Librarians: In their own words

While each orchestra has their own preference for the size and layout of the final product, overall there are definitely certain guidelines for proper preparation of scores and parts, and a very valuable pamphlet can be downloaded from the MOLA website, Major Orchestra Librarians’ Association. It is called “MOLA Guidelines for Music Preparation” and can be found under Resources/MOLA Publications. We ask all composers who are writing for the NACO to follow these guidelines, as do most of my librarian colleagues in other orchestras.

Although there are no rules stating that composers must submit computer-generated parts, it is pretty much the norm nowadays. The problem, as I mentioned before, is that many young composers try to save money by doing the copying themselves when they really do not know proper standards in copying, even for basic things like allowing proper time for page turns, setting up the margins, the font size, spacing, placement and size of rehearsal letters, measure numbers and page numbers, and so on. The majority of composers and copyists use Sibelius or Finale software, although there are also a few other companies out there that sell copying software. Personally, Greg uses Finale, so whenever something is submitted to our library that has been done in Finale, we ask for the computer files to be sent as well as the hard copies so that if anything needs to be fixed or changed it can quickly be done in-house to our preferred specifications. However, librarians generally do not like to be publishers. At our level of orchestra, a composer who is being commissioned and paid a good fee should be expected to provide professional quality parts which have been prepared to our specifications (samples are sent ahead) and then double or triple checked by a second person before the parts are made and sent to us. There is nothing worse than sending us a set of parts, and then three days later we receive a huge list of corrections which have been found after the parts were sent and we have to manually enter them into each part and the score – which may already have been sent to a guest conductor. Please double check your work carefully and have someone else proof it as well. Later, during rehearsals some changes might be mutually agreed upon between the conductor, composer and players, and if we already have the computer files on hand we can quickly make up an insert to add to the part if it is more than just a simple note or rhythm change to be penciled in.

When we are dealing with young composers who don’t have much experience, this is sometimes a different matter. After sending us several versions of their submission and amending them each time as per our suggested layout preferences, then when it comes time to make the parts for the players we may actually prefer to copy and bind the scores and parts ourselves if we have already determined that they do not have access to the proper paper or binding systems to make them themselves, nor the funds to have someone else make them for them. We do not like plastic comb bindings on scores or parts, for example. They are noisy, and the holes tear. We prefer spiral coil bindings on scores, and the parts should be bound with certain types of binding tapes which allow the parts to lay flat. Individual parts bound with coils are too bulky when there are other pieces of repertoire in the musicians’ folder. We generally use spiral coils on individual parts only for full evening works such as operas or ballets.