Excellent advice! Everything I would have said and more. I have been fighting the default spacing war in my little corner of the music copying world for 35 years. Meliora!
Thank you so much for the video! It helped me clear up my doubts about organizing space on the sheets. And overall it's great that you started making videos like this, invaluable experience!
Great stuff! Engraving definitely something most non-professional (and some professional) composers struggle with, but it's not necessarily the sexiest topic and generally gets overlooked a bit. Keep it up please!
Hey Frej! Really nice and informative video. Thanks a lot! I would recommend lingering longer on visual examples and the squares containing informative texts. Many of the examples fly by much faster than I am able to 1) register what I'm looking at, 2) process what I'm seeing, and 3) connect it to what you are saying. Same goes with text, I need to repeatedly pause the video to read and process all the information. I'd recommend keeping the texts and image examples on the screen for longer while you talk. A common heuristic in video editing is that the text should be on the screen long enough for you (the editor who already knows what it says) to read it at least twice at a normal pace.
In my experience, choosing staff and paper sizes such that the layout of a given single page of score is good is more or less always possible, but in a score for a large ensemble where empty staves are hidden, every page is its own potentially unique layout challenge, and choosing a single staff and paper size that is good for every page can seem impossible. I often run into situations where I ensure that tutti systems fit comfortably, but when there are sequences of several systems in a row where around two thirds of the ensemble plays, there isn't room for two systems on a page, but one system per page is too spread out.
Usually in those cases, you have to: a) add extra whitespace at the bottom of the page (as in mistake #3) - having different heights for the bottom staff throughout a score is fine, but you would want at least a spread (two facing pages, left+right) like this, not just a singular page. Some editions do not do this. b) show more instruments that are not playing. Optimized scores are tricky and you can't always optimize all passages. Sometimes you have to pretty much have a tutti setup despite not having too many instruments playing. or possibly, if it has not been explored yet: c) reduce more staves if you want to achieve two systems/page (the latter half of mistake #3 was partially aimed at this but it's a far more complex issue)
@@frejwedlundcomposer If you have to show instruments that aren't playing, how do you choose which ones? The first thing that comes to mind is ones that play on the adjacent systems. Any other criteria?
Displaying sheet music on a screen, in landscape format, is tricky even without RUclips compression - switch to 4k if you can to make things more legible.
Thank you Frej! Really helpful to have an experienced engraver here. Breitkopf & Härtel scores are always a pleasure to read. Some personal observations: B4 for scores and parts always works, though I started writing music manuscript, copying by hand and using Notaset (!) in the 70s in UK, when the DIN A/B series was becoming established. Thanks also for the stave/staff size discussion. I now use Dorico, but the default stave sizes suggested are sometimes too large! The stave size chart you show from Gould makes very little sense to me, as a studio session conductor. While I'm sure 2 systems per page and hiding staves works for publishers, it can reduce readability whereas a complete full score spread always works. If you could cover extended technique notations, that would be great!
So glad you enjoyed it! My millennial mind can barely imagine a world before the ISO paper standard, haha. Indeed, studio session scores are a different beast - every staff always is the standard there.
9in x 12in and 10in x 13in are standard among music publishers and libraries in the US and Canada, and they serve as a good B4 alternative. The downside is that they are rare outside of music printing. They usually need to be custom ordered and so aren't available for consumers.
Hmm, maaaybe - I think beaming is pretty extensively covered by textbooks (or better, books like Behind Bars). Part of the reason I chose the subjects in this video is that it's veeeeery hard to find any material at all on them.
@@frejwedlundcomposer that makes sense, thanks so much for the reply. I actually have a copy of behind the bars myself and I probably just need to give the topic some more time before I fully understand.
Frej, I thought the video was excellent. I am facing producing Symphony Orchestra and parts. My printer is A4 so I find that when I get a Score printed it is useful to enlarge it to A3 which is much better for the conductor. I try to get the Rehearsal Letters to be on the first bar of a system so that they are easy to find, and this means that some systems are too spaced out or too squished up. Is it a good idea to have Rehearsal Letters at the beginning of a system or is it OK to have them where ever they come?
