Divisi question

[MichelRE]

I am of the opinion that indication of a divisi section should start slightly before the actual divisi when notes are beamed.

When the divisi itself starts on the 1st beat of a measure, or on the 2nd beat of a measure within a beamed group, it's easy to simply create a note with stems in two directions. (example 1)

divisi_example_01.png (2.16 KiB) Viewed 9253 times

but when the divisi itself starts a bit further into the measure, I prefer to STILL keep double stems going from the start of the measure, it feels more organic to me, rather than have notes suddenly going to double stems.

divisi_example_02.png (2.87 KiB) Viewed 9253 times

Am I wrong in preferring this?

I also (obviously) prefer to have divisi clearly divided with different stem directions, rather than having desks share stems.

What I don't like is 1 or 2 beats sharing a stem, then suddenly 2 or 3 beats with individual stems. (hopefully this makes sense... I didn't create an example of what I disliked)

____________________________________

as an addendum, do you think the "div." text should go where the stems divide? (even if those initial notes are unison) or only put it at the moment the notes are actually different.

I look at my example and think that maybe the text marking should appear where the stems divide as well.

Or is the text even necessary? with the stems being enough of an indication that the passage is divided?

(I DO have a passage earlier on in the piece where the violins play doublestops, slurred, half notes against moving quarter notes... involving held notes on open strings. Despite the stem direction being different for the notes, I did included the text "non-div." above, as well as a bracket before the notes.)

non-divisi_example_01.png (7.08 KiB) Viewed 9250 times

[Anders Hedelin]

but when the divisi itself starts a bit further into the measure, I prefer to STILL keep double stems going from the start of the measure, it feels more organic to me, rather than have notes suddenly going to double stems. divisi_example_02.png
Am I wrong in preferring this?

No, you are not wrong about that. To me, though, it seems much more logical to put the "div." at the beginning of the measure (2nd example), where the divisi actually starts with the double stems. (You could look at it the other way round: why would there be double stems at all if it weren't divisi?)

[MichelRE]

Thanks Anders, somehow, I was thinking the same thing, even if "technically" they ARE playing in unison at that point.

[hautbois baryton]

I totally agree with Anders.

[OCTO]

Agree with Anders as well. Unison playing doesn't mean "single voice". In your case it is "two voices divided".

[MichelRE]

thank-you Anders, Oboe, and Octo.