My own wishlist contains mainly engraving-related issues, and their fixing probably wouldn’t even make the headlines individually as Major Features in the update announcement but would save me so much time and frustration. Things like:
improved control over system object placement, as @FredGUnn also outlined above. In 95% of cases, the current system based on instrument types is fine (especially with the new Soloists, cheers for that!) but in the other 5% of cases all of a sudden it’s downright impossible to achieve the desired result and one wishes the software would just be less intelligent. (also, what’s the harp doing in the “Pitched Percussion” category?)
speaking of which, an option to make system objects just always align on a system instead of “tucking into” the staff above which they appear.
speaking of which, a way that “rit. - - - - - [B] A tempo” doesn’t make the rehearsal mark jump out of the way
Bracketing tweaks:
-the option to auto-subbracket auxiliary winds together with their mainstream counterparts
-Violin I/II (sub-)sub-brackets that behave themselves in divisi
-the ability to make bracket/barline adjustments in condensed scores (or with hidden staves) without unexpected results
-percussion staves that automatically stay together through instrument changes when grouped, regardless of type (pitched/unpitched/Orff)
being able to have one player hold both grid-based and 5-line percussion instruments
Condensing tweaks, many of which already requested by others:
-showing a bar rest for a tacet part instead of breaking it up when an entrance in the other part on that staff isn’t on the first beat
-the ability to condense all instruments held by a certain player instead of just the topmost one (case in point: A/Bb clarinets)
-keeping condensing working across an instrument change
-control over rest positioning in condensed staves
-a Condensing Change with intermediate control, e.g. “condense Trumpet 1+2 and keep 3 separate, but just follow the settings within that configuration”.
-“Reset All” and “No Condensing for All” condensing changes.
(both currently achievable, but taking dozens of clicks)
-some way of making the Condensing Change dialog less mouse-intensive in general
Line breaks in tempo indications, on a per-layout basis for bonus points
Bar repeats in parts but written-out in scores. Conversely, 8va lines in scores but written at pitch in parts.
“Avoid collisions” toggle for playing techniques, instrument change labels, cue labels
What might be headline features:
The general overhaul of divisi which has been promised to us some day. Just search the forum if you want a list of specific issues
Hierarchical ordering of flows including Flow Group Headings
Score-but-not-staff-attached text for footnotes or staging directions
This is a great suggestion. Add the possibility to cross-staff between them and it would be much easier to engrave music with multi-instrument percussion setups.
I also wish there would be an option to turn of the automatic beaming of 5- and 7-tuplets by default. Any tuplet really.
Make it a “yes” with capital letters. I also work a lot with choir arrangements and therefore still have to correct and delete a lot manually, as im_a_roc has already clearly written. But I also work mainly in the pop/rock & jazz sector and here, in my eyes, there is still a lot missing. As I’ve written in many posts and threads, it’s amazing, for example, that the (automatic) positioning of text in staves (shift x/alt shift x) is still so rudimentary. And markers, which serve to structure the form (verse/chorus/…), are simply part of a more modern writing style. As much as I admire and welcome the big throws in Dorico 4, I miss the small improvements in areas that are really important to me and involve many manual and time-consuming detours. That’s why my wish for Dorico 5 or please already for Dorico 4.xx is a rather unspectacular improvement of the already great defaults. For me, only a little is needed for Dorico to reach perfection, but I think I’ve been waiting for that since 2017 …
Those little but essential things that also @ hrnbouma has on his list
looping would be great:
I like do use my notation software as a practice tool as well. Its nice to be able to loop difficult passages in playback and play along until the phrase is learned.
This is one capability amongst a number which exist together currently in DAW apps. These apps can loop during playback - but can also loop record audio and MIDI - keeping multiple takes and allowing the user to then make up a master take out of sections of each take - they can do punch in and out audio and MIDI recording - they can divide a piece into named sections and then allow the user to quickly make different arrangements using the named sections (including having a particular section play back any number of times as you describe here).
I point this out as part of continuing to make the point that most users either want the features that DAWs have - integrated with their music notation now - or would if they knew more about what DAWs do - and if they existed in a way that didn’t force them to change their current way of working.
If someone wants to hear instrument parts play back presumably they would like to hear vocal parts play back too if there’s some way in which they can make it happen using their own skills or the skills of others willing to help them. And if someone plays one or more instruments it is likely they will want to have the ability to audio record those instruments - as part of writing pieces which use those instruments more than others.
I’m quite aware of the capabilities of DAWs. I don’t want to use DORICO as a daw as I’m already using CUBASE for that purpose. I just like to have the ability to loop in DORICO in order to practice difficult parts.
You say that you don’t want to use Dorico as a DAW. I suggest the reason for that is that Dorico isn’t a DAW - and so therefore your point is no different to saying that you don’t want to use Dorico to cook a meal. If I’m wrong - if you meant different to that - please clarify.
