Create custom repeat ending line without repeat barline?

Please see the attached image, which is of a Sibelius chart.

I’m wondering if it’s possible to do this in Dorico, and if so, how.

This is at the end of a section for improvised solos. If I add repeat ending brackets in Dorico, it replaces the first double barline with a repeat barline. But that would create nested repeats, as there are repeated sections earlier in this section.

I could move the notes one bar earlier, and write “play after last solo only”, and remove the last bar. But I’d rather use repeat lines as in Sibelius.

EDIT: Turns out it wasn’t a problem to remove the earlier repeats and write those sections out. So the repeat barline under the first ending line is not a problem.

Still, it’d be nice to know if there’s a way to do what I described above.

Dorico does indeed create an end repeat barline when you create a repeat ending, since nine times out of 10 that’s what you want, but you can simply select that repeat barline and delete it, or replace it with a double barline. And you can set the second ending to have a closed right-hand end via Properties, and indeed override the text that appears in the brackets via Properties, too, so I think this should be reasonably straightforward to achieve.

Great to know - thanks!

I re-imported the song in question to give this a try.

This time, when I created the repeat ending bracket, it did not create a repeat barline, as happened previously. It left the double-barline in place, which is exactly what I want!

While the source XML file was the same, this time I had enabled all the XML Import Preferences except for Accidental Visibility and Rest Positions, whereas the previous time, these were set to the defaults (as I had not yet discovered XML Import Preferences). Maybe that affected this somehow.

With the previous import I was not able to delete the repeat barline.

Thanks again!

you can simply select that repeat barline and delete it, or replace it with a double barline.

Thank you also from my part. I didn’t even try this logical and simple solution …