A as a solo line.

B when there is another part on the same staff.

Only if you do it with evil intent. I may have misread, but one page describes musical notation is a visual language witch.

Maybe I need new glasses.

For Noel's "A" option, as a solo line, I've always believed that stems start to point down at the middle line of a 5-line staff. So, in treble clef, stems start to point down at middle B.

If I chose to do "B," does that make me a bad person?

They'd create an appearance out of keeping with your usual craftsmanship.

JeffO...you are obviously a bad person. Rarely has such a simple thing created such turmoil on the list.

You have forgotten to add the "I'm not a bad person disclaimer", "Well, that's the way Sibelius does it."

And why, Richard, does Sib have this problem when creating stemless notes with slurs? Does it leave them out hanging in the air over invisible stems?

:) A is right. B is wrong. A could be right, but not in this situation.

Incorrect use of stem direction does not make one a bad person, just a bad music engraver.

Seriously, the rule is that for a single voice (not two voices in which the stem direction distinguishes the upper and lower voice), all notes above the middle line point down, and all notes below the middle line point up.

Technically, stems of notes on the middle line can point either way, but modern American copyists consistently point it downward. (Older English engravers often made took avail of the option to point the stems of notes on the middle line upward.)

Music engraving is an art as much as a science. I'd like to think I'm fairly good at it - at least as those working for some choral publishing houses these days - but I know there are those out there who are far better at it than I am.

Jeffrey,

I'd suggest that stems on the middle line be almost horizontal, but with a slight lift from the staff line to indicate if the next note after it be higher or a fall, if lower. Repeated notes on the same pitch would require no stem. [This would create a problem as far as length indications, but I have delt with that in a later sentence.] Then each stem above or below be incrementally raised at its end a bit more, with full verticality present on the full octave. This would eliminate the need for staff lines and make a beautiful page. Of course, flags would be difficult to read, so instead of flags, let's let the white space between each note determine the length of each note. This would be especially effective with scores of contrapuntal works. The notes, instead of round, should be square, for clarity, giving us a punch-card appearance that would be universal and might bring back the card readers of the 1970's that have been stored awaiting being put back into service in warehouses around the world. Cardboard manufacturers would appreciate the business, creating cardboard for the cards.

Then a bright light held to the card would project the notes on a screen, permitting the director to teach the music using a red/green Ward stick indicating the notes on the screen.

Of course, it may be prudent to just use the current system.

And I have it direct from the Bride's mouth that she reminds him to shut down the chant machine and get some sleep on regular intervals.

Friends,

Thank you very much for your thoughts and ideas.

I was always taught:

1. In Britain, stems on the middle line "default" up, but visually, this can be altered. For instance, if every other stem were pointing down except one on the middle line, it can go up, even in Britain.

2. In America, stems on the middle like can go up or down.

3. I also realize the slur position is a bit unconventional. However, a world class typesetter has assured me it's "OK" to do it my way.

4. I believe that I have a "liberal" approach in these regards. I know I have "my own" ways. For instance, I always write tenor lines on bass clef, because the only reason for the transposing tenor clef was because in the 19th century, they could not (as in COULD NOT) easily write ledger lines on vocal scores.

5. Again, I appreciate your thoughts. I agree with Marc on ugly slurs.

6. I am trying to find a reasonably conventional method that I can stick to and BE CONSISTENT without constantly offending my (warped?) sensibilities.

7. I believe that chant is much better for vocal lines than modern notation, because in chant notation, you see melodic GESTURES (slopes) in a way you do not in modern.

Only if you do it with evil intent.

Noel, that goes without saying... I thought you knew my intentions were always evil !!! :-D

Perhaps the publishers found it more convenient/economical to merge tenor parts onto the bass staff.

Jeff O.,

I must respect your contrary views with regard to notation, because, as a choral conducting Catholic, I happen to hold some of my own contrary views (it seems) with regard to rather well-accepted chant performances practices among people here.

Nevertheless, as the saying goes, "when in Rome...." If I were to find myself leading a schola who was used to those well-accepted practices, I would adapt my conducting to what they were used to. Similarly, my advice to you is - if this engraving is for yourself or your own choir, do as you are convicted. If it is to be published for the wider world, like or not, agree or not, there is a certain degree of judgment that will be passed on your work from using not using accepted notation practices. In a published work (even self-published) not following the "rules" makes music look unprofessional - even if people can't put their finger on what's "wrong" with it.

With regard to writing the tenor part in bass clef, I do not disagree, unless there would be a lot of ledger lines. Regardless of the original development of the transposing tenor treble clef, too many ledger lines (even if they are now easy to typeset), make the music look sloppy and may make it harder to read. (The same principle is behind why clefs sometimes move in chant for ornate gradual verses that have a higher tessitura.) In high school as a young musician, I was for a time left very confused by the treble clef on the tenor line, and so I consistently engrave tenor parts with the eight underneath. That seems to do the trick for my conscience.

4-5 lines is a lot of information to take in, but at least it's all in standard clefs. At University of Michigan, I had to take 2 semesters of keyboard harmony where we used the R.O. Morris Preparatory Exercises in Score-reading, which begins with 2 lines, 1 of which is in alto clef, through 3 out of 4 lines in C clefs, to (last exercise) 5 parts, 2nd in A, 3rd in F, 4th in alto clef (outers were treble and bass). I never got good at it, but that was because my keyboard sight-reading in general is pretty bad. But if you cracked your head against that diligently, open score would be a walk in the park.

Jeffrey Quick is right. You get better reading open score the more you do it. In fact, when I first started working with men's choirs (two transposing treble clefs and two bass parts) it was awkward at first (even though this might seem easier). In addition to the R.O. Morris book, I have found a similar one by C.S. Lang which uses only treble (at pitch and transposing) and bass clefs. Practice makes perfect, and I often need to practice playing from an open score before I'm comfortable doing it in front of a choir for rehearsal. Such individual practice can also lead to some unintentional score study and vice versa!

I disagree with Marc that reading open score at the keyboard is about horizontal vs. vertical. For me, when reading a very homophonic piece in four staves from open score I am thinking about what chord is being spelled - and certain subtleties of voicing will actually not (heavily) matter to your choir's singing the correct pitches. However, when reading, say, Palestrina or Victoria, it's all a matter of trying to grab all the important "horizontal" lines.

With regard to my original comment about tenor parts in bass clef, the music should be engraved for ease of reading for the singers, not the rehearsal accompanist. With notation software, you can always make yourself a rehearsal reduction and give the choir the open score in the "correct" clefs. Also, there's nothing wrong with putting music in hymn format with only two staves, as long as it is homophonic enough to be clear as to who's singing what part.