Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Do you write in measure numbers on your scores?

When I start a new piece, one of the first things I do is check to see if the measures are numbered. If they aren't, I go through and count and write in the number for the first measure of each line. I do this even if the score includes rehearsal indications (i.e. sections A, B etc.) Then I use those numbers to make notes for myself about what to practice, and also to analyze the piece, to find repeating themes that I might have missed and so on.

I was surprised to read the HR2 thread , where the poster mentions not counting the measures because "there are too many." It occurred to me that maybe none of the pieces I play are all that long (the longest currently is nine pages.) But then it also occurred to me that, with a longer piece, knowing the measure numbers would be that much more important.

What does everyone else do? Do you write in the measure numbers? Why or why not?

The only time I write in measure numbers - Henle almost always does in their scores - is when I want to communicate in writing with someone else about a particular question. One need not necessarily give the number of the measure, in this particular case, but one could say, for example, three measures after the change to Db major, or ten measures into the third movement.

Otherwise, I don't really see the need to write in measure numbers throughout the whole composition, as useful as I find Henle's doing so.

What I often do, however, is break down a movement into logical sections and I will name those sections "A" through ..., so that I can plan on one day to work particularly on section "D", another day on section "C", and so on. When I do this, I also make a habit of lettering the sections from the end to the beginning. There's some sort of perverse logic in doing this that encourages me to not always continue working on a piece from the beginning measures and not giving enough attention to the concluding measures. It also helps those who use this method out of the trap of having to say: "Well, I've learned the first three pages, but I haven't started working on the last two, yet."

Regards,

If I am going to be discussing the piece with someone I always mark the measures. How else would we know if we are both looking at the same measure???

Other times, I follow Bruce's method, marking the various sections, noting repeats, whether or not they have variations in them from when they first appeared, etc.. Like Bruce, I find that by breaking it into sections, I avoid the "start- at- the- beginning" syndrome, which used to result in my being able to play it fairly well at the beginning, but deteriorating bit by bit, as I got further along in the compostion.

Gaby Tu

I always mark out the measures when working on duets. Every 5 full bars gets a number. Yes, there can be a lot of measures to count (570 on a single Schubert movement I worked on a few years back) but it sure saves a lot of confusion.

I definitely mark the measures for analysis - and it's a prerequisite at some music festivals.

Thankfully, most good quality editions include measure marking.

Cheers/IS

Hi Shiro,

When I am playing a piece for my teacher that I have memorized, he requires me to write in the measure numbers. He uses it for reference when I am playing the piece and writes in my notebook by the measure number what things to work on (or mistakes or suggestions or whatever). I agree with Ivory Speaks that this is essential to do with duet scores as well.

I write on mine all the time. It is nice to wake up and know that exact spot you are having trouble on.

yeah, noting the sections is really useful. Matt is right, when u wake up the next morning you know which section you are having trouble on.

haha well for me personally, if I am stuggling on a section or passage, I dont near easily forget much of anything about it. I also don't see much benefit of writing in measure numbers unless I am doing anything collaborative (chamber, accompanying, etc.) the reasons and benefits for doing it in those situations are obvious, but I don't personally see much use for it otherwise.

Yes, indeed. EVERYTHING I play on The Job has to square...

I do the same as Bruce. Most of my music already has the measure numbers, but the sections are definitely helpful.

John

Nope. I write all kinds of stuff in, but not measure numbers.

I do not write in measure numbers on pieces I play for my own enjoyment.


We DO write in measure numbers for everything my son plays at competitions and festivals because it is required. As Bruce mentioned, measure numbers ease communication with someone else about a piece.

Only a little confused: Do you mean bar, when you say measure... - and do you mean bar line, when you say bar? Or what?

buxtehude:

bar (Brit.) = measure (Amer.)

That said, the American usage of 'measure' is sometimes encountered in Britain as well. I've never thought what Leftponders would call a bar line: 'measure-line' sounds distinctly odd, even for them . Just for more confusion, they probably call them 'bars'...

-Michael B.

Thanks P. (Leftponders! )

Yes, we approach our music more ....mathematically over here.

Cheers,

DF


P.S. I think a bar line is a bar line.

NOW your joke dawned at me!!! (After 4 hours of constant pondering! )