Beam Grouping options take precedence over Metre popover

Is it correct that Beam Grouping options in Notation Options take precedence over specific popover instructions?
In a new document, type this:


In the fourth bar, Shift-M then [1+1+1]/4 and Return.
Shouldn’t I get 2+2+2 eights?
If I change the notation options to break beams at beat boundaries also the first 3 bars get divided. Here’s my project for reference:
Beam grouping and popover.dorico (428.6 KB)

I think I have managed to get deeper into this, since the documentation doesn’t go into specific details over this precise scenario.

Assumption:

From the documentation, one would think that using the square bracket notation would override just anything.

If the metre is one of the standard ones such as 3/4 and 4/4, writing [1+1+1]/4 or [1+1+1+1]/4 has no effect whatsoever and only Beam Grouping options will help. If one writes [1+2+1]/4 or [2+1]/4, then it works as I would have expected.

This obliges a flow separation if one has long sections of a work where a 3/4 needs to be written with all six 8ths beamed together, and other long sections where a 3/4 needs to be written with 2+2+2 8ths.
In a project I recently started, a cello concerto in a single, long movement, it would be preferable if Dorico gave the popover precedence.

Unless, of course, I am missing something else?

I’m not sure of the result that you’re actually after but, yes, you’re correct that if your beam grouping is set to Allow to cross beats in Notation Options, then typing [1+1+1]/4 will have no effect.

However, if you have your beam grouping set to Break beams at beat boundaries, you can enter [3]/4 and the 6 quavers will be beamed together. If you want it switched back to breaking beams at beats then you just enter [1+1+1]/4 again. It will create a new time signature but this is easy enough to hide (and copy/paste if necessary).

2 Likes

Ah-ha! So it works the other way around.
First set notation option to break beams, then set them to join in the popover and not the opposite.
Cool! (though not really intelligible!)
Thanks!