15

And it's not a double sharp.

I saw it in Miley Cyrus Fugue in measure 88 between the 3rd and 4th beat for the right hand. It's being reached at 2:42-2:43 in the video and I don't hear anything special. Here is a screenshot for convenience:

Excerpt from Miley Cyrus Fugue, measures 84–91

200_success
  • 1,641
  • 13
  • 21
user1803551
  • 1,733
  • 11
  • 24
  • why are you sure it is not a double sharp? – Neil Meyer May 02 '16 at 13:19
  • 4
    @NeilMeyer - That would indicate an F double sharp, and there are no notes on the F line in that measure. It also wouldn't match the expected font. – Basstickler May 02 '16 at 13:44
  • 1
    One way or the other, this is close to the worst sheet music typesetting I have seen. Bars have incomplete voices, and the notation is inconsistent: Why cis4. and a2 in bar 84 do not share their stem, but similar notes in other bars do? What is the half rest in bars 84,85 good for when it does not belong to any voice? Etc. – yo' May 04 '16 at 09:28

2 Answers2

14

May I suggest that it is not an 'x' per se, but actually two lines clarifying the voice leading for the top voices. Such lines are found in the first two bars as well.

Johannes
  • 1,447
  • 11
  • 12
  • This is my thought as well. It's strange though, this would seem to indicate that a melody line is depicted in the top voice, which looks to be the case in all previous measures, as well as the first half of the measure in question, but at the point this happens, the inverted stems/flags stop, which would suggest the separate voice also stops. If that's the case, I'm not sure why they would show this sort of voice exchange. – Basstickler May 02 '16 at 13:47
  • Yes, I agree that it is strange. But it seemed to be the most reasonable explanation. Also, keeping in mind that the score appears to be prepared by the composer and not a professional engraver/copyist (and as such, not proofread) I guess it is to be expected. – Johannes May 02 '16 at 16:30
  • I agree. I can't think of any other meaning that this could hold. And yes, I imagine it's not been proofread. – Basstickler May 02 '16 at 17:53
  • @Basstickler and johannes. Theses pop music fugues are not serious compositions by the composer, so I agree that they were not checked by a professional editor. To the point, the voice leading is certainly an option, but it's done for voices in the same hand/staff. Usually when I see voice leading indications it's for connecting between staffs, like in the first 2 measures in the picture. And yes, exchanging the 1st and 2nd voices there doesn't make much sense. – user1803551 May 02 '16 at 21:16
  • 4
    @Johannes is undoubtedly correct. It's however not great notation. The usual notation for crossing voices in one hand would be separate voices with oppositely pointing stems, much like the earlier measures. Mind you, most of the voice crossings in this example aren't going to sound like voice crossings. –  May 03 '16 at 00:36
  • 1
    Agreed with the general consensus here about voice indication. However, the score is a mess and should be cleaned up. – jjmusicnotes May 03 '16 at 23:22
3

If you listen to the recording, the melody voice in bars 88-89 really goes f f f g g g ees c' | g ...; this is probably a way how the author wanted to present this fact, using voice/staff switching lines.

It would have been actually better to use the proper notation of the leading voice:

enter image description here

yo'
  • 2,472
  • 16
  • 24