Chord definitions and suffixes - From a Finale perspective

[Kerry_Moffit]

As many of you already know, I’m a Finale refugee and am working diligently to learn Dorico as I work. The purpose of this “topic” is to address chord creation and spark a discussion aimed at making the “Dorico way” better.

First and foremost, the Dorico/Steinberg engineers have decided to create chord definitions that are 1. Carved in stone, 2. Cannot be altered without changing the definition on a global scale, and 3. Dorico does not allow the individual user to create their own chord definitions. While this might be a European system, there are far too many non-Europeans using Dorico to not consider a different path.

First, chord definitions should never have been tied to individual notes/tones. Finale allows the user to add a playable suffix to any of the 12 chromatic notes and to define new chords suffixes as needed. Inputting chords is easily done by typing in the base note of the chord then either typing in or selecting from a menu the desired chord suffix (min, min7, min7b5, etc). The mere notion that the only chord definitions I can utilize when composing, arranging, or transcribing are the ones the Dorico/Steinberg engineers allow or have already programmed is ludicrous at best. Additionally, requiring engineers to program Cmaj7, C#maj7, Dmaj7, Ebmaj7, ect. is, IMO, enormously time consuming. Especially when you have to add any number of chord extensions to each of the “base” chords. Far better to have a library of chord suffixes that can be attached to any of the 12 chromatic tones.

Further, the user should be able to select any chord suffix (see above), duplicate it, change it to suit their needs, and have it automatically added to their chord suffix library for future use. The original remains unchanged and there’s no adverse effect on music/files already created.

Finally, the user/creator absolutely must be allowed to create chord definitions suited to the music they’re composing, arranging, or transcribing. LOL… how dare some software engineer tell me what I can and cannot write.

I realize this is, in some ways, “beating a dead horse” but the desire is to make the software more adaptable to everyone’s use rather than being forced into workarounds because programmers have already created the system they want and have no desire to upgrade or change. Yes, I know, it’s time and money. I get it… but there are several million of us using the software who’ll be paying for upgrades in the future. I’m not suggesting Dorico become Finale; far from it. There are any number of things Dorico does better than Finale and I think we all realize there are some things Finale does/did better than Dorico.

Please do give this some consideration.

Thanks,

Kerry
MacBook Pro, OSX 14.5, Dorico 5.1.6

[Derrek]

I’m sure your suggestion is welcome.

To the extent that it implies that the Development Team intentionally tries to thwart user needs, the huffy attitude is probably not the best way to inspire widespread support.

[judddanby]

@Kerry_Moffit

The mere notion that the only chord definitions I can utilize when composing, arranging, or transcribing are the ones the Dorico/Steinberg engineers allow or have already programmed is ludicrous at best. […]

LOL… how dare some software engineer tell me what I can and cannot write.

From the inclusion of “LOL” I take it you knew this was at risk of sounding overly “harsh.” You might also want to know that a number of the Dorico team members are very highly trained and active musicians, so they definitely “get it” in the big sense, even if we users have cause to question certain details of implementation.

I assume you’ve read the many threads about this topic and along the way had the opportunity to see how often Daniel Spreadbury mentions their awareness and plans for future improvements. History has shown that such talk is never idle or there just to mollify users. When they say it’s on the list, it’s on the list.

To echo Derrek, your feedback is, like all of ours, definitely welcome here, but you’ll find that the default setting for this forum is to be polite, constructive, and mindful of the fact that all involved are human beings worthy of being treated with respect. Please give some consideration to meeting us on those terms. You’ll find that users who do can fully expect a tremendously generous engagement from others.

[wing]

@Kerry_Moffit

First, chord definitions should never have been tied to individual notes/tones. Finale allows the user to add a playable suffix to any of the 12 chromatic notes and to define new chords suffixes as needed. Inputting chords is easily done by typing in the base note of the chord then either typing in or selecting from a menu the desired chord suffix (min, min7, min7b5, etc). The mere notion that the only chord definitions I can utilize when composing, arranging, or transcribing are the ones the Dorico/Steinberg engineers allow or have already programmed is ludicrous at best. Additionally, requiring engineers to program Cmaj7, C#maj7, Dmaj7, Ebmaj7, ect. is, IMO, enormously time consuming. Especially when you have to add any number of chord extensions to each of the “base” chords. Far better to have a library of chord suffixes that can be attached to any of the 12 chromatic tones.

