Re: Fwd: Re: please please please - before you ship 1.4

[Amelie Zapf]

> > In 10 years of big band and small group playing, leading and arranging, I've
> > never come across a more-than-four bar repeat. ".////." is the longest I've
> > seen. The main goal in music notation, IMHO, is legibility. Imagine a
> > substitute player coming in at the last minute and having to play prima 
> > vista.
> > 
> > Myself, I would not write a 16-bar-repeat in percent style, but I suggest 
> > that
> > "./16/." is favorable in that case - for better legibility. So, my opinion 
> > in a
> > nutshell:
> > 
> >     1 to 4-bar repeats:                     "./." to ".////."
> 
> OK! How about the bar lines? Should all the bar lines be 
> printed?  For example: | | `///. | |
> 
> >     5 and more bars (if at all necessary):  "./128/."
> 
> I wouldn't want to see this notation myself if I were to play it.
> Actually, last time I encountered a double bar repeat in an
> orchestral piece, I had to replace it with an ordinary repeat sign
> in order to play it right. 
> 
>     /Mats

It's a matter of getting used to it. Once you're used to it, those percent
repeats are fabulous, because they unclutter the score. 

In jazz music, you mainly use them for short, repetitive phrases (riffs) that
usually consist of only a few notes and have the purpose of adding some "color"
or "flavor" to the backing of a solo voice or instrument - all in all, phrases
that are easily remembered. I wouldn't write a percent repeat in an intricate
passage. I would write it out.

But as for the notation convention concerning bar lines:

The 1-bar repeat goes centered in a bar.
All other repeats go across one bar line. So every sign occupies 2 bars,
although it may have a different duration.

Regards,
good luck in implementing,

Amy