You want the staves to appear, and you want them to be filled with rests? That should be as simple as ensuring that the option under Hide Empty Staves on the Vertical Spacing page of Layout Options is set to ‘Never’. Then the same staves will appear on each system.
Thank you for answer.
I am sorry I think it is a question of my bad english.
I want the
Oud starting being displayed from bar 1 to bar 139
Strings from bar 1 to bar 120
The paino from bar 25 to bar 145
So these few system start and end at different position.
And the empty bars in between starting and ending point should be displayed with rests.
In the option the L. harris offered it seemsd as if also the bars in between were hidden? Am i wrong?
Are you sure this has been checked in Layout Options > Players?
per
Looks like gogollny wants a cutaway score… Which are not implemented yet!
cutaway score… Which are not implemented yet!
Ah really? Thanx for this Info Marc, that explains my resultless tries with this.
Is there another workaround to avoid this loads of empty bars at the end of a piece in 4 of 5 instruments in the partitur view?
Best regards g
At the moment, you can set the hiding empty staves option to “after first system” but input an empty text item (that contains just a space, no letters) on each staff and in each system where you want the empty staves to appear. These text items will break multi-bar rests in the parts, though. More controls for managing which staves are hidden and shown are planned for the future.
I’ve got your email - I’ll take a look at the instrument names thing and reply to you.
I would suggest Layout options > Vertical Spacing > Hide empty staves !
PS Sorry Lillie, I had not seen you had already answered that
Marc,
I was going to ask about that, but he said he wanted the measures filled with rests, which threw me off track. Likely there are some translation issues at play here, but I could never converse smoothly in any of the foreign languages I have “studied,” so my hat is off to those who do.
Likely there are some translation issues at play here
Yes, and I am really sorry for that. I know that led to some unprecise formulation.
I wanted some system(voice/instrument) to start later (as you can see above) but when they once started to be displayed the empty bars should be filled with rests, so that in the partitur the instruments set in one after each other, but than are completely displayed until the individual end of the voice.
As you could see in he pic above there are too many empty bars in too many voices at the end.
But with this :
Layout options > Vertical Spacing > Hide empty staves !
My result was, that also the empty bars in between are hidden. Or I made a mistake.
It seems that you are speaking german, am I right?
If so, you can message me your issue in German if you want and I will be happy to help.
As for your last sentence: you are correct. I assume one could work around this by inputting notes in a second voice and then scale them to 1% to “hide” them
Dear Gogollny,
This issue is to be solved in next update, where you will be able to choose on a system basis which empty staves are hidden. For the time being, the workaround is to input a hard space (as system text, shift x, input alt-shift-space) on some bars of that instrument that you do not want hidden. The result is that you can control which bars/systems are hidden in the full score. But it does break multirests, if I am not mistaken (in the parts). Hope this helps !
From gogollny’s screenshot I deduce that the layout has instrument names showing (because you see the numbering 1-6). This means that the original XML didn’t contain instrument names, and maybe not even usable instrument descriptions at all, which might have given information about transposition. In that case Sibelius or any other application won’t do any better deciphering the XML. I am not familiar with Oud notation, but I guess you mean that you would like to notate it like a guitar, an octave higher than the sound, and with the G clef with an 8 underneath. Assigning a guitar to this part might already solve it. The clef in itself doesn’t do the transposition. The transposition is in the instrument, not in the clef.
As always, and already suggested: if you attach the project here (or a reduced version of it), it’s easier to assist you. Zip it before uploading.
gogollny, obwohl Englisch offensichtlich auf diesem Forum die Hauptsprache ist, scheint es mir kein großes Problem wenn du gelegentlich eine Frage auf Deutsch stellst, wenn es dir ab und zu an englischem Vokabular mangeln würde. Wie du siehst, gibt es manche deutschsprachigen Doricobenutzer (und Steinberg-Mitarbeiter) hier.
Andererseits: dein Benehmen auf diesem Forum hat mich schon oft ziemlich geärgert, und das hat wenig mit der Sprache zu tun. Ich frage mich wirklich ob du dich überhaupt helfen lassen willst.
Thanx a lot everybody for patience and help, I realize, that I have really difficulties to exactly explain what I needed, so some answers led me into a non wanted direction, sorry.
Because of a bit time pressure I gave the project to a friend who did the layouting for the rehearsals with Sibelius… however.
So it is not that urgent anymore. (Just frustrating 
)
I really understood, that have to pay much more attention before I export the XML File . The name issue could be solved by giving the names before exporting. But I didn’t mange yet do that in D.
And it was really surprising, that the really non-professional Notationpart of logic could do sth that I don’t manage to do with Dorico.
But now I will just do more simple things with the app. Doing Leadsheets is fine…
Best regards and thanx again