When exporting audio of a video film cue for the director, I have to remember to mute the video sound. When I go back into the mixer, I have to first press the “video” button to enable the video fader, then press mute. Curiously, SAVING the file hides the video fader again. This seems like a bug. In the ideal world, I would love to control the export of video sound within the “Export Audio” dialogue.
This is not film scoring related, but it bothers me that tremolo markings are in the “repeat Endings” section in Write mode. To me they’re more closely linked to ornaments and glissandi. I understand the logic that tremolo is related to repeat structures, and are a sort of shorthand – but emotionally I always thought of tremolo as a bowing effect; in timpani writing, some composers used trills while others tremolo… so it’s more ornamental for me than concerned with repeat endings and slashes. I always forget where it is in the toolbar.
Is it possible to use the Shift-X text to enter directions like pizz. and con sord, and have them be interpreted in playback? Seems so longhand to go into the Playing Techniques toolbox.
I can’t presume to speak for the development team, but I really don’t see this functionality changing. Of course I understand to your point, and other users have expressed that as well. But I also understand why the team placed tremolos where they did, and I’ve gotten used to it pretty quickly. It would be a significant change for them to move them, which is rare.
This may be semantics, but I don’t think it’s insignificant to observe that the popover is not called “repeat endings,” but simply “repeats.” Hence the rationale of the placement of tremolos.
From a performer’s point of view, there are two sorts of tremolos, measured (defining an exact rhythm of repeated notes) and unmeasured (usually, “as fast as possible”).
The first type clearly has something to do with repeats, but the second are not - they are arguably either ornaments or playing techniques.
But it would be even more confusing to have them in three difference places, I think!
BTW for timps, some composers consistently used tremolos only for measured tremolos, and trills for unmeasured. Sometimes you find a tremolo immediately followed by a trill. But not everybody has been as precise as that.
We have discussed the tremolo and rhythmically repeated notes a couple of times here already.
To avoid looking for the slashed note symbol in the toolboxes, you can easily use the popover: after having selected the note(s) type Shift-R, /, Enter
Shift-R to invoce the popover / to define the number of slashes you want (//, /// etc.) Enter to execute it
That’s true, but you still have to remember you want the repeats popover (Shift-R), and not a different one.
Unless you just remember “Shift-R /” as “the magic formula for tremolos” without knowing what the “Shift-R” means on its own - but that’s probably not a good way to become a “Dorico power user” in the long term.
RichardC, measured tremolos are NOT trills, by any stretch of the imagination, and they are often repeats of a single note.
I suppose one could be pedantic and put measured tremolos among the trills and unmeasured ones among the repeats, but since the signs are identical, that would probably just lead to another crop of complaints that playback was wrong because somebody used the wrong type.
IMO the root cause of the issue is that some users think “tremolo” ONLY means “unmeasured tremolo”.
FWIW Dorico didn’t invent the idea that tremolos were a type of repeat. Lilypond classified them that way 20 years ago (and still does).
As it relates to UX, people can acclimate to almost anything. Just think of how much goofiness in SIbelius or Finale we all just got used to, until we didn’t even think about it any more. In Finale, a dynamic mark and a gradual dynamic mark were in completely different categories. I just accepted it and adapted myself to it. Now that was really a stretch!
While tremolos filed under repeats might seem a bit odd… honestly, it’s not a big deal. In a short time, it becomes second nature. The number of debateably un-intuitive UI choices in Dorico is pretty small. They might be good for a chuckle (Qhords), but hardly an affliction to use.
Just a question regarding the OP’s third point. What if you want to put (pizz.) to emphasize to a player that he really has to pizz. despite what another string section is doing? If I type that in in the playing techniques, Dorico just ignores it. If I put it in as text, not only will it not play back, it’ll be in the wrong font [size] because I’ve defined these two text categories to have different point sizes.
Vaughan, you need to add that as a custom playing technique using Engrave > Edit Playing Techniques. Takes a matter of seconds once you know how to do it, and you can save your custom PTs as default, which makes them appear in all new projects.
Asbefore, regarding your third question, Dorico has a more semantic approach, and will not try to interpret your text items in any way. However, you should find that using the Shift+P popover and typing pizz. gives you exactly what you want in the same amount of time. No reason to use the toolbox.
It would be nice, though, if one could enter ‘(pizz.)’, in parentheses, in the shift-P popover, and Dorico recognising it, instead of having to create a playing technique for it.