Hey! Yes, A3 is often the way you have to go with large conductor scores. I actually touched upon this in a seminar I did a month ago or so - to have rehearsal numbers at the beginning of a system (this particularly pertains to parts) is a nice bonus, but don't sacrifice horizontal balance for it. Balancing the amount of music takes precedence.
Hello. Your video is very relevant to me. Unfortunately, musicians do not always come across well-formatted notes. I really want you to share your settings, more subtle than in the program, Note Spacing. I'm experimenting with this, but I want to know the experience of more experienced engravers. Thanks for the video.
Americans aren't limited to 8.5x11 or 11x14. We also have tabloid size paper (11"x17") which is very close to European A3. It works really well for large ensemble scores (as well as for do-it-yourself manuscript paper). Most home printers can't accept that size, but all virtually all copier/printers in offices, print shops, etc. can handle it. 😀
@@frejwedlundcomposer Thanks for this video! Parts and notation are a huge part of what I teach my students. I'll definitely find room in my classes for your videos. 👍😀
With U. S. paper sizes, it's all about the printer and what size it will print to. Moreover, it's all about the containers that will house the paper. The U. S. still revolves around 8.5x11.
I have 20 years of experience in music engraving and I can not agree with you about the page layout. It's a matter of taste. Actually in the case of the examples presented at 6:30 I totally prefer the 1 system per page layout over the squeezed 2 systems per page. And contrary to your opinion, I find the big bottom margins to be a technical mistake.
Good video. Since I have a dual career as both an conductor and an orchestrator/arranger (sometimes composer), I appreciate what you say. I tend to like compact layouts myself, but I don't like extra space at the bottom, I'd rather have a bit more white space, or have that page set at a slightly different staff size. One thing I wanted to add however, is that I personally hate-hate-hate-hate-hate 11x17 Tabloid-size full scores (can't speak for my colleagues though). As you said, conductors learn the music first and then use the score as a bird's-eye view reference. Tabloid is unwieldly and sometimes, depending on the stock it's printed on, makes page turns difficult; not to mention the amount of paper ripping that happens. 10x13 is maximum for me as a performer. Of course I realize that 9x12, 9.5x12.5 and 10x13 are custom orders over here, but I format all my stuff in 9x12 except for the odd score, or the odd continuo part at 10x13. I have to go to a copy shop if I print my own material, but that's OK because it's worth it. If it's for a quick job, I will print the parts on letter and the reduction is barely noticeable to the players. Not one complaint in 20 years, but as I said: those are for the little gigs. Most of the time, I send my stuff to orchestras in 9x12 or 10x13 and they do their own paper cutting. Edmonton Symphony used B4 for a while, and I had a template for them, but now they are back at 9x12, for parts at least. Anyway, I just wanted to talk about tabloid because I see so many new scores in that format, and I consider it a real plague.
I do have Gould on my side vis-a-vis whitespace at bottom 😉 But ideally a better paper format could be found, or a more systems/page layout (or resting instruments shown). Agreed 11x17 or A3 (which ever so slightly more sufferable as it's not quite as tall) for no sake is super annoying though. Young me did my bachelor's exam 15 staff string piece on A3 - it was like 40% whitespace 😂 I can't remember if I said but 10x13 is very close to Breitkopf's "Leipzig" format
Nice tips! But could you please not use this horrifying transition between your shots? When your head morphs back and forth it makes me uncomfortable☠️
Good shout, I tried that transition out late in the process and definitely did not spend enough time tweaking it (and I think I move too much for it to work). Will stick to more straightforward transition in the future!
A very useful guide for young and striving composers. Thank you for your efforts! Great video!
Thank you for the kind words!
Excellent advice! Everything I would have said and more. I have been fighting the default spacing war in my little corner of the music copying world for 35 years. Meliora!
Thank you so much for the video! It helped me clear up my doubts about organizing space on the sheets. And overall it's great that you started making videos like this, invaluable experience!
I'm glad it helped! Hope to have time for more soon.
Great stuff! Engraving definitely something most non-professional (and some professional) composers struggle with, but it's not necessarily the sexiest topic and generally gets overlooked a bit. Keep it up please!
