I’m curious — in what cases would this be useful?
Complete all incomplete MusicXML work.
If it’s not the kind of feature that will cause users to buy Dorico why not include it in a point five release?
2 Likes
I also find that beam grouping can be a bit confusing at times. The controls are divided between Notation Options and the way the Time Signatures are entered.
Entering 3/8 with default settings results:
Entering [3]/8 with default settings results:
Entering 3/8 with the Notation Option «Break beams at beat boundaries» results:
«Beam grouping according to meters» with the use of square brackets (as described in the D4 manual on page 821f.) are great, but maybe a bit hidden. Maybe it would be an advantage to have the controls in one place.
5 Likes
For very tight spacing when every little bit helps. It comes up occasionally for end-of line cautionary key signatures. In Finale I have had to hide the actual key signature and put in the accidentals by hand. And the bar line before the end-of -line key signature also needs to be moveable. In Finale it is fixed just like the spacing of the key signature itself ,so one must work around that too.
While automatic features that produce excellent results are great when they are wanted, some of us need manual control over every element on the page, like a plate engraver. This the only way computer engraving will ever equal the results of plate engraving. Unfortunately, that does not not seem to be the goal of the current notational software.
Dorico is a step forward in some ways, as with more control of slur contour than Finale, but a backward step in others. For example, in Finale one can design one’s own piano brace with numerical input, but this is not possible in Dorico. So that would be another request for Dorico 5.
1 Like
That’s interesting! Would you mind giving us a “for example” i.e. screen shot of something that needed it? My instinct would be to say “well, perhaps there are too many things on the page” but I’d be happily proven wrong…
If you are talking about the XML 4.0 format features listed here, I haven’t tested all of these with D4 so I’m not entirely sure if these are all working or not. It was released last summer so I would assume D4 is supporting them, but perhaps there are some areas of incomplete implementation. If you mean further development or feature requests, MusicXML is not a Steinberg developed format. MusicXML development is handled by the Music Notation Community Group, so any modifications to the format will originate and have to be approved there, not here with Steinberg.
Options to automatically adjust the position of the top staff away from the music frame top margin.
Or as Daniel expressed it:
“… options that would cause the top and bottom systems to “push” against the frame margins …”
See the comments in this thread for explanations:
3 Likes
Option to print multiple layouts to a single PDF.
3 Likes
Another good example. There are quite a few scenarios I’ve posted about in the past as well. My hope is that these different situations are all noted somewhere with the development team; if there was an update with a bunch of stuff added at once, it would be best to cover as much ground as possible in one sweep I would think.
Just imagine a single long measure that must appear on one system, ends with a key signature, and is so packed with stuff that every little bit of space is at a premium. The alternate course is to scale down the notes and accidentals a little, but that may be less desirable in some cases.
In studying lots of examples of traditional plate engraving, one can see varying spacing within key signatures, even in well engraved music. It could be a house style or an individual engraver’s decision. Quite often it’s noticeable in “large” key signatures of 5 accidentals or more where tighter spacing just looks better. It might be nice if Dorico eventually supports this.
3 Likes
That’s a very good point. I’ve noticed this, as well.
I published a book with Hebrew text all done in Dorico on Mac. Dorico handles Hebrew ok in text boxes, and it prints fine, but when you look at the page in “Print” view, the punctuation is in the wrong place. In “Write” and “Engrave” modes, it looks as it actually prints.
I did not attempt to set the lyrics in Hebrew though, and my limited attempts at trying to do so did not go smoothly, mainly because of the hyphens.
Excellent observation. Changing the spacing of individual key signatures can be for more than just cramped conditions. The plate engravers engraved by eye which gave printed music individuality and life. Almost all aspects of the notation were under their control. Comparing the hand-engraved editions of Henle with what they are producing today is enlightening.
Why is this thread in “Slow Mode” so that one can’t post immediately? Is this common for this forum?
1 Like
There was a certain amount of uncivil traffic so it was slowed down I think (read back up the thread for details)
But really… don’t.
8 Likes
Incivility is a bit strong. It was the typical heat that gets generated when the operating assumptions of a group are questioned. My view is that - definitionally - significant improvement only happens when this kind of questioning happens.
If you are someone who questions the way things are and you have time - read the thread. If not - don’t.
1 Like
In general, Dorico’s own print routines (and export to graphics), in the right hand panel in Print Mode, is way better than the generic print dialog from the OS (bottom left), and especially the use of the print-to-PDF function in the OS’s print dialog should be discouraged.
And BTW, I’d like to suggest closing this thread. It’s a terrible mixture of FRs, suggestions, nuisances, actual bugs and outlandish ideas. Questions like these printing issues in Hebrew are better discussed separately, not buried in a pile of 159 other posts.
4 Likes
Please do not close the thread. I presume I am not alone in thinking that the combined suggestions of the forum outstrip the wisdom of any one person - and must surely give ideas to the Dorico team which they would not otherwise consider.
Let the nuisances exist for the sake of the gems (especially because people have different views as to which is which). It’s not as if the thread being closed will see the ideas in the thread being posted nowhere - they’ll just be presented in other threads.
I want to suggest the opposite - that suggestions for Dorico 5 since the release of Dorico 4 that aren’t included in this thread be each linked to within this thread.
1 Like
We can always perform clean-up on a thread by splitting posts on different topics into different threads. What I will say it that no specific wish list thread will have special influence on what we choose to work on – we have to consider things more broadly than what a small subset of our overall userbase (albeit one of the most dedicated and engaged segments of that userbase) request. And, as I am wont to say, Dorico development is in any case not managed via a democratic process. But we do of course welcome suggestions in whatever form or forum they arrive.
13 Likes