Transcription Tips and Advice

[Higgie]

Then don't be too alarmed about the triple dot 😁

[stewblack]

🤯 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Higgie said:

Then don't be too alarmed about the triple dot 😁

Haha I’d never thought of that, yes you could have a bar of 4/4 with a triple dot minim and a single quaver. It’d definitely throw you the first time you see it on a chart though

[Higgie]

23 minutes ago, FDC484950 said:

Haha I’d never thought of that, yes you could have a bar of 4/4 with a triple dot minim and a single quaver. It’d definitely throw you the first time you see it on a chart though

I've never seen one in the wild, but it's an option in Sibelius...So some mad bastards must use them 🤣

 

[itu]

Minim + three dots = half + quarter + eighth + sixteenth.

You could not add a quaver (eighth) after that to a bar of 4/4, dear @FDC484950. Just one extra sixteenth (semiquaver) fills the bar.

Edited February 10, 2021 by itu

[Bilbo]

On 28/09/2020 at 14:12, stewblack said:

Just so you know your hard work on this thread hasn't been wasted, here's an example of how I used to write a score. The point being not that it's bad, more that I can see why it's bad.

Can you explain what is wrong with this, my friend? Like you, I am self taught and, when I look at old charts I have written out, some of which are very long and complicated, a little piece of me dies inside! Some of my problems relate to learning how to make Sibelius work but I cannot see what is wrong with the above which obviously you can! 

[stewblack]

1 hour ago, Bilbo said:

Can you explain what is wrong with this, my friend? Like you, I am self taught and, when I look at old charts I have written out, some of which are very long and complicated, a little piece of me dies inside! Some of my problems relate to learning how to make Sibelius work but I cannot see what is wrong with the above which obviously you can! 

Beats the heck out of me!

I wonder if I posted the wrong picture - as you say that doesn't look bad. I'm out right now but I'll play through it and see what the problem was. Or if I can work out what I thought it was.

[Higgie]

8 hours ago, Bilbo said:

Can you explain what is wrong with this, my friend? Like you, I am self taught and, when I look at old charts I have written out, some of which are very long and complicated, a little piece of me dies inside! Some of my problems relate to learning how to make Sibelius work but I cannot see what is wrong with the above which obviously you can! 

My first thought is layout. Physical geography of the chart is just as important as what’s actually in it music-wise. Even if all the notes are right, a chart is no good if it’s a struggle to read on the gig. 

[Bilbo]

4 hours ago, Higgie said:

My first thought is layout. Physical geography of the chart is just as important as what’s actually in it music-wise. Even if all the notes are right, a chart is no good if it’s a struggle to read on the gig. 

 

Of course, but I can read that part fine. That is why I cannot see why this is 'wrong'.

 

I do think that 'working' the software can be a problem, though (it's no different with WORD or EXCEL, really - we are all limited by our understanding of the software and what it can actually do. Everyone knows how to write something in WORD but how many of us can manage formatting etc).

[stewblack]

I suspect that now I would format it more tidily. Even number of bars per line, chords above the bars, repeat symbols, etc

[Higgie]

5 hours ago, stewblack said:

I suspect that now I would format it more tidily. Even number of bars per line, chords above the bars, repeat symbols, etc

Yes this is the kind of thing I was getting at. While the example above was readable, I would try and even out the number of bars per line etc to make it even easier to read. 
 

Writing out quick charts for yourself is fine, but if I were to have other players reading it (a dep, or doing arrangements for someone else for example), I’d want everything as clear and concise as possible to minimise the chances of any mishaps on the gig.

[Bilbo]

That kind of formatting is one of the frustrations I have with Sibelius although I did figure out how to put beams over rests yesterday which definitely does make things more readable. I can revisit a few of my old charts now and tidy them up.

[Bilbo]

I have to be honest and say that one of the reasons that my transcriptions are 'free' is that I don't think that many of them are of a sufficiently high standard to be considered professional. No-one complains if you share your amateurish efforts for nothing but, if you charged for them, people would have the right to winge....

[itu]

1 hour ago, Bilbo said:

I have to be honest and say that one of the reasons that my transcriptions are 'free' is that I don't think that many of them are...

Dear @Bilbo,

 

Your work is super, and sharing it is very generous.

 

Thank you very much.

[Nickthebass]

On 06/02/2025 at 20:50, stewblack said:

Beats the heck out of me!

I wonder if I posted the wrong picture - as you say that doesn't look bad. I'm out right now but I'll play through it and see what the problem was. Or if I can work out what I thought it was.

From a technical geek point of view - the only question I'd have is whether the G sharps should be A flats - given that we're in a flat key. 

 

Otherwise you've mentioned the readability stuff.

 

I heard Sean Hurley talk about chart writing and always sticking to 4 bars per line as generally popular music is in 4 bar phrases (or multiples of 4). If you have a 5 bar phrase - then I'd either have 5 bars or split it across to lines (2-3 or 3-2 whichever made the most sense from a point of view of the phrase). Then when you scan down the chart any time there's something non-standard in the form it jumps out a little more easily.

[80Hz]

I quite enjoy doing my own transcriptions. It's something I used to do a fair bit years ago, but I'm bit rusty now. I like having written parts for reference, then adapting them depending on how much I need to dumb it down for my skill level.

 

So has this thread been resurrected? Anyone else want to share/critique transcriptions, and if so should we branch off into a new thread?

[stewblack]

9 hours ago, 80Hz said:

So has this thread been resurrected? Anyone else want to share/critique transcriptions, and if so should we branch off into a new thread?

Happy to retitle this one if you like. As we're all here already.