Hey Frej! Really nice and informative video. Thanks a lot! I would recommend lingering longer on visual examples and the squares containing informative texts. Many of the examples fly by much faster than I am able to 1) register what I'm looking at, 2) process what I'm seeing, and 3) connect it to what you are saying. Same goes with text, I need to repeatedly pause the video to read and process all the information. I'd recommend keeping the texts and image examples on the screen for longer while you talk. A common heuristic in video editing is that the text should be on the screen long enough for you (the editor who already knows what it says) to read it at least twice at a normal pace.
Great feedback! I get really impatient editing and watching back things, so that heuristic seems very handy.
@@frejwedlundcomposer cheers, looking forward to more videos! //an old kmh fellow
In my experience, choosing staff and paper sizes such that the layout of a given single page of score is good is more or less always possible, but in a score for a large ensemble where empty staves are hidden, every page is its own potentially unique layout challenge, and choosing a single staff and paper size that is good for every page can seem impossible. I often run into situations where I ensure that tutti systems fit comfortably, but when there are sequences of several systems in a row where around two thirds of the ensemble plays, there isn't room for two systems on a page, but one system per page is too spread out.
Usually in those cases, you have to:
a) add extra whitespace at the bottom of the page (as in mistake #3)
- having different heights for the bottom staff throughout a score is fine, but you would want at least a spread (two facing pages, left+right) like this, not just a singular page. Some editions do not do this.
b) show more instruments that are not playing. Optimized scores are tricky and you can't always optimize all passages. Sometimes you have to pretty much have a tutti setup despite not having too many instruments playing.
or possibly, if it has not been explored yet:
c) reduce more staves if you want to achieve two systems/page
(the latter half of mistake #3 was partially aimed at this but it's a far more complex issue)
@@frejwedlundcomposer If you have to show instruments that aren't playing, how do you choose which ones? The first thing that comes to mind is ones that play on the adjacent systems. Any other criteria?
Displaying sheet music on a screen, in landscape format, is tricky even without RUclips compression - switch to 4k if you can to make things more legible.
Thank you Frej! Really helpful to have an experienced engraver here. Breitkopf & Härtel scores are always a pleasure to read. Some personal observations: B4 for scores and parts always works, though I started writing music manuscript, copying by hand and using Notaset (!) in the 70s in UK, when the DIN A/B series was becoming established. Thanks also for the stave/staff size discussion. I now use Dorico, but the default stave sizes suggested are sometimes too large! The stave size chart you show from Gould makes very little sense to me, as a studio session conductor. While I'm sure 2 systems per page and hiding staves works for publishers, it can reduce readability whereas a complete full score spread always works. If you could cover extended technique notations, that would be great!
So glad you enjoyed it! My millennial mind can barely imagine a world before the ISO paper standard, haha.
Indeed, studio session scores are a different beast - every staff always is the standard there.
9in x 12in and 10in x 13in are standard among music publishers and libraries in the US and Canada, and they serve as a good B4 alternative. The downside is that they are rare outside of music printing. They usually need to be custom ordered and so aren't available for consumers.
Yeah, it seems to be a pain if you're an individual! 10x13 is also very close to the 'Leipzig' format that Breitkopf uses (250x320mm).
Really grateful for videos on engraving as space is pretty thin on RUclips. Could you do a video on beaming at some point?
Hmm, maaaybe - I think beaming is pretty extensively covered by textbooks (or better, books like Behind Bars). Part of the reason I chose the subjects in this video is that it's veeeeery hard to find any material at all on them.
@@frejwedlundcomposer that makes sense, thanks so much for the reply.
I actually have a copy of behind the bars myself and I probably just need to give the topic some more time before I fully understand.
1:54 You don't even need the stave split in the first system. Use one stave per system in your extract; for b.7, put the 2nd part's stems downwards.
Frej, I thought the video was excellent. I am facing producing Symphony Orchestra and parts. My printer is A4 so I find that when I get a Score printed it is useful to enlarge it to A3 which is much better for the conductor. I try to get the Rehearsal Letters to be on the first bar of a system so that they are easy to find, and this means that some systems are too spaced out or too squished up. Is it a good idea to have Rehearsal Letters at the beginning of a system or is it OK to have them where ever they come?
