# Proofing your work



## BopEuph (Jul 19, 2012)

I was reamed out by a client today because I missed a bug with the lyric tool in Finale. I've decided I don't proof my work enough, especially with a client like this one. His scores are very detailed, and he's meticulous in writing them and checking his work. If I forget even a staccato, he notices.

I asked this on the Finale forum, and two really great suggestions that I don't do, but will start getting into, is printing out the music and going over with a red pen, then reading through on my own instrument.

What other practices do you some of you copyists do?


----------



## autopilot (Jul 19, 2012)

print it out . hard copys makes every difference in the world. 

Be the player on each individual part - is this how I'd like it?


----------



## JohnG (Jul 19, 2012)

As an orchestrator you really have to go through each part carefully, and "play" it in your head. Otherwise you miss things.

And agree about the printout. I hate to waste paper but there is no substitute.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 19, 2012)

I think I learned an important lesson today.

Besides wasting paper, it's a lot of money, too. This particular job is 250 pages long (legal size)...and it's only part one of two!


----------



## windshore (Jul 19, 2012)

+1 on print out.

On a big project like you're doing, I've often hired a good proof-reader. There's nothing like getting additional eyes on it. A score encompasses almost an infinite amount of detailed information. - It's almost impossilbe to proof as well as someone who hasn't worked on it.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Jul 19, 2012)

windshore @ Thu Jul 19 said:


> +1 on print out.
> 
> On a big project like you're doing, I've often hired a good proof-reader. There's nothing like getting additional eyes on it. A score encompasses almost an infinite amount of detailed information. - It's almost impossilbe to proof as well as someone who hasn't worked on it.



+2. When you stare a things a long time, your brain fills in the missing parts.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 19, 2012)

Good points all around. Thanks. Someone else at the Finale forum did mention the second set of eyes. I forgot about that.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 20, 2012)

BopEuph @ Fri Jul 20 said:


> I think I learned an important lesson today.
> 
> Besides wasting paper, it's a lot of money, too. This particular job is 250 pages long (legal size)...and it's only part one of two!


If you can't afford to print it out, you are not charging enough.

D


----------



## doubleattack (Jul 20, 2012)

JohnG @ Fri 20 Jul said:


> ...
> 
> And agree about the printout. I hate to waste paper but there is no substitute.



I'm always thinking about this phenomen. Looking on screen or on paper makes a huge difference. Even with a normal letter. You can going through very carefully on screen - you always will find mistakes reading from paper. :shock: 

I don't know exactly why. Seems mankind aren't made for computer... :mrgreen:


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 20, 2012)

Daryl @ Fri Jul 20 said:


> BopEuph @ Fri Jul 20 said:
> 
> 
> > I think I learned an important lesson today.
> ...



I'm charging what the standard was a few years ago--50 cents a frame. It is decent, but printing this out will still cost about $30, which is a week's worth in groceries, when you think about it.

The total payout is going to be around $3,000. I've already been paid half. I can't wait to repeat that income with part 2!


----------



## snattack (Jul 20, 2012)

I always print, use a PROOFREADING CHECKLIST for every part/score and a red pen. I then with "machine-like" dicipline check everything in the same order as the check list on everything.

Usually I'm so very tired at the end of a project after several hours of orchestration, and it's usually tight before the deadline, so the only way for me to not miss anything is this system. It's painful, but it's practically bullet proof.

Best,
A


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 20, 2012)

Might I get a copy of that checklist? 

Most of my copying jobs are fairly easy, but this guy will have an articulation on just about every note, at least 2-3 dynamics in every frame, and quite a bit of textual direction. It gets easy to miss something, and I definitely need to step it up.


----------



## JJP (Jul 20, 2012)

I've worked as a music proofreader for years. The rule is, "Never proof your own work." It is definitely worth figuring another person into the budget when estimating a project. That proofreader will ALWAYS find things that need fixing. If not, find a better proofreader.

Many people fail to realize that there is so much that goes into good copying beyond knowing basic notation and the notation programs. You don't learn most of this from a book. Proofreading is one of those jobs that most musicians think, "oh yeah, I can do that". The truth is it's a quite laborious part of copying. I've seen more than one person humbled when they were shown how much they missed because they underestimated the amount of careful attention required to proofread. Some of those people were good copyists and musicians. The difficult truth is that most people are not very good at proofreading music. The human mind often sees what it thinks it should see rather than what is actually there.

On important or complicated projects, double-proofing becomes essential. (Most projects are important.) Proof once for errors, then proof a second time to check the corrections and any other items that may have been missed the first time around. Sometimes the corrections may cause a proofreader to see different things or even cause new problems.

