Strange notation in Ravel

[OCTO]

Noteheads of adjacent seconds are placed on opposite sides of the stem. The top and bottom notes of a chord are always placed on the normal side of the stem.

French editions always have some french uniqueness!

[MJCube]

Thanks to erelievonen for that! Makes perfect sense to me.

One disadvantage of making the lower note of a second the “back-note” might be that it leaves a tiny white gap between the noteheads, so they may look less connected in a chord. In the usual modern alignment, the noteheads of a second always touch.

[DatOrganistTho]

Here's the last to systems of the 4th song in Ravel's Cinq mélodies populaires grecques:

Cinq mélodies populaires grecques IV.jpg

Apart from the unclear notation in the piano, 4th measure, my real question is with the 6th measure, piano, left hand. This seems to me like an overly complex, if not unclear way to notate this kind of figure. In fact, in another edition available on IMSLP by the Russian publisher Muzyka, the is simply converted to an and the quintuplet is omitted. This seems sensible to me, considering the slow tempo of the piece (Lento) and the break from the rhythmic left-hand pattern in the same measure. What do you think?

I had a composition professor say once, "If players spent half as much time playing the music and not griping about how it is written, there would be a lot more work done playing new music!" - But I disagree with it.

I think there is something very philosophical (as some have already pointed out) that Ravel insisted on. 5 is more relaxed, and thus helps the player to initially slow down, see what's going on, figure it out, and play it like every other human being plays quintuplets - with liberality. This is not effectively communicated when it is simplified as mentioned in Muzyka.

E. Gould strongly encourages in her book to avoid cross measure stemming because it makes the beat "ambiguous," and thus it is better to use a simple slur to communicate such syncopations... but she's wrong, isn't she? Don't we all at the bottom of our hearts (especially composers) see the visual value of understanding music that has been cross-measure syncopated?

At the end of the day there's always a compromise between notating what will be effective in terms of literal communication to the performer, and what is effective in communicating style, form, and philosophy.

[John Ruggero]

What is "cross-measure stemming"?