How should I annotate 2 rests in a row

[pmatz2]

Could you us tell the rule/s why you need to clean up your transcriptions?

Do you think that whole rest is correct?

View attachment 5004028

The order of the rests help show the beat division. I know in some cases I've gotten carried away with reducing the number of rests. Looking at the the first example I know have used a number "c" type rests and should re-evaluate.

In your new example I'd give up if that was considered wrong. in the earlier examples a thru e I see why, how expressing "nothing (the rests) " would impact readability. Your brain is used to seeing a certain pattern, keeping it consistent can make it easier and quicker to comprehend.

There's been lots of good information shared in this thread. Greatly appreciate those that are sharing their knowledge and experience with someone new to trying to make there transcriptions more readable.

I think it would make an interesting sub group - posting transcriptions and people commenting on them....

 

[Whousedtoplay]

For the avoidance of doubt, yes it is.

..., but it's
"A whole note (American) or semibreve (British) in musical notation is a single note equivalent to or lasting as long as two half notes or four quarter notes.

But of course, you are correct!
That rest is also called a whole bar rest.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

For the avoidance of doubt, yes it is.

Steve,

I need your knowledge to explain the following "typo."

It's from Schubert’s "Gretchen am Spinnrade."

 

[SteveCS]

Steve,

I need your knowledge to explain the following "typo."

It's from Schubert’s "Gretchen am Spinnrade."

View attachment 5004378

Not familiar with that, but it does suggest some kind of poly-rhythm, creating some flavour of temporary syncopated pulse in the bass against the smooth melody line. Is there a permanent change just around the corner? I wonder of the 'typo', if there is one, might be in the time signature, not the beaming? I have seen, but can't recall where, different signatures in parts. Might be Pictures at an Exhibition, or maybe something from Shostakovich 10, but I honestly can't remember. Getting too old for quizzes!! But it does look a bit odd right there.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

But it does look a bit odd right there.

Here is a picture of that score.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Getting too old for quizzes!!

P.S. It's not a quiz. I just don't know how to explain it.

 

[SteveCS]

Here is a picture of that score.

View attachment 5005170

Well I've not played it but reading it in my head it sounds like a fast waltz!!

P.S. It's not a quiz. I just don't know how to explain it.

Nor me, except that it makes sense for the phrasing of the tune at that tempo. The pulse of the accompaniment is 3 in my mind, which the beaming conveys. Do you think 3/8 is a viable alternative? Imagine the ties in the melody before deciding...

 

[Richard Lindsey]

Probably the simplest reason is that it's how Schubert wrote it in the first place.

As for why he wrote it that way, maybe he was intending a 3/4 feel in the accompaniment, but maybe (and more probably IMO) it was just the result of coming from a time that used slightly different conventions for beaming etc. That we tend to follow certain conventions today doesn't mean that they were always in place exactly as they are now.

Note something else that isn't quite as most of us would do it now: In the vocal melody, eighth notes are always left unbeamed when they correspond to a different syllable of the word, even in spots where we would tend to beam them today.

If you poke around on the interwebs enough, you can find images of this piece rendered with beaming closer to what's considered usual practice today.

I don't know if it's really much deeper than, different times, different practices.