Hello all,
Sometimes I need to hide individual dynamics in condensed staves to reduce clutter. As they cannot be unlinked in Engrave mode (reasonable FR?) my choice is to visit Galley View to unlink the dynamics in question (takes eons of time), or just unlink all dynamics in the score before starting layout work. Or maybe I should from now on keep that checkbox in Note Input Options for automatic linking unchecked.
What are your thoughts on this?
It depends on how often you want to hide them I guess?
I find scaling them down to 1% works, or just dragging them off the page.
Does the scaling only affect the selected dynamic, or the linked ones as well?
Just tried it: no effect on linked dynamics
Does the property for hiding immediate dynamics work in your situation?
It certainly does, but working from engrave mode I first have to go to write mode galley view to unlink. On my computer this is rather time consuming.
Can you share a picture or something of an example where you’ve got dynamics you need to hide to reduce clutter? It could be that reviewing the condensing result would allow the dynamics to be condensed as well, reducing the need to handle this manually.
Sure.
Great!
Right, I see now. Perhaps switching the preference not to link dynamics and slurs by default for future work would be beneficial, as then only dynamics you actively want to link together are linked.
@Lillie_Harris going on from this, I have a similar query, but this time involving hairpins. Is it possible to hide hairpins like immediate dynamics when in a condensed score?
I attach my example below. The stave in question is the middle one, and the offending hairpin is the one above!
Thanks,
Seb
I’m not sure there’s a way to hide this diminuendo, I’m afraid (although I’m happy to be contradicted if anyone else has an idea) because the condensing result is in 2 voices, and each voice has different dynamics.
You could try ungrouping the dynamics for the 2nd instrument on this condensed staff, which might allow the two now-separate diminuendos match and might be consolidated? You could still group the p<f, just without the subsequent diminuendo.
@Lillie_Harris Unfortunately ungrouping didn’t work, but I appreciate that they are different, hence not being able to hide them. I will keep it in for now and think about a possible workaround later!
Thanks
I experimented with this, hoping that including that including the forte might make them match – but no luck.
