In Fernando Sor's Op 44 No 7, what is the purpose of the repeat sign indicated by the arrow?

There isn't a matching sign before the end of the piece, so how am I supposed to interpret it? (The picture is the entire piece).

"repeat begin" sign with no matching repeat sign

  • Closely related question, might even be considered as a duplicate
    – guidot
    Aug 20, 2023 at 9:29

2 Answers 2


There's an implied repeat sign at the end of the piece, so the entire second section is played twice. As in this recording by Dale Harris:

This is similar to the convention that is there is no "begin repeat sign", then one repeats from the beginning of the piece.

  • Yes, and the incomplete measure just after, reminding the beginning of the piece is also an hint that it should be repeated like the first one.
    – Tom
    Aug 19, 2023 at 20:01
  • 1
    Thanks, I thought about that... But isn't the last bar of the piece lasting two beats (i.e. it is complete), so when you repeat, don't you go out of tempo?
    – dariober
    Aug 19, 2023 at 20:07
  • 2
    @Tom, (I'm obviously reading it wrong...). The bar before the arrow lasts 1 beat and a half. I'm ok with that. But in the last bar of the piece, the rest plus the last note makes 2 beats so the bar is complete and when you repeat you go out of sync... What am I missing?
    – dariober
    Aug 19, 2023 at 20:41
  • 1
    @dariober The first time through the B section, the final note is cut short to make room for the beginning of the repeat. In the linked recording, he slows down the final measure, which also helps make the final measure sound full while still allowing for the pickup notes on the repeat, all without creating awkward timing problems.
    – Aaron
    Aug 19, 2023 at 20:53
  • @Aaron the final note is cut short to make room for the beginning of the repeat. but then the music score is somewhat imprecise. The last bar should have been more like the last bar of the first section. (Just curious, I'm not complaining...)
    – dariober
    Aug 19, 2023 at 20:59

It's sloppy notation. There is a convention that an End Repeat may reflect to the beginning of the piece without there having to be an explicit Start Repeat there. There is no such convention for a Start Repeat and the end of the piece. There is further sloppy notation in that if we ARE to assume an End Repeat at the end, the anacrusis is not taken into account.

We may, perhaps, assume the intention to repeat both halves. But the notation doesn't clearly tell us to.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.