If this process is too time consuming because of deadlines, then more proofreaders are hired. It's that important. I've seen projects with five or more proofreaders working simultaneously and cross-checking things with each other. In such cases the same proofreader never looks a the same part twice. The second proof is done by another person.

As mentioned above, proofing from a hard copy is the best way to work. I've not yet found an on-screen solution that works as effectively. I'm still looking, though, and I'm eager to try out a few ideas!

FYI: Union (AFM) minimum scale for proofreaders on live performances is currently $39/hour plus benefits. That's a pretty good bargain considering how much they save people. Rates are slightly different for films, live TV, sound recordings, etc -- usually a few bucks less because of the potential for greater new/re-use, secondary markets, and special payments.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 20, 2012)

Yeah, I now have new steps to add into this. 

Though, I've never had these bugs pop up. Mostly, I never use the lyrics tool in Finale, since I'm usually doing instrumental work. So, I didn't realize how possible it was for the words to start disappearing when I made the font larger. When he requested them bigger, I just went through each movement, changed the font size and sent them back out. The text either disappeared or the words shifted to attach to the wrong notes. It was a very weird bug.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 22, 2012)

It's not 'really' a bug, in that if you make a font bigger, the text will simply NOT fit...

But other than that perhaps you can find some other composer to proof read each others work? 

But printing is tons important, and you can't avoid it no matter what!


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 22, 2012)

nikolas @ Sun Jul 22 said:


> It's not 'really' a bug, in that if you make a font bigger, the text will simply NOT fit...



Actually, what happened when I made the font bigger, is the text disappeared completely for a few pages. And when I would re-attach it, the same syllable would attach to every word on the vocal line. So the vocal line would become "the the the the the, etc." Or the wrong words would attach to the notes, not because of space, they would just shift over completely. It was weird. 

Part of it was probably because I didn't clear the text out of the lyrics window when I would just use the previous movement's file as the template for the next movement. So the last movement's text would start showing up under the words, when I didn't attach them.

At that point, the only workaround that worked was to put the text into another verse and set them to the notes again.


----------



## Mike Marino (Jul 22, 2012)

Hey Nick,

Here's an article on proofreading from On NOte (an article-based site for Finale and Sibelius users):

http://www.rpmseattle.com/of_note/proofreading/

There's a lot of great tips on this website.

Hope this helps!

- Mike


----------



## wst3 (Jul 22, 2012)

I'll add my votes for paper and extra eyes.

This applies to everything, except maybe writing code, since the compiler will tell you that you missed something!

For copyist work, which I do very little of, I first play it back from within Finale. It never really sounds all that musical, but that helps find mistakes, at least for me.

Then I print it out and read it, I found that if I played it I tended to gloss over the mistakes, fixing them unintentionally as I played. So reading it, and 'listening to it in my head' works better for me.

For anything more than a few pages I have someone else proof it. I know for a fact that I will skip over errors after a few pages.

The same rules apply to writing, especially resume writing! And they apply to other fields too, such as circuit design. A friend and I worked on a project last year where we each did part of the circuit. I proofed his work, he proofed mine. It was embarrassing how many errors we found in each other's schematics, net lists, and even parts lists (I think I hated them the most!)

The human mind is a funny thing! We are capable of correcting things we know are wrong! It fascinates me every time I run across it.

So listen, print, and then get a second set of eyes for larger projects.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 26, 2012)

So I just finished the first movement. This piece is in its third draft between me and the composer's editing. I've found an embarrassing amount of dumb mistakes. 

This has definitely been a learning experience.

By the way, this is the text that was given to me on the Finale forum for the proofing process:

At the top of the page, pencil in the following letters: P R D A M Pd T Ex. You proofread the page once for each separate element (as explained below) and check it off when you are finished. By only looking at individual aspects when you proofread, you focus your eye and don't fall into the trap of 'reading' the music.

The letters indicate:
P - Pitch (clefs, clef changes, accidentals)
R - Rhythm (rests, multiple rests [in extracted parts], ties)
D - Dynamics (hairpins, cresc. and dim. indications)
A - Articulations (expressive markings, instrument labels, tempi)
M - Measure numbers
Pd - Pedal markings (keyboard music)
T - Text (vocal music)
Ex - Extremities

Normally, when proofreaders look at a page of music (or text) they tend to overlook things that appear at the extreme ends of lines and at the top and bottom of the page. Because of this, a good proofreader will look at the extremities of a page to try and find the extraneous details someone else might miss. Some things to look for when examining extremities are:


Are ties at the end of a system restated in the next system (or on the next page)?

Are parenthetical accidentals necessary?

Are the clefs at the beginning of a system correct?

Is the key signature at the beginning of a system correct?

If a time of key signature is changed at the end of one line, is it correctly stated in the next line, and vice versa?