If you didn’t mean anything different to that am I right in saying that you have no particular reason for preferring that Dorico and a DAW be two different apps? Or is there something about music notation apps and DAWs which are in your mind impossible to reconcile - impossible to co-exist in the one app? Presumably it isn’t because only one can have a notation window, or only one has a MIDI editor, or only one has a preferences window - or only one has a transport window - or only one can enter data in step and real time - or only one has import and export options - or only one has playback support? Is it some other reason - or is it your opinion that in fact the only reason for not using Dorico as a DAW - or Cubase as your notation program - is that as things stand neither has the full capabilities of the other?
If you wish to reply can I ask that you first read the thread I created called Universal Audio, MIDI and Notation File Format in which I reconcile the only things that I believe function differently in DAWs and music notation apps?
If you have any other areas in which you believe music notation apps and DAWs operate differently - preventing them from being better off in being one - I would be interested in hearing about them - as I cannot think of any area (nor any reason why a combined music notation audio app cannot be designed in a way that allows people who work in these two kinds of apps from continuing to have their current priorities).
Someone recently suggested “staff spacing changes” that could be applied like note spacing changes in engrave mode. I think this would be very clever and an elegant way to handle things (and still have them dynamically flow).
Integrate all existing entry options in Dorico into one window - and add new possibilities.
The step entry system for Dorico currently allows the user to choose:
pitches using the typewriter keyboard, or MIDI keyboard, or on screen keyboard
rhythm values using the typewriter keyboard and numeric keypad
symbols using Shift popovers
along with using the mouse to click on palettes.
I think that these choices are expected methods of entry (except possibly Shift popovers but the popovers are well done) - they exist in almost all apps. I also think it’s necessary for Dorico to have normal real time entry.
However as Dorico matures I have suggestions for how its entry methods:
could be broadened
possibly be made faster
require the new user to remember less keystroke shortcuts
enable the more able user to possibly use less keystrokes.
I introduce these suggestions in two videos linked below (although please read below before watching).
Part of my suggestion includes an entry palette system a bit like a software Streamdeck. When I made the videos in 2013 and 2014 Streamdecks were three years away from existing - I was just thinking along the same lines.
My idea mentioned above for an additional method of music entry - a type of entry which is somewhere between real and step entry. It is twist on real time entry where recording stops whenever the user doesn’t enter any note information for a whole beat (the entry point then returns to the start of the empty beat). For full details see above.
Both the entry idea - and also my ideas for uniting all of Dorico’s entry options - and an entry palette - come together in the two videos linked below. The first video - which was originally sent to the Dorico team in a more primitive form - and then updated before being added to a Logic forum - shows how all of Dorico’s entry settings could be united into a single entry dialog - with the settings being able to be saved as presets - the dialog having five tabs - metronome, pitch, velocities, symbols and a record tab where the user sets recording methods and filtering. The second video focuses on the Streamdeck like entry palette - and how it could allow the user to enter literally any symbol using the numeric keypad. (If the numeric keypad was being used to enter symbols rhythm values could be entered using the up and down arrow keys - which would change the rhythm value to the next highest or next lowest - the left and right arrow keys remaining available for moving back and forward through the music - or all notes entered using the numeric keypad first and then symbols). After watching the videos read additional notes below.
PS In the first video on the fifth record tab there should under the heading Start Recording be the following two options (them being either or - not both)
record the first MIDI note I play
record after count in of X bars - start the count in when I press note XX.
PPS If the Dorico team implemented my entry palette idea making choices would of course not make popovers open as they do with Streamdeck and letters entered - symbols would just insert into the score. And Streamdecks could be reprogrammed to access the new functionality - so they also do not make popovers appear. Ensuring that the external hardware and internal software palette work in exactly the same way. However the internal software palette could potentially be set up to have more buttons than a Streamdeck.
It would be handy if Dorico could allow different placement of immediate tempo markings from that of the gradual ones. As it is now, Dorico treats these system objects the same, meaning that if I want gradual tempo markings to show in the piano part in an ensemble, I have to drag the immediate tempo markings off the page or enter the gradual tempo markings as text (unless someone knows a better workaround).
Please! These days, that is probably one of the only two features of Finale I really miss. And the other is the Band-in-a-boc auto-harmonizer, which Finale dropped a long time ago.
Possibility to directly print a score with RTL language. (Now the way to do that without problems is to export to graphics first and then to print the graphics file. All this in windows, perhaps it already works good in mac).
I have seen Hebrew text printed, without problems, right from Dorico, but I admit, that was from Mac. I understand there are still (quite) some limitations in the Qt framework with regard to special linguistic features in OTF, but unfortunately, they’re beyond the Team’s jurisdiction, so to say.
For me (and many others I’d imagine), the note grouping options need a significant update. There are several very common use-cases that I’ve come across over the years that are unfortunately still missing as global defaults.
for these, particularly the bar repeat just in parts (which has been driving me nuts trying to play scores at the piano)