Encore/Windows 5.0.2 - staff transposition

[Doug Kerr]

In Encore/Windows 4.5.5, a "running playback transposition" was set for a staff in terms of half steps up or down and was indicated on the Staff Sheet accordingly.

In Encore/Windows 5.0.2, the transposition can be set in either of two terms:

• A shift of a named interval

• The key of a transposing instrument which the transposition would accommodate (the octave having to be chosen by reference to the interval name).

The transposition in effect is indicated on the staff sheet in terms of the key of a transposing instrument which the transposition would accommodate (there being no indication of octave, and in fact there would be no convention for doing that).

Thus no transposition, an transposition of -12 half steps, and a transposition of +12 half steps, all look the same: "C". Just "C".

The lack of octave indication can be very problematical. I once accidentally had a transposition of +12 half steps set on one staff, and the score played peculiarly, but the staff sheet looked fine - "C's for every staff.

In addition, there are special cases in which the transposition I need is thought of in half steps, no transposing instrument being involved. My music theory is not good enough that I can remember which "key of a hypothetical transposing instrument" corresponds to a transposition of three half steps up, or what interval name either. So I count up or down the menu from "no transposition".

I urge that the following changes be made in this facility for Encore 4.7 (sorry, 5.1):

1. The setting dialog show each choice in terms of:

• Half steps (signed)
• Interval name
• Key of a transposing instrument (there is of course no convention for stating the octave of that; the user would have to rely on the adjacent description in terms of half steps or interval name to figure that out).

2. The indications in the staff sheet have two columns, one showing the transposition in terms of (signed) half steps and one showing the key of a transposing instrument the transposition would accommodate.

That would be an improvement over what we had in 4.5.5; the present arrangement is not.

Best regards,

Doug

[Denkster]

I urge that the following changes be made in this facility for Encore 4.7 (sorry, 5.1):

1. The setting dialog show each choice in terms of:
   
   • Half steps (signed)
   • Interval name
   • Key of a transposing instrument
2. The indications in the staff sheet have two columns, one showing the transposition in terms of (signed) half steps and one showing the key of a transposing instrument the transposition would accommodate.

I wholeheartedly support that!
Can you please compose a mock-up image and post that here, to attract better attention?

Kind regards
Eveline

[q]

In Encore/Windows 4.5.5, a "running playback transposition" was set for a staff in terms of half steps up or down and was indicated on the Staff Sheet accordingly.

I urge that the following changes be made in this facility for Encore 4.7 (sorry, 5.1):

1. The [Staff Sheet?] show each choice in terms of:

• Half steps (signed)
• Interval name
• Key of a transposing instrument (there is of course no convention for stating the octave of that; the user would have to rely on the adjacent description in terms of half steps or interval name to figure that out).

2. The indications in the staff sheet have two columns, one showing the transposition in terms of (signed) half steps and one showing the key of a transposing instrument the transposition would accommodate.

That would be an improvement over what we had in 4.5.5; the present arrangement is not.

Best regards,

Doug

Thanks Doug!

A very important request—otherwise Staff Sheet octave transpositions are not self evident.

A similar request was made in April 2009, with this image:



I believe this partially represents your vision.

Please note: In section #1 of your quotation, where you had said "setting dialog" I substituted "Staff Sheet". Is that substitution in accord with your statement?

q

[q]

 
The following quote is from a recent post:



When first confused ... I checked the Staff Sheet at least three times thinking that a transposition must be in effect; seeing just a C, I concluded not. I made this erroneous conclusion multiple times because the transposition is not self evident; it is discoverable only when the Key menu is open.

This is true for other transpositions as well!

For instance, without opening the menu the user cannot see if Eb means (minor 3rd higher) or (Major 6th Lower). A simple plus or minus sign would clarify the direction of the transposition, and that would clarify that something is occurring when C actually represents Octave Lower(C) or 2 Octaves Lower(C), Octave Higher(C), 2 Octaves Higher(C). It's like having a faulty cockpit indicator—not one that's malfunctioning, one that was designed improperly.

Doesn't this bug anyone else?


Let's get this fixed so users can have an accurate view of transpositions at a glance.

q

[polarbreeze]

As I posted elsewhere, rather than adding a column it's arguably better to show only the number of semitones - in case the presence of what appears to be a "key" ( and is labelled as such actually) misleads the user into thinking that the playback will be in that absolute key. I think any user working with transposing instruments knows that +3 is for an Eb instrument, -2 is for a Bb instrument, -12 is for an octave-down instrument etc.

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, p,

As I posted elsewhere, rather than adding a column it's arguably better to show only the number of semitones - in case the presence of what appears to be a "key" ( and is labelled as such actually) misleads the user into thinking that the playback will be in that absolute key. I think any user working with transposing instruments knows that +3 is for an Eb instrument, -2 is for a Bb instrument, -12 is for an octave-down instrument etc.

I would certainly be absolutely happy with that.