Does any indication continue (pedal, trill, octava) and is it correctly notated?

Are instruments correctly labelled? (particularly important in orchestral scores)

Is the text of the copyright notice correct?

In orchestral scores, are the percussion instruments and "doubling" instruments correctly labelled?


Editorial Procedures 

Does every measure have the correct number of beats?

Does the composer ever exceed the range of the instrument?

Are any unconventional notational devices employed? If so, is there a conventional way to notate it? (Unconventional notation is discouraged, unless there is a valid argument for it.)

If an unusual notation is employed, make sure it is explained in a footnote or preface.

If percussion instruments are used, are they consistently placed on the same line or space of the staff?

Is the notational practice consistently applied throughout the work?

Is every notational aspect clear and unambiguous for the engraver/copyist? (N.B., if the work is to be engraved in Korea, English instructions to the engraver should be avoided whenever possible.)


----------



## JJP (Jul 26, 2012)

There are also other things proofreaders watch for when proofing music that is to be sight-read. Some of these are more esoteric, but they aid in reading.

- Is the spacing of the notes correct? Space is time in notated music. Does the spacing of the notation convey the rhythm and timing?

- Did the copyist lay out the page in a musical way? i.e. Are four-bar phrases generally kept on a single system if the music is phrased that waya? Do major sections begin at the beginning of a system? The music should look like it sounds.

- Are there proper page turns for the player? This is a huge rookie mistake that can make an easy part almost unplayable.

- Are multimeasure rests broken at musical points and are cues given so the players can find their place if they lose count or have to begin in the middle of a long section of rests?

- Oh, check for tacet sheets! Tacet sheets are very important for any players who do not play a particular cue, movement, whatever. That way they don't stop the session or rehearsal asking if they are missing a part.

Funny note: I once walked in to a rehearsal and was handed an orchestral percussion part with an 80 measure rest. It was just one system with a single 80 bar multimeasure rest. No cues, nothing, just my entrance 81 bars later. I wanted to find the publisher's place of business and go burn it down! :evil:


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 26, 2012)

JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> - Is the spacing of the notes correct? Space is time in notated music. Does the spacing of the notation convey the rhythm and timing?


This is one of the hardest things to do on a modern score. The parts usually extract perfectly, but the score, with long cadenzas, long syllables under the notes, and grace notes really affect spacing more than I always expect.



JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> - Did the copyist lay out the page in a musical way? i.e. Are four-bar phrases generally kept on a single system if the music is phrased that waya? Do major sections begin at the beginning of a system? The music should look like it sounds.


I've always thought this is more apparent in jazz; the systems are usually spaced out more symmetrical (I HATE lead sheets that don't group in four bar lines!). I try to keep classical scores from disturbing the phrase with a new line if possible.



JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> - Are there proper page turns for the player? This is a huge rookie mistake that can make an easy part almost unplayable.


I hate poor page turns, too. If a poor page turn gets by, it was either a poor judgment on my part, or I couldn't find any good places.



JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> - Are multimeasure rests broken at musical points and are cues given so the players can find their place if they lose count or have to begin in the middle of a long section of rests?


A specific client doesn't do rehearsal marks, and his handwritten parts are always like this. Extracting the parts for him is always extra work.



JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> - Oh, check for tacet sheets! Tacet sheets are very important for any players who do not play a particular cue, movement, whatever. That way they don't stop the session or rehearsal asking if they are missing a part.


These are always printed in the parts, too. I will extract the part, and when I see that it's a tacet, I'll delete all systems and put a centered text box with the word "tacet" in its place.



JJP @ Fri Jul 27 said:


> Funny note: I once walked in to a rehearsal and was handed an orchestral percussion part with an 80 measure rest. It was just one system with a single 80 bar multimeasure rest. No cues, nothing, just my entrance 81 bars later. I wanted to find the publisher's place of business and go burn it down! :evil:


Aren't percussionists used to that?! :twisted:


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 26, 2012)

By the way, those extra ones are being copied to this document now. I'm actually kind of excited to have been given all this information on how to bump up quality. I think that's a bit sad--music copying excites me.


----------



## Daryl (Jul 27, 2012)

Just as a quick aside, cues and tacet sheets are virtually automatic in Sibelius, so just check them out. It will save hours of faffing around.

D


----------



## Casey Edwards (Jul 27, 2012)

I want you guys to know, this thread rocks. I recently started intern work doing score prep and I'm being trained by some really top notch people with high profile clients. It's amazing what little stupid mistakes we can miss some times. This is a good reminder for things to double check regardless of how many times you've done it.


----------



## BopEuph (Jul 27, 2012)

Awesome, Casey. 

I want to start doing some more high-end clients myself. This was a subject I just couldn't look over any more without doing something about it.


----------

