Bug with dot size when flipping?

This is pretty repeatable. You can see the dots become smaller when the noteheads are flipped.

If it is a bug and not just a setting I’ve missed, I’d appreciate any suggestions for working around it for now. The dot consolidation property doesn’t help.

Oh, and I wish I could move the dots up a space where they belong. I understand why they’re lowered, I just would like to be able to work around this as well.

Regarding the dots changing size - try changing the voice column index of the smaller (cue-size?) dotted minim (the low B).

Interesting… when the voice columns are the same, the dots are normal. Well, I don’t want the two voices vertically aligned, that’s the only reason I wouldn’t prefer that. Maybe it’s the lesser of two evils…

Is this the look you want?
Ties & dots

I entered a minim (undotted) D and lengthened the stem a little, then copied it into the next bar, removed the crotchet rests and then moved it up an octave (out of the way for the next bit). In another voice, entered a dotted minim B and D as a chord, made them stems up, and hid the stem (in Properties in Engrave mode) and tied them. Then moved the high D down to the 4th line, adjusted voice column index where necessary, etc.

ties & dots.dorico (843.9 KB)

Thanks for looking into that. Indeed, that’s what I was referring to above: I don’t want the last cue note vertically aligned with the full-size ones, but it seems that’s the only way to get a full-size dot.

Is this better?

Ties & dots 2

ties & dots 2.dorico (844.1 KB)

I fiddled around changing the voice column index of each note in that bar until I was able to move the small note without the dot changing size.

Are you sure the dot size changes when printing, and it’s not just a pixel count rounding of the display?

I exported it to PDF and this is the result. It looks OK to me.

Ties & dots 2.pdf (19.1 KB)

I don’t know if Dan requires a smaller dot to match the smaller note. If he does, because of the amount of experimentation needed (with possibly no result), I would be inclined to simply make the low B only 2 beats long and paste a dot in as text and scale it until it looks right.

The problem seems to be that all of the dots at the same rhythmic position have the same size even if the notes have different sizes and are in different voices. Here is a potential solution:


The two cue notes are separated by a sixteenth rest and the dotted cue note is inside a quarter note triplet. The rests in the second measure have been removed and the triplet number hidden.

1 Like

I must say I don’t want to use Dorico like that… The workaround works beautifully but that’s the kind of things we should not have to be doing. Consider this a feature request from me (even if I never had this problem so far, so not too high on my list!).

This is a tricky edge case for Dorico to handle. Rhythm dots are processed in a voice-independent way, because you can have complex pairs of voices (or greater numbers than two voices, of course) that interlock, so Dorico has to consider the overall context when it determines the final disposition of the rhythm dots. However, I agree that this is not an ideal outcome, so I’ll make a note of it and we’ll try to look into it in the future.


This has been requested for a long time. Since D2, I think, because I remember mentioning it years ago when setting an organ work that had this issue. I’ve been secretly hoping this would be one of the many little nuggets that are just listed in passing in the release notes without fanfare.

Agree. Have we ever gotten any response to this FR? The issue was never addressed in Sibelius either.

In this particular case, the team didn’t respond directly although I’m sure it was seen at the time:

I had forgotten that you can sometimes fudge the desired result with additional voices with their stems hidden.

I know this has come up before but I can’t find it by searching. Is it correct then that one can’t move prolongation dots vertically in Dorico; only horizontally?

Yes, that is our complaint, Dan & I.

See the thread I linked to just above your post. There is a hack.

The complaint is justified and this should be high on the list of improvements because fine engraving requires complete control over prolongation dots. Finale has a tool that allows one to place them anywhere, and I must use it at least once a day.

1 Like