repeat sign function when using D.C. or D.S.

[Fred]

Example:

| Cm7 | % | F13 | % |
| Cm7 | % | % | F13 | % |
||: BbMA7 | % | Gb13 | % :||
| Fm7 | % | Bb13 | % |
| EbMA7 | % | G7(b9) | % | D.C.



When going D.C., will the repeated section (BbMA7 ,Gb13) again be repeated or played just once?
In my opinion it will be repeated. Some classical musician say no.

[beeboss]

In some classical forms the repeat is not played but it can go either way. Best to clarify for safety.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by beeboss

In some classical forms the repeat is not played but it can go either way. Best to clarify for safety.

O.K., but would you make a safety clarify in a Jazz context also?

[jazz oud]

In a jazz context, most people would play the repeat unless it is marked "no repeat on DC". But it would still be safer to note "repeats good on DC". If you anticipate a question, better to answer it in advance.

[engelbach]

Originally Posted by Fred

Example:

| Cm7 | % | F13 | % |
| Cm7 | % | % | F13 | % |
||: BbMA7 | % | Gb13 | % :||
| Fm7 | % | Bb13 | % |
| EbMA7 | % | G7(b9) | % | D.C.



When going D.C., will the repeated section (BbMA7 ,Gb13) again be repeated or played just once?
In my opinion it will be repeated. Some classical musician say no.

I disagree with them. That section consists of two plays of very short material, written once with repeat signs to save space. I would consider four measures too short to justify not repeating them.

D.C. simply means "Da Capo," which is Italian for "from the head." In the absence of any other instruction, it means "start all over again from the beginning."

In music with a very long middle section often a repeat is not played. But that's discretionary by the conductor and/or musicians. If the composer puts in a repeat, he intends that it be played.

[jazz oud]

The possible exception to this is stage music, which will often has a repeated vamp that is used for a cue; it is often understood to be not repeated if there is a DS, but usually it is still written in to avoid confusion. For stage music, the better solution is usually to use ˙/. or ˙//. instead of repeat bars to indicate a repeat that occurs every time or an internal repeat. It's usually not important enough to save space to risk making the music less clear.

In printed music (not hand-copied), there is no reason not to write it out again unless it is a whole section of music.

This is one of those things that it doesn't matter much in practical terms what the "right" answer is but what will get the music played as intended.


If reading someone else's music, I will assume that repeats are good unless noted otherwise, and if something is unclear I will try to ask beforehand what is intended.

[Jay Norem]

It's as jazz oud said: "If you anticipate a question, better to answer it in advance."

Experience will teach you that everything must be spelled out on your charts, no matter how trivial or obvious it may be to you, for the simple reasons that a. You don't want to waste valuable rehearsal time and b: It's your chart, meaning that it's your music, and you want it played exactly the way you hear it.

Put yourself into the mind of a tenor sax player who has a lot of personal issues, and write your charts for him.

[jazz oud]

Originally Posted by Jay Norem

Put yourself into the mind of a tenor sax player who has a lot of personal issues, and write your charts for him.

I prefer to imagine a surly teenage trombonist.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by jazz oud

I prefer to imagine a surly teenage trombonist.

Who also has a lot of personal issues?

O.K.. Maybe you are right. The goal must be to keep the chart as clear as possible.

On the other hand I agree also with Jerry. It never crossed my mind not to consider a repeat sign, whether it stands before or after the Coda sign.

Now, I also remember theses days writing a lot of Salsa charts where repetitions are on the agenda. When you go back to the Mambo and the Mambo was 4x´s, it´ll stay 4x´s.