Further, the user should be able to select any chord suffix (see above), duplicate it, change it to suit their needs, and have it automatically added to their chord suffix library for future use. The original remains unchanged and there’s no adverse effect on music/files already created.

In addition to what others have said, without a specific example I’m a little lost as to what you believe is not possible here. You can easily create all kinds of chord names based on any root and in numerous styles. The examples you mention Finale allowing you to do, you can easily do in Dorico as well. There are so many choices available to you in the Chord Symbols various menu settings, and as to what you can type yourself. What exactly are you looking to achieve that you cannot currently?

@Kerry_Moffit

Finally, the user/creator absolutely must be allowed to create chord definitions suited to the music they’re composing, arranging, or transcribing. LOL… how dare some software engineer tell me what I can and cannot write.

I mean, the Chord Symbols menu under Engraving Options is immensely deep, with all kinds of preference settings down to the tiniest detail. If that doesn’t say Engineers giving users options to carve their own path, I don’t know what would. I’m not saying it couldn’t be further improved, but it’s very clear to me based on how many preferences available that the Engineers are not making any decisions for us; they are offering a massive banquet of options for you to decide.

If you are more specific about what you are looking to achieve or have a specific Feature Request in mind, it might be more helpful to discover something which is already possible or to offer constructive ideas to the team rather than, simply: “make it better.”

[pianoleo]

@Kerry_Moffit

Yes, I know, it’s time and money. I get it… but there are several million of us using the software who’ll be paying for upgrades in the future.

If there were several million, the development team could afford hundreds of people, all working on different modules within the program.

Let’s be real: there are under a million users of Dorico, Finale and Sibelius combined, worldwide. That means each program has a small development team with limited capacity, and they have to prioritise. In the case of Dorico, the team is, what, six people? Seven?

@dspreadbury

We’re unlikely to do a complete rework of the chord symbols features – one of the running jokes we have in the team is that at least one member must always be working on chord symbols, and has been since we embarked on working on them at the end of 2016 (indeed, one member of the team is working on chord symbols and chord diagrams right now, keeping it going). It is an area that we have made a massive investment in over the past six years.

That’s 10-20% of the entire development team working on chord symbols most of the time. Not many people, but a massive proportion of the overall development time and capacity.

[FredGUnn]

@Kerry_Moffit

First and foremost, the Dorico/Steinberg engineers have decided to create chord definitions that are 1. Carved in stone, 2. Cannot be altered without changing the definition on a global scale, and 3. Dorico does not allow the individual user to create their own chord definitions.

1. Not really sure what you mean by this. There are a zillion ways to alter them.
2. Definitely not true. You can create an override that will modify all occurrences of that root + suffix, or you can create a single override just for that one particular root + suffix.
3. True, unless you take a suffix not in use and modify it to be something else. I agree there needs to be a way to define custom suffixes.

@Kerry_Moffit

First, chord definitions should never have been tied to individual notes/tones.

Agreed. It would have been better to be able to more easily have global suffix overrides BUT … what are you using overrides for? You haven’t provided any examples that show you actually need overrides. If you started with chord symbols thinking they were like Finale and you needed to build your suffix library, you’re simply doing it wrong, as that’s not how Dorico is designed to work at all, and you are likely creating a lot of unnecessary hassle for yourself.

I used to have a zillion overrides for chord symbol formatting issues that weren’t achievable through the Dorico interface. I honestly got tired of requesting the features and learned how to hack them in myself using doricolib files, so I have several doricolib files that are essential to my chord symbol workflow. I have no idea if that could be an option for you as you haven’t actually told us what you are unable to accomplish with the current Engraving Options. Just wanted to mention that there are some additional ways to modify chord symbol formatting, depending on what you need to achieve.

[joaoluiztp]

Easy customization of chord symbols is very important for a lot of people.
To me it seems if every year since 2016 a member of the team is working on chord symbols this is a clear sign that the tool is incomplete until now.
Let the user do the customization and most of the problems with chord symbols will disappear. I said this before since I’ve bought Dorico version 3.5 (and as an ex Finale user), Every new version I hope this customization happens and it is frustrating when it does not. I really hope (now that a lot of ex Finale users are enter the Dorico Universe) this comes in Dorico 6.
I have suggested a way to do it here in the forum before but received no comment.
Only an easy customization way (change 1 suffix and apply to all roots) will solve this dilema because there is so many ways to use chords around the world that is impossible to have a fixed system to deal with it and satisfy all the users.
Finale was not perfect but at least it did let the user do the customization in a very easy way. Customization in Dorico is possible, but at this moment is a very time consuming effort.