Yes, the "key" designation is in fact misleading (unless the actual music on the staff was truly in the key of C).

Doug

[anaigeon]

OTH this "key" (of course different from the key signature of the music) is the traditional way to talk of a transposing instrument.
"Trumpet in Bb", for instance.
But... I'm just wondering wether "tone" would be more appropriate than "key" ?

BTW, do we expect Encore to adapt the key signature accordingly when switching to the transposed score ?
It would be great !
And what about accidentals..?

[polarbreeze]

BTW, do we expect Encore to adapt the key signature accordingly when switching to the transposed score ?
It would be great !
And what about accidentals..?

I think theoretically it does that because there's a check box in the key signature dialog inviting us to "ignore" (or not, presumably) "instrument transposition keys" but it doesn't seem to do quite what I'd expect.

[commnthings]

And what about accidentals..?

Doug,

Accidentals are always a problem in a transposition. I've found that I always have to go through the score and correct enharmonic mis-spellings.

Cheers,

Bob

[Denkster]

this "key" (of course different from the key signature of the music) is the traditional way to talk of a transposing instrument. "Trumpet in Bb", for instance.

Indeed, people must be able to tell the 'key' of the transposing instrument. Therefor, this 'key' column is very valuable.
The column heading causes the confusion, the information is important.
Apart from 'Tenor sax is transposing instrument in Bb' we must know: 'Tenor sax sounds -14 half steps down'. Both pieces of information are valuable, but belong to different categories.

Eveline

[polarbreeze]

The column heading causes the confusion,

Ya, trouble is there's only room for a 3-letter word for the column heading. "Key" has the big advantage that it fits nicely. Hmm, how about "Egg" or "Tit"?

[Doug Kerr]

The column heading causes the confusion,

Ya, trouble is there's only room for a 3-letter word for the column heading.

Why? Because the column width has been made a width that only accommodates a three-character label in the stub. Then, only three-character labels will fit. Duh!

"Key" has the big advantage that it fits nicely.

Well, on my system it fits the currently-established width of the column stub (more than you can say about some text containers in Encore/Windows!)

Hmm, how about "Egg" or "Tit"?)

Any breakfast item would be good, of course.

Doug

[Denkster]

The column heading causes the confusion,

Ya, trouble is there's only room for a 3-letter word for the column heading. "Key" has the big advantage that it fits nicely. Hmm, how about "Egg" or "Tit"?

If you are in the mood for 'funny' three letter words, consult the Dutch dictionary.
No, let's be serious! The heading is utterly important. You may not appreciate that, judging previous remarks like 'It's just semantics', but that should not withhold GVox of making space for a correct heading text.
Some creativity would help. Example: For the Dutch translation of the heading of the Encore 4.5 staff sheet column 'Key' I choose 'Klinkt', which means 'Sounds'.
I could imagine a dual-line heading.

Eveline

[polarbreeze]

...No, let's be serious! The heading is utterly important. You may not appreciate that, judging previous remarks like 'It's just semantics'...

I agree that the wording is important, sorry if I gave a different impression, just being a bit flippant! My personal recommendation is to solve the problem a different way, ie show only the number of semitones - because that is unambiguous.

[Doug Kerr]

The operation whose control we are discussing is quite reasonably considered a form of transposition. In fact, instruments that "do it themselves" (actually usually by virtue of the convention used for their notation) are called transposing instruments.

Thus the best heading for the column showing the degree of transposition set for a staff would be an abbreviation of "transposition".

Sometimes the user is interested in the "degree" of transposition in terms of the "key" of the transposing instrument involved. Sometimes the user is intersted in the degree of transposition in terms of a number of half steps, up or down. Sometimes the user (especially if showing off his musical education) is interested in the degree of transposition in terms of an interval name, up or down: "I think we're going to sing it a major second lower than written; can you fix it so the accompaniment comes out that way?" "Let me look at the menu - yes, you're in luck."

Now, unfortunately, there is no handy way to show the "octave" of the "key" of a transposing instrument.* Under the current Encore system, the transposition for a piccolo (Bb) trumpet (+10 half steps) and that for a "regular" (Bb) trumpet (-2 half steps) both look the same: "Bb". Perhaps more to the point, the transposition for a string bass (an octave down, 12 half-steps) looks just like no transposition at all: "C", as does the transposition for a piccolo (one octave up).

* Well we could describe the transposition for a subcontrabass saxophone as "BBBb", or "Bb super low".

Thus the most practical way to show the transposition in effect is with a signed integer: the number of half steps (up or down).

Now, the menu that is used for setting should show all three forms for all its entries. But we should be able to enter any reasonable number of half steps someplace, numerically (or else the menu needs to include all values over a substantial range). We have today no way that I know of to enter a transposition of +1 or +3 half steps, should we need that for some reason. "I think we''re going to sing it a half step higher than written; can you fix it so the accompaniment comes out that way?" "No, sorry. This time last year I could have. But there was this clarinet player . . . Oh, never mind."

Doug