 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: mmatisoff
Date: 2016-09-23 01:46
This question shows my ignorance. Still learning.
If the C below staff is an acccidental sharp, are all "c"s through the measure sharp? Or just the note below staff that is marked?
Marty
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-09-23 02:28
It depends on the composer, unfortunately. Some composers treat an accidental as effective only for the specific octave in which it appears. Others intend it to affect the same note in any octave. When there's a question, you really have to look at the rest of the piece or even other pieces by the same composer to be sure which is meant.
You can look, for example, for a place where a new octave is given a new marking, or a place where the line is so obvious (maybe a straight-up D major scale, that a higher C couldn't possibly be a natural.
In either case, the accidental persists only for the rest of the measure. It has to be renewed after a bar line for as long as it's meant to be in effect.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bennett ★2017
Date: 2016-09-23 02:34
Generally the accidental applies to all similarly named notes, of whatever octave, within the bar but this is not an ironclad rule. Some authorities disagree.
See (quotes lifted from http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2038234/Accidentals%20-%20do%20they%20apply%20to.html (Scroll down to almost the bottom of the page)
From Read, G. (1979). Music notation: A manual of modern practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Taplinger Publishing:
"When an accidental not included in a key signature precedes any note, it affects the pitch it precedes--and no other--for that one measure only" (p. 129, author's italics).
From Heussenstamm, G. (1987). The Norton manual of music notation. New York, NY: W. W. Norton:
"An accidental applies only to the note at its original pitch level. When that note is sounded at a different octave level, another accidental is needed" (p. 69, author's italics).
From Gould, E. (2011). Behind bars: The definitive guide to music notation. London, England: Faber Music:
"An accidental holds good for the duration of a bar. It applies only to the pitch at which it is writen (sic): Each additional octave requires a further accidental" (p. 78).
Post Edited (2016-09-23 03:01)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2016-09-23 03:02
Not ignorant at all.
As you can see there is no correct or even definitive answer
In the end your ears will probably tell you which is right for any given score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Philip Caron
Date: 2016-09-23 05:41
If an accidentalized note is tied into the next bar, the accidentalized pitch is maintained by the tie for the duration of the tied note.
However, I learned on this board that the accidental is not then established for the rest of the tied-into bar; if the same accidental is needed for a subsequent instance of the note in the tied-into bar, then another accidental is needed, and if one is lacking then the subsequent instance takes the pitch defined by the key signature alone.
I used to suppose otherwise (that the tied note reestablished the accidental in the new bar), and I thought I knew of at least one piece where my opinion was substantiated, however I've never since found that piece, at least when I was looking for it in this connection, so I've abandoned that notion and consider myself well corrected.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: brycon
Date: 2016-09-23 06:26
Quote:
It depends on the composer, unfortunately. Some composers treat an accidental as effective only for the specific octave in which it appears. Others intend it to affect the same note in any octave. When there's a question, you really have to look at the rest of the piece or even other pieces by the same composer to be sure which is meant.
You can look, for example, for a place where a new octave is given a new marking, or a place where the line is so obvious (maybe a straight-up D major scale, that a higher C couldn't possibly be a natural.
I think it's a matter of idiom more than composer. In non-tonal music, accidentals are rarely good in different octaves (a great deal of non-tonal music doesn't assume octave equivalency). Music notation software treats accidentals in the same way--at least Finale does.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2016-09-23 07:14
brycon wrote:
> I think it's a matter of idiom more than composer. In non-tonal
> music, accidentals are rarely good in different octaves (a
> great deal of non-tonal music doesn't assume octave
> equivalency). Music notation software treats accidentals in the
> same way--at least Finale does.
Finale drives me crazy when it assumes if I've changed a C to a C#, that another C immediately after it returns to natural (and marks it). So, inputting a series of the same accidental requires repeating the alteration for each one. Not my idea of an ideal model.
I'm not so sure that tonal composers are in any way consistent about applying accidentals over octaves. Some, especially, I think, the French, do it differently throughout a single piece. Look at the Klose scales.Through Bb minor, the chromatics (there are no key signatures) are not repeated in the second octave. We know for certain they still apply. Beginning with Gb Major, they are repeated in each octave as if they wouldn't have applied otherwise. In the Twenty Studies later in the book, he repeats the chromatics in each octave, again implying that they wouldn't have applied without the marking. Mostly.
You really need to look at the full context.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Roys_toys
Date: 2016-09-23 14:10
Marty says" still learning."
It may be worth noting that most tutor method books give most of their example pieces from out of copywrite music, and for excerpts of older music an accidental is usually meant to apply to all octaves in the bar.
With the possible exception of an accidental on an early grace note, where I have to go by my ears even in the same octave.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tobin
Date: 2016-09-23 15:33
The rule is that an accidental is only applied to its octave, but as has been pointed out by almost everyone -- the rule is not universally or accurately applied in any context (EXCEPT key-signatureless modern pieces in which all accidentals are explicitly printed) or even agreed upon...so there is no rule.
I make a motion that, henceforth, The rule is (as Karl and others said above) "that one must use the context to determine the composer's intent."
All those in favor?
Gnothi Seauton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2016-09-23 20:00
You cannot always trust you ear, either. Anyone else familiar with "Canzona" by Peter Mennin? (Fond memories of circa 1969 high school band.)
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tony F
Date: 2016-09-23 20:37
The thing to remember about questions is that there's no such thing as a dumb question, there are only dumb answers. Good question.
Tony F.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Douglas
Date: 2016-09-24 20:49
If there is a piano part with that music measure, consult it as well. The piano
harmony is a very important source to answer an accidental or not in relation
to the piano. In Beethoven piano sonatas, the famous composer did not
indicate a continuation of the accidental in other octaves when there are
arpeggiated chords which demand the accidental being carried at all octaves.
In the clarinet part of the Hindemith woodwind quintet, movement I, two
measures from the end, there is a C natural in the first beat, an octave higher
C flat in the second group of 16ths which end with a written C which everyone
plays C natural to the of the measure. Only Mitchell Lurie, in a very early
recording of this work, continues the C flat to the end of the measure at all
octaves. Beethoven had one idea of the notation rule, Hindemith another.
An excellent question which is best answered by musical context rather than
following a scholastic stated rule.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sean.Perrin
Date: 2016-09-25 03:56
Technically, different octaves are NOT also sharp, but unfortunately not everyone adheres to this rule.
Astute composers will repeat the accidental if intended in other registers to be clear, or will add a reminder natural.
You may have to consult the score to be sure (assuming it's tonal).
Founder and host of the Clarineat Podcast: http://www.clarineat.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