[YourMusic.Pro]

This is like any other issue in Dorico: You give us an example of what you want to achieve, and we try to make it happen, explain how it’s done or, if not yet possible, why it is like it is at the moment.
That’s it. Easiest way to rule out user error or uncover shortcomings in the software.

Cheers,
Benji

[k_b]

Yes, let us get productive, start sharing examples.

[dspreadbury]

I won’t spill too much digital ink here in defence of our approach to chord symbols, since this topic has been done to death over the years. But in brief:

Our aim with every functional area in Dorico is to handle things as semantically as possible, i.e. for the software to have some understanding of the musical meaning behind the notation, rather than for something to simply be a graphical symbol on the page. This allows us to make the software smarter and able to do more things automatically for you, or to provide intelligent features to help with editing.

For chord symbols, we wanted to make it easily possible to use any text font (rather than requiring you to use a specific font that might not match the typeface used in the rest of your project) and to quickly achieve the broad strokes of the convention you want to follow.

As such, Dorico needs to have a solid understanding of the musical function of every component of a chord symbol in order to be able to substitute it with another equivalent one with a different graphical appearance, and to know how to position that component relative to every other component.

This has many advantages, and allows us to provide dozens of rules for how chord symbols should appear in thousands of different situations. We also recognise, however, that even these thousands of different situations are not exhaustive, and so we provide extensive further options for customisation of the appearance and positioning of the individual components of chord symbols.

That is not to say that this functional area is complete, however. (Indeed, I’m not sure if there is any functional area of Dorico that we consider complete and in need of no further improvement or expansion.)

We know what the shortcomings are in the way Dorico handles chord symbols. Users want to be able to show alternative chord symbols at the same position, they want to be able to make changes that apply to all roots rather than needing to make the same edits for each root, they want greater control over the positioning of items in chord symbols, and on, and on. We have said many times that all of these things and more will be addressed in future versions of the software.

We cannot work on every area of the program at once. We have a limited number of developers and many projects that require our attention. But you can rest assured that we understand very well what the needs are in this area, and our goal is never to restrict what you can create with the software (this is, frankly, pretty insulting, given the enormous lengths we go to to provide such depth of functionality and customisation in Dorico). Our goal is to make it possible to create whatever you need as quickly and easily as possible, but because of the rich, semantic approach we have taken, it takes time to build these features in the way that opens those possibilities.

[Kerry_Moffit]

Between students, rehearsals, gigs, hiring faculty for a summer camp where I’m an administrator/faculty, and household stuff, it sometimes takes me more than a few minutes to get back to things.

All… yes, I was a bit snarky. I’m still new to Dorico and doing my best to learn but when I search and search for solutions to issues I face and come away seemingly empty handed I get irritated rather quickly – call if a personality disorder if you prefer. I can read manuals and watch training videos until the cows come home but am very much a “hands on learner”. As I said in my OP, there are any number of things Dorico does far better than Finale but learning the inside and out takes quite a bit of time and energy.

After finally getting to read Jonathan Wing’s response, I was finally directed to the Engraving Options/Chord Symbols menu. Nothing else I’ve previously seen on the forum pointed me in that direction but now that I’ve found it, I’ll be “nosing around” to see what I can and cannot do.

As for pianoleo’s notion that there are under a million users of the several notation programs worldwide, I’ll dispute that in totality. In the US alone there are at least 1 million to include composers, engravers, educators (public/private schools and college/university), and students. Then, there are likely a few thousand hobbyists who use notation software for their own amusement and enjoyment.

I do appreciate everyone’s responses and understand you getting testy with me…

Kerry

[wing]

In spite of the temperature rising, let us know if you have any questions or specific references you’d like to figure out how to re-create – a passionate and opinionated bunch we have here, but people are more than happy to help. Until then – good luck and happy menu digging – hope you can find the solution and preferences which works for you.

[YourMusic.Pro]

Your post is very much appreciated!
So, for the future, if you want to achieve something in Dorico, give an example and the combined wisdom of the forum will try to get it done or point you in the right direction.
Dorico can do a lot, but not everything yet, and heaven knows I have my pet peeves that I’d like to see in future versions, like many here…
But in general, try to think from “What do I want to see?” and let Dorico make it happen for you!

Sincerely,
Benji

[Stefan_VdB]

I also used a customised library of chord definitions in Finale. When I started with Dorico, first I used the ‘Edit Chord Symbol Appearance’ feature but issue there is that you need to change the appearance for every chord root. Then I discovered (with help from the forum) Chord Symbols in Engraving Options and forgot about the former since it covers most of my chord symbol needs. I also spell out my chords on a separate staff to remember exactly what I intended since chord symbols can be a bit personal and even change over time. I don’t use music notation quite as often as I used to (retired teacher) but since I started with Dorico I have not once gone back to Finale. Still have to convert my bl… back catalog to MusicXML though!

[jonburr]

In my experience, the 7 in seventh chords, generally, is hard to see - the default scale is 85%, as far as I can tell. Is there a way to change that 7 suffix scale to 100% everywhere, that is, for all instances of any kind of seventh chord? I was hoping to find it somewhere in the options, or the chord symbol editor. It seems possible to do it for a specific chord, drilling down to the isolated 7 character… is the bottom line here “no, you can’t, at least not at this point.” It seems the chord suffix editor doesn’t work without a root attached… is that correct? I’m hoping to make a global change, and have it apply to all files. My apologies for “bumping” the thread. Solutions are welcome, judgement on the question itself not.

[FredGUnn]

We’ll probably need to see a file, or at the very least an image, to know exactly what you are trying to do. If I set my Font Styles / Chord Symbols Font and my Paragraph Styles / Default Text to be the exact same values then create a C7 chord and place a Shift-X 7 next to it, they look identical with no scaling at all, even though one is a Chord Symbol and one is Text.

The 7 looks to be displayed at 100% to me. Can you not reproduce that? There might be a way to create a global size edit with a doricolib file, but it would depend on what exactly you are trying to achieve and how that is different than what is possible with the Engraving Options settings like above.

[jonburr]

@FredGUnn

The 7 looks to be displayed at 100% to me. Can you not reproduce that?

I’m suffering from “the universe is what I’m looking at” effect…
I’m in the Jazz font for this series I’m in, which probably has small glyphs for some stuff.
The thing I’m trying to figure out is where the scaling numbers are coming from. I see in Engraving Options>Chord Symbols>Design options to scale superscript and subscript. I also see in Font Styles an option to control chord symbol text.
I understand there’s an ideal order to try to work with these things, but I can’t quite get there… I don’t know what it is or how to find out.
I can see changes when changing the scale in the Chord Symbol editor, and I remember our discussion when you burrow down into the character level, if you make changes there, they’re more global than on the previous screen. I don’t yet understand the scope of their effect…just how global they are.
But, I also see the other set of places to change scale in Engraving options.
If I wanted to get all 7’s in the jazz font bigger in one shot, would it be in Engraving Options? Or the Chord Symbol editor?
And ideally, once I get the Jazz Font chord symbol extensions all so I can read em off an iPad with my 71-year old eyes, then I’d like to make it a default.

[FredGUnn]

Oof, yeah, you’re probably going to have all sorts of complications with a non-compliant font. Jazz Font does not have all the SMuFL glyphs that Dorico expects it to have, so it’s probably a going to be a bit of effort to get it to work. Are you sure you don’t want to just use Petaluma? LOL!

Are you using JazzCord or Finale Jazz Text? I just looked in InDesign and JazzCord (bottom in image below) has a smaller superscripted 7 that is different from Finale Jazz Text (top).

[jonburr]

@FredGUnn

Finale Jazz

Finale Jazz and Finale Jazz text. I think I found it… it’s a couple of stops. First, Library>Font Styles>Chord Symbols font to 18, Chord Symbols Music Text font to 16, then in Engraving Options>Chord Symbols>Design>Scale Factor for Subscripts…etc to 85%, and Stacked Alterations to 75%.
That kinda does it, except the triangles are tiny… but, if I then go into the symbol editor and double click the symbol, it gets into that edit screen where i can increase the scale of the triangle to 125%. That seems to do it…
I wish I didn’t have to do the whole sequence every file. I think this time I’ll save it as a template and fuhgedaboudit

[benwiggy]

@FredGUnn

Oof, yeah, you’re probably going to have all sorts of complications with a non-compliant font. Jazz Font does not have all the SMuFL glyphs that Dorico expects it to have, so it’s probably a going to be a bit of effort to get it to work. Are you sure you don’t want to just use Petaluma? LOL!

Don’t forget GoldenAge, which should have all the SMuFL characters you want; and if it doesn’t, then something can probably be done about it!