Hey! Yes, A3 is often the way you have to go with large conductor scores.
I actually touched upon this in a seminar I did a month ago or so - to have rehearsal numbers at the beginning of a system (this particularly pertains to parts) is a nice bonus, but don't sacrifice horizontal balance for it. Balancing the amount of music takes precedence.
Felicitaciones por el video ..saludos desde colombia
Thanks for watching!
Hello. Your video is very relevant to me. Unfortunately, musicians do not always come across well-formatted notes. I really want you to share your settings, more subtle than in the program, Note Spacing. I'm experimenting with this, but I want to know the experience of more experienced engravers. Thanks for the video.
This is really helpful!
Americans aren't limited to 8.5x11 or 11x14. We also have tabloid size paper (11"x17") which is very close to European A3. It works really well for large ensemble scores (as well as for do-it-yourself manuscript paper). Most home printers can't accept that size, but all virtually all copier/printers in offices, print shops, etc. can handle it. 😀
oh for sure! that was meant to be regarding parts and medium size scores (where 11x17 gets to be oversized), my bad
@@frejwedlundcomposer Thanks for this video! Parts and notation are a huge part of what I teach my students. I'll definitely find room in my classes for your videos. 👍😀
@@frejwedlundcomposer And you're absolutely right about "legal" size paper! Not enough horizontal space to be useful.
With U. S. paper sizes, it's all about the printer and what size it will print to. Moreover, it's all about the containers that will house the paper. The U. S. still revolves around 8.5x11.
Me gustaría contactarme contigo y aprender de ti en este arte... es posible? .... gracias
Hey- if you have a project or you're interested in lessons, contact me through my website. But I don't speak Spanish, unfortunately!
👍
I have 20 years of experience in music engraving and I can not agree with you about the page layout. It's a matter of taste. Actually in the case of the examples presented at 6:30 I totally prefer the 1 system per page layout over the squeezed 2 systems per page. And contrary to your opinion, I find the big bottom margins to be a technical mistake.
Good video. Since I have a dual career as both an conductor and an orchestrator/arranger (sometimes composer), I appreciate what you say. I tend to like compact layouts myself, but I don't like extra space at the bottom, I'd rather have a bit more white space, or have that page set at a slightly different staff size. One thing I wanted to add however, is that I personally hate-hate-hate-hate-hate 11x17 Tabloid-size full scores (can't speak for my colleagues though). As you said, conductors learn the music first and then use the score as a bird's-eye view reference. Tabloid is unwieldly and sometimes, depending on the stock it's printed on, makes page turns difficult; not to mention the amount of paper ripping that happens. 10x13 is maximum for me as a performer. Of course I realize that 9x12, 9.5x12.5 and 10x13 are custom orders over here, but I format all my stuff in 9x12 except for the odd score, or the odd continuo part at 10x13. I have to go to a copy shop if I print my own material, but that's OK because it's worth it. If it's for a quick job, I will print the parts on letter and the reduction is barely noticeable to the players. Not one complaint in 20 years, but as I said: those are for the little gigs. Most of the time, I send my stuff to orchestras in 9x12 or 10x13 and they do their own paper cutting. Edmonton Symphony used B4 for a while, and I had a template for them, but now they are back at 9x12, for parts at least. Anyway, I just wanted to talk about tabloid because I see so many new scores in that format, and I consider it a real plague.
I do have Gould on my side vis-a-vis whitespace at bottom 😉 But ideally a better paper format could be found, or a more systems/page layout (or resting instruments shown). Agreed 11x17 or A3 (which ever so slightly more sufferable as it's not quite as tall) for no sake is super annoying though. Young me did my bachelor's exam 15 staff string piece on A3 - it was like 40% whitespace 😂 I can't remember if I said but 10x13 is very close to Breitkopf's "Leipzig" format
Nice tips! But could you please not use this horrifying transition between your shots? When your head morphs back and forth it makes me uncomfortable☠️
Good shout, I tried that transition out late in the process and definitely did not spend enough time tweaking it (and I think I move too much for it to work). Will stick to more straightforward transition in the future!