A fix for laissez vibrer ties

So I’ve seen a lot of posts about how others are unsatisfied about the length of laissez vibrer ties. And while going into Engraving Options to make them longer sort of works, it doesn’t quite fix the problem.

I believe that many (including myself) would want an option that allows laissez vibrer ties to go into the next beat. Currently, the option in Engraving Rules simply pushes the next beat (or barline) away to make room for the tie. But of course, the whole purpose of laissez vibrer is that it keeps ringing into the next beat!

Also, can’t we just use “t” as a shortcut to get it? I know it’s technically a different kind of tie, but it’s a common enough thing that it’s a huge pain to dig into those submenus…

Except that T at present will always tie to the next occurrence of that same pitch, regardless of how far away it is.

1 Like

Add a note in another voice. Tie to that note then hide it.

Edit: If you’re tieing across a barline, the other voice isn’t necessary. Force duration can also avoid using another voice.

1 Like

I’m trying to see how this can be done and failing. What is the method?

Great idea - thanks for suggesting this!

1 Like

That was a (not very well thought out) afterthought of my original post. In reality it wouldn’t really work as one would want either a note or rest in the regular voice there.

That doesn’t strike me as a particularly useful feature… I honestly can’t think of a lot of use for that, especially trumping the convenience of a one-button shortcut for laissez vibrer, no?

Arpeggio Ties


Perhaps if a note is not immediately followed by a note of the same pitch, T would only tie it if there are two notes selected in total (using Ctrl-click), otherwise T would produce an LV tie?

Before complaining, I must say that the amount of support and how quickly I get an answer from Daniel Spreadbury is just out of this world. I really do wonder if he has a life outside of supporting this forum and, just for that, I feel it’s worth the price of Dorico.

Okay, that aside, I do agree that the submenus could already get simplified (so does this forum! It’s not a so intuitive forum!) Like this :
Why do I need to first click on a button to override? Could I now simply click “Has a trill line” and have it override the property just by me saying I want to override it?

Also, I feel they could be some way to group ungroup, link/unlink dynamics in a much simpler way. Just as any photo editing software, there’s always a quick button or intuitive short cut to “stick to grid”. I’d love to have something similar implemented in the next version of Dorico.

It’s indeed the program with which I can get the best results and it’s quite fast, easy to work with. But I do feel there’s a lot that could make it even easier/faster and maybe even more flexible/adaptable, which is what I feel is slightly lacking at the moment.

Otherwise, even with my complains, it’s still far ahead all the other programs I’ve used.

1 Like

No need to wonder whether I have a life outside of supporting this forum. Right at this minute, I don’t! 18 hours yesterday – we’ll see how long it is today…

The presence of switches to enable and disable property changes has been debated long and hard over the years, but they do fulfill a specific purpose, namely that they allow you to specify not only a specific value, but also whether or not it is overridden from the default value (provided by Engraving Options or whatever), and therefore provides you with a simple and 100% reliable way to undo an individual property change. (If you do something like Reset Appearance or Reset Position, then a whole load of properties will be unset, possibly doing more than you intended to do.)

So they’ll be staying, sorry!


Dear Daniel,
I perfectly understand why the toggles are there, and believe it or not, I’m perfectly ok with that behavior. But from a user point of view, what could be useful would be to be able to click direcly on the tick box, which would also toggle on the override property. This is a place where I find Dorico over-protective. I understand there might be boring technical reasons that prevent that behavior, but from a user point of view, it would save some clicks and some wonderings…


I actually got l,v as a shortcut (yes, sequential keys shortcut) and it’s been working flawlessly for years…


I definitely agree with you on this, Marc. I find it made worse by the fact that even on my 42-inch monitor the clickable area of the toggle seems to be about the width of a hair! I don’t think I have ever had one toggle on the first try.

There was a thread just about that clickable area and in the previous versions, it happened to be just a little bit above the “clickable” icons in the properties panel. I never had this problem again since Daniel told me I had to click a little bit above and not spot-on. Hope it helps! And I hope it is fixed ^^

thanks for the tip! I missed that thread. I’ll try it out - just installing v4 right now.

That’s fine, but why not allow the enable flag to turn on automatically if you click on the option itself? After all, if you are clicking on an option, then obviously you want the option turned on. Why require the extra click?

There was some discussion very early on (way before 1.0) of the possibility of keyboard access to everything in Properties. I don’t suppose that has been completely forgotten, but I’m sure it would be a low priority.

1 Like

This reminds me of the Tantacrul video. Switch the switch to tick the box.:joy:
Some of them I do understand, but there are a few that are a bit bizarre.

I doubt Daniel needs reminding of this video (and I also doubt it’s a good thing to remind him, especially today).

1 Like