Hi,
I got these 2 issues with condensing in a project.
The first one is that, when condensing, the brackets around a note disappear.
In the example below on the right, flutes 1 and 2 are condensed. The flute 1 part by itself has 2 notes, the top one being in brackets. But when they are condensed, the brackets disappear.
I used the function “chords” to add the higher note. If instead I change the voice (shift+v), the brackets appear but it changes the condensing (instead of flutes 1 and 2 together, it makes 1 alone and 2 and 3 together).
The second question has to do with the grouping of 2 or 3 instruments together when condensing.
I have already chose “Include in staff label” for the option “Condensing for players inactive for the whole system” in Notation Options.
However, sometimes the 3 flutes are condensed on the same staff, but other times the 3rd flute is on a different staff, even if there is no voice crossing and all the rhythms are the same. Here’s an example:
For the first issue, you do need to use a chord within a single voice if you want the flutes to condense; condensing can only work when each instrument uses a single voice. You can probably set the bracket property again in condensed mode, within Engrave mode.
For the second issue, it’s no good looking at (or sharing with us) a single system and questioning why Dorico’s making particular choices, as Dorico condenses a phrase at a time, where a phrase means “everything between simultaneous rests in all of the instruments within the condensing group”. What happens at the start of the next system, right up until all three flutes have rests?
A printout is not the same as a Dorico file, but guessing from your printout, the half note (minim) on the third beat of Flute 2 in the first measure of your last system is likely the cause of the split into two staves.
I suppose you are mentioning 3rd beat of Flute 2 on page 13. But on page 12 they all have the same rhythm.
You could argue that Dorico is anticipating the next page change of rhythm and that’s why on page 12 Flute 3 is not condensed.
Yet if that is the case, I guess a similar pattern should happen on pages 9 and 10. However, on page 9 Flute 3 is not condensed despite having the same rhythm, but in page 10 it is.
PS: For this specific project, I decided to never condense Flute 3 (and other 3rd instruments). But if the developers are interested in having a look to understand better the condensing behavior that’s happening, I can send the Dorico file.
On the second note of p. 10, parts one and two have a unison. Part three needs separate stems (for the entire phrase, since Dorico by default condenses by phrase) to show it is parts one and two that have the unison while part three plays a separate note.
On page 11, measure 1, the held note(s) are in the top notes while the third part moves with separate stems. But at the start of page 13, the held note is in the middle voice, which forces the third part onto a separate staff to make the voice leading clear.
Condensing is done by phrase, not by page or system.
The phrase on pages 10 and 11, despite the unison on page 10 and the different rhythm on page 11, is all condensed: the 3 flutes on the same staff. So, why would the pickup of that phrase (on page 9) not condensing Flute 3, which has the same rhythm as the others?
Condensing is very subtle. As you see people are making (educated) guesses, but we can only be sure by seeing the file itself. Cut it down to just a few bars (that show the problem). You can remove all the other instruments. And upload it.
Hi.
Here’s the simplified file.
Please notice in particular page 3, system starting on measure 106 (flute 3 note condensed) and the followings (flute 3 condensed). Test condensed flutes.dorico (1.2 MB)
I’m afraid not. The other differences in condensing are explained by the rhythmic differences between Flute 2 and Flutes 1+3, but I’m not sure why Dorico’s doing what it’s doing at the system starting at measure 106.
This is very odd: even trying to force a manual condensing change (whether pushing Fl 3 to join 1 & 2 in an upstem voice or putting Fl 3 into a downstem voice does not change Dorico’s keeping them on separate staves for that one pickup note.
My colleague Andrew, who is the real expert on the deepest intricacies of condensing, is away at the moment, so I can’t call upon him for an explanation. In the end I think it comes down to the fact that passages of rests are considered to be part of the preceding phrase, and the phrase prior to bar 106 begins at bar 82 with the offset entries of flute 1 and 2, followed by flute 3 in bar 88. This long interlocking phrase can’t be condensed onto a single staff, which means that the system starting at bar 106 is still within this phrase and hence requires a second staff, even though the material at the upbeat to bar 112 can be condensed into a single staff.
Hi Daniel.
Thank you for answering.
Between the phrase on measure 88 and the new one measure 112, there are many empty measures, including two full systems of empty measures and all the measures of the system of measure 112 (starting on 106). In principle, I think that should indicate to Dorico that it is a new phrase, not a continuation of the previous one.
Additionally, the two systems before the one of 106 were condensed to one staff, so, I think that should be another indication to Dorico that it could condense the system of measure 106.
If that is not the case, maybe a possible upgrade for future versions?
