or not the higher of two notes is in the Major scale of the lower always take precedence over the ‘rule’ that odd-numbered intervals (thirds, fifths, sevenths) should/will always be both either on a line or a space as opposed to even-numbered intervals, which won’t?
Indeed. I have yet to explore Write > Respell > Respell Notes Automatically… and am curious to know whether this is pretty solid yet; or whether I should approach it manually, case by case.
For which I’m grateful. This is an area where exactitude counts.
You certainly should NOT trust Dorico’s automatic spelling especially when dealing with transposing instruments. The problem is that Dorico makes an enharmonic decision either based on concert pitch or the transposition of the active layout, but can’t do both. The determination is based on this Note Input Options setting:
Here’s a particularly terrible example where I input in concert then switch to transposed:
Inputting in concert pitch with Note Options / Note Spelling / Non-transposing layouts selected, Dorico correctly figures out this is in the key of B and actually makes very logical accidental choices. It’s incapable of making logical accidental choices in the transposed pitch though so literally transposes everything up a major 6th, putting the Alto Sax accidentals in the key of G# major, which no one wants to read. Respell Notes Automatically does not fix this example.
Below is an example from the Guy Lacour saxophone etude book 28 Studies on Modes by Olivier Messiaen. He states the mode as a preamble then freely changes the enharmonics to allow for the shapes to be easily recognizable to the player.
It’s certainly possible to argue a few of his decisions but in general, triad arpeggios look like recognizable triads, scalar passages look scalar, quartal stuff looks quartal, etc. It makes it a lot easier for the player to read.
I honestly have no idea. Why not notate a few measures however you think it would be best received, save the file, save the file as a new file, and then apply the automatic respelling in Dorico to see what happens. It could be interesting. Then you could post the two examples here for commentary.
I’ve not used Dorico’s respelling feature but I would suspect that it chooses to spell, first, within the established key and then within related keys. I could be wrong. See my previous response to the latter half of your reply…
As with the gif I posted above, if you’re inputting in concert, there’s still no guarantee any accidentals for transposing instruments won’t be completely bonkers.
Just because I stumbled upon this thread… Caveat, I don’t use Dorico, and it’s been a while since I was predominantly a player, but I did play a ton, got myself a degree in Jazz composition and did a fair amount of reading at the time (mainly tenor sax).
From my perspective it really has a lot to do with what you want to achieve when you write out music. If the primary goal is just to get a player to sightread effectively then that’s one thing, but if you want them to also understand the deeper essence of the music then I think it needs to be notated accordingly. And, of course, a deeper understanding makes it easier to read.
So in my humble opinion it’s important to understand the function of the notes I’m playing. Enharmonic spelling alternatives risk messing that up. A B# always looks annoying to me, but it indicates a function within a context, and that may ultimately be more valuable than nailing the reading first time around…
I agree. Interesting notation.
On the line that starts with mp there is an interesting example where it looks to me as a player as an F# major scale is spelled out, starting on F#, and then under the word “crescendo” the same notes first three notes are spelled enharmonically, but it makes sense since the B is omitted in favor of the C, making it a whole tone scale. I think that implies different sounds to me just by virtue of notation.
Also interesting is the fundamental problem of constant structures, in this case major thirds. On the next line starting with G# the first part of the bar has all natural and sharps except for the Bb. For some reason that makes more sense than A# to me, though I’m not sure it “should” make more sense. In my brain the Bb makes that descending line starting with D look different from the rest of the bar which probably makes sense, especially considering that the shape of melody repeats in the next bar and spelling that set of major thirds differently would have been worse (B#/G# instead of C/Ab).
Anyway… I don’t really know why I butted in… I’ll shut up now.
I don’t, actually. I remember when he switched to a neoromaticism and the music world went nuts. He ended up in a retirement community here in the Philly area and while I’m not that familiar with his works, hope his oeuvre isn’t neglected. Too many composers are ending up that way (Shapey, Bazelon, Fine, Ruth Crawford Seeger, Shapero, Berger, etc); even Ives and Dallapiccola are probably underperformed these days.
.
) so I tend to prefer flats. But my Alto Sax friends would prefer sharps since that is more common with the transposition for their instruments (from a HS Band perspective). So the end user should be considered.
