Making a confusing sheet with 3 voices and triplets non-ambiguous

Question

Context

I've transcribed the Title Screen song from Pokémon Red/Blue/Yellow for classical guitar and I am now polishing the sheet.

Here are measures 15 and 16 of the direct transcription of the original song, which has 3 melody channels (voices) and a noise channel for percussion effects (which I omitted). Note the coloring of each voice on the left side of this image:

And here are the same measures in the guitar sheet, where I mixed (as best as possible) the 3 voices of the direct transcription into a single guitar sheet (remember that guitar is a transposing instrument which plays one octave below what's represented on the sheet):

This guitar sheet may seem confusing (which is the point of this question), so here's the same image but with additional text notes and colors to highlight each voice and the duration of the confusing musical notes (voice 1 is blue, voice 2 is green and voice 3 is red):

In my opinion, on measure 16, the three voices are such that it is very hard to create a non-ambiguous guitar sheet. Despite my best efforts, this was the best that I managed to do. I see four points that might cause confusion to readers on the guitar sheet:

Note 1: This piece is not meant for sight reading. Instead, it is meant to be thoroughly rehearsed before performing, as it is very tricky to read without the tab (and to play). I want to print two versions of the score: one with tab and the other without, so the sheet alone must be readable by itself.

Note 2: This score is being produced with Guitar Pro 8.

Note 3: In the answers, please ignore the confusing notation in the pictures for artificial harmonics, where both the harmonic pitch and the note pressed with the left hand are notated in the sheet. This notation is forced by Guitar Pro 8, I cannot do anything about it (as far as I know).

Questions

I have 5 questions: 4 of them for each one of the 4 points identified in red in the last image and a 5th one asking for a better alternative for measure 16 of the guitar sheet (if there is any). Please provide a point-wise answer, if possible:

1. Is the duration of every note in here clear (that C is a quarter note and the others are triplet quarter notes)? Also, note that the G from voice 1 (blue) is pointing down here.

2. Voice 1 is now pointing up instead of down like in the previous note (point 1). Is it clear that this is not a quarter note, but actually a triplet quarter note affected by the |--3--| notation below? In other words, is it clear that the G pointing up in point 1 is not affected by the triplet, but the F (also pointing up) in point 2 is?

3. Is the duration of each of the notes here clear? I'd say voice 3 (red) (the bottom note) is clear, but what about the other two?

4. Here, the stem of the quarter note E in voice 2 (green) is pointing up because if I pointed it down, its stem would blend with the stem of the eighth note F from voice 3 (red) below it, and then the E would seem like an eighth note as well. Is it clear that the E is a quarter note and not a triplet quarter note (affected by the |---3---| notation abouve it)?

5. What is a better solution to represent measure 16 of the guitar sheet in a legible, non-confusing and non-ambiguous way? I don't necessarily require answers taking Guitar Pro 8 into account (although it would be appreciated of course), because I am even finding it hard to imagine how measure 16 could look non-ambiguous on paper or in a better music notation software.

Answer 1

First, a frame challenge: Why does the reader need to know the precise duration of every single note? Are they muting each note at the end of its duration? Are you muting each note when you play it? Play the piece yourself, simplifying where necessary, and match the notation to what you're actually doing; this will make it much more practical for someone else to follow, sight reading or not.

Second, ties are a tool to clarify rhythms. As a rule, any note value crossing a subdivision longer than itself (quarter across the half-measure, eighth across the beat, etc.) should be broken up across that subdivision. Your original three-staff version follows this rule, and I'm not sure why you made things harder by changing it.

Then, to answer your questions in rapidfire:

1. Yes, this is clear.
2. I think that would just be confusing. The triplet now looks like it goes with voice 3, which looks like an orphaned triplet-quarter.
3. Nope, not clear at all. I'd have to squint for a bit before I saw the top one as anything but a dotted eighth.
4. This is as clear as it can be in my opinion, especially with the upper voice in octaves. Others may disagree.
5. Here's a basis to build from, which happens to preserve your exact durations:

But again, don't take my word for it; play it through and try to reflect what you're actually doing and thinking.

You'll note that voices 1 and 3 adhere to my second point, but I've preserved the dotted quarter in voice 2 for a few reasons: One, the common 'tresillo' rhythm (dotted x, dotted x, x) is often given a pass due to its simplicity. Two, there's nowhere for a quarter stem to go in beat 3. And three, it makes voice 2 stand out visually, helping the stray quarter amidst the triplets make sense.

Three voices is a lot for one staff! There are good notational and cognitive reasons to pare it down to two distinct rhythms when possible. The good news is that a guitar is more like a percussion instrument than a violin, and, in extreme cases, you can just do this (EXAGGERATED FOR COMEDY; PLEASE DO NOT):

Answer 2

TL;DR

---

Step by step solution

Following the standards laid out in Behind Bars, here is the process I went through.¹

Step 1: MuseScore defaults for 3-voice entry

There is plenty of awkwardness here: quarter notes and dotted quarter notes sharing a stem (allowed, but awkward), overlapping stems (e.g. m. 16 beat 2), and overlapping ties (m. 16). It also make it seem that in m. 16 beat 1, the voice 3 F is part of voice 1's triplet.

Step 2: Down stems for lowest voice

This is not made explicit in Behind Bars, but is consistent throughout the examples.

This resolves some of the stem/slur crossing, but also creates the same problems in new places, such as the unclear stems in m. 15 beat 2.5. It also make m. 16, beat 3, voice 2 look like an eighth note rather than a quarter note.

Step 3: Adjust stems in middle voice

This step resolves various collisions. For example, in m. 15 beat 1, the dotted quarter notes in voices 1 and 2 are now combined, as with the following eighth notes and half notes. The stemming in m. 16 beats 1 and 2 is clarified, and voice 2's beat 2.5–3 tied eighth-note and quarter note, although the usual way to write is, is now combined into a single dotted quarter note, which is sufficiently clear, because the other voices clarify the beats and beat divisions.

An obvious problem, though, is that the voice crossing in m. 16 beats 1 and 2 is totally unclear, such that the voice leading is lost.

Step 4: Final adjustments

The main adjustment here is giving more space to m. 16 so that the individual beats are better clarified. Voice leading lines are also added to show where voice 1 crosses voice 2. In m. 15, I made voice 1 and 2's initial dotted quarter notes into tied quarter and eighth note to help the eye follow all three voices. I also adjusted some stem directions and lengths and note offsets for visual clarity.

Given that this is intended for study, so sight readability is somewhat secondary, this is the solution I find easiest to follow.

---

¹ Gould, Elaine. Behind Bars (Faber Music, 2011). See especially pp. 310 – 313, "Keyboard: Part Writing." The guitar notation section does not address part writing.