I’m writing more frequently these days, and with frequency of using a program comes noticing certain quirks more. Lately I’ve observed the behavior around adding and modifying dynamics feels quite random. Is any of this normal?
Sometimes when I double click a dynamic, and the popover appears for me to enter a different dynamic, it creates a new dynamic on top of the already existing one (rather than simply changing it). So then I have to delete the old one. This happens with both text dynamics and hairpins. I should add it’s happening on single ungrouped/unlinked dynamics too. However, sometimes this does not happen, leading me to wonder if it’s a bug? Or am I doing something wrong here?
Sometimes when I create multiple dynamics across multiple staves, a few will be linked, a few will not. It seems to be completely random as to when and why some are linked and others not. (For example sometimes I select the entire string section and create a dynamic swell, and then later I wish to move or change the dynamic quality and all of them are linked except the violas, or the celli, etc).
Sometimes I go to edit clearly linked dynamics, and only the one I edit changed, and other times all of them change?
Wondering if any of these are settings or user-error which they very well could be haha. Thank you!
the first issue you mention has always been a problem for me.
I have yet to find a way to “change” a dynamic in this manner.
I ended up making a key command for raising and lowering a dynamic by increments. of course, this doesn’t work if I insert a fp and want to change that to something else.
so far I’ve just put up with deleting the dynamic and inserting a new one.
Hmm. In my case I hadn’t been trying to use any ‘combined dynamics’ if I understand those to be sudden stuff like fp. In every case this happens for me when I’m simply trying to adjust one immediate dynamic to another, such as changing p to pp or f to mf. Aren’t those all within the same class of dynamics, really just volume variation?
Oooh yeah, I didn’t know that existed. Honestly 90% of the time I don’t want things linked unless I manually choose to have them linked. However I can’t find this setting? The only thing which comes up in a google search is specific to disabling linking when pasting to other staves.
That’s the one. It also applies to operations you might not think of as pasting, like Duplicate to Staff Below. If you’re actually creating the dynamics simulatanouesly (multi stave input) then I dunno, I don’t do that. I’m only just transitioning from PC keyboard to MIDI keyboard entry.
Noted, thank you! I think it would be a nice preference option in a future version to disable automatic linking at creation for multiple staves too. I get the logic behind it, but there are cases you might not want that behavior, and I usually prefer fully manual control when I can. But disabling link when pasting is going to be super helpful when doubling a part in a totally different instrument section with very different timbres!
I think it would be a nice preference option in a future version to disable automatic linking at creation for multiple staves too.
However apparently that preference, when unchecked, does that as well. It’s a bit misleading because it says “when pasting” which I would take only for copy/paste actions, not when creating multiple dynamics from scratch. I do feel these behaviors could be separated in the preferences, or at least the language could be clarified (when pasting/when creating).
I had also said:
90% of the time I don’t want things linked unless I manually choose to have them linked.
However now I have to disagree with my old self on that one In the past few weeks I’ve actually found myself frustrated more than I realized I would discovering that dynamics weren’t linked, and actually constantly having to relink them. So instead I re-checked that preference, and created an easier shortcut for link and unlink. I now find it’s much easier for me to create (or copy/paste) dynamics and then when I really want to isolate a particular one, I can quickly unlink it. Now I know.
Lastly, the below issue still drives me a little crazy. I’ve discovered that if you double-click a text dynamic and enter a different dynamic AND a hairpin, it will add that on top of the existing text dynamic, which doesn’t make sense. The only way around this I’ve found is to change the dynamic separately first, then re-enter the field and add a hairpin, etc.
The animation of changing “p” to “mp” at the end of the hairpin, ending up with both p and mp. I was running into that frequently last night, and truly feels like a bug.
How else am I supposed to change the ending dynamic of a hairpin? This behavior seems completely nonintuitive.
@wