I’m wondering how often I have to use slurs for vocal melisma. Please see the image. Is the slur in bar 45 obvious? Or do I need to put the slur marking in at that spot as in bar 53. Are we still doing slurs for every single occurrence? Is it acceptable to put those slurs in the first chorus only?
Same with bars 46 vs 54. The line after the word ‘smooth’ indicates that the note lasts through the ‘G’. Is that enough?
Same in 50-51 as compared to 58-59. Are we still always putting that slur in as shown in bars 58-59?
I just feel like much of the time, the singers are going to understand what to do, and certainly they will after the first occurrence. Any comments are appreciated.
But Bill, let me be clear. You vote *no* for the lines that extend after a word to show that it lasts xx amount of time? As in, you would not use those lines after the word ‘Stones’ in bar 45 or ‘Smooth’ in bar 50?
If the answer is yes I have to think you’d say no to any of the lines in my example?
What about if a word lasts from the last note of one system through the 1st bar of the next system?
If the convention has become to not use this extension lines (if that’s what you mean)… boy oh boy, I have included those lines in a lot of charts!
Yes, my style is that if you have slurs you don’t need word extensions, but that’s just my style. Many would disagree, but I see that some modern hymnals agree. Take your pick.
I would definitely disagree. I find reading music without extension lines a bit like doing a high-wire without a safety net. It feels like something is missing and puts me on edge.
Context is important. Extension lines don’t always show up in very tight, small spaces (like the very last “Stones” in the original example), so slurs make it clear.
Over longer phrases, extension lines are more efficient than lengthy slur arcs over more than one system.
A lot of early music editions use no slurs (or very few), but do show extension lines.
There is some redundancy of meaning, I’ll grant you, in slurs and extension lines; but I dare say that I could contrive situations where not having one might conceivably change the meaning subtly.
I would suggest that the vast majority of music published in the last 50 years or so uses both, and it is very much standard practice, apart from in particular genres such as some hymnals and early music, for the reasons given.
Of course, hundreds of years ago, people just sang the last syllable until such time as they saw another one, without either slurs or lines, but music has got more complex since then.
You can guarantee that someone is going to complain or mutter in rehearsal if things are non-standard without good reason!
As a professional singer for 25 years, I absolutely agree with @benwiggy. Slurs+extension lines (when there’s enough room for it) is the rule, anything that goes against it raises questions, and usually you don’t want the musicians to have questions when they read your scores…
I agree too. Anything out of the ordinary is going to stop people’s ‘automatic’ sight reading and force them to think. I would find your music as written very confusing.
I am by no means a pro singer, I read bass guitar charts. Still, I did an experiment. I took the extension lines out and pretended I was trying to sight-sing some passage. ‘Safety net’ is a good description. I felt like I was missing out on very useful information.
I guess I have my answer. In fact this is how I’ve done vocals on charts in the past, but for some reason it was looking odd to me, possibly because there was so much syncopation in the melody, with ties everywhere including across bar lines. Thanks for the input everyone.
