In-Accord or Intervals?

[kdejute]

Greetings! I'm passing on a question from my co-transcriber in a project.

For this project we're using EBAE 1997 Music Rules.

In the attached image, on the first Clarinet should this be brailled in Intervals or In-Accord? If Accords are used, would the accidentals need to be repeated? (I'll see if I can get a larger image for you.)

[It looks like the 1997 rules on Accidentals say that they do not affect the note after the in-accord sign. However it appears like in the sheet music that the sharp is spilt between both notes. Reading 10.6.1 says the accidentals should be added again but preceded by a dot 5.]

In short: 1. On the score would it make sense to use in-accord or intervals? 2. Would the accidentals be repeated?

Thank you for any input you can give.

–Kyle

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Kathleen]

Hi there!

The image is indeed hard to see - I can't seem to enlarge it.

However, I can answer your question.

If you are transcribing this as a full score - all the parts included - for the purpose of score study or for a conductor, intervals are fine (read upwards in all parts). In this case the accidentals would not need to be repeated. (Perhaps it's because the image is so small, but I don't actually see an instance in these measures where this would be an issue - am I missing something?)

If you are transcribing for a clarinet player and extracting their part from the score, in-accords need to be used - highest part first. And in that case accidentals WOULD need to be repeated for the 2nd part of the in-accord. Adding a dot 5 would indicate that the accidental does not appear before that note in print but that it is required for proper reading.

Maybe you can send me a larger image so I can be sure that I'm reading it clearly enough...

And so curious as to why you're using 1997 Code....

Thanks!

Kathleen

[Author]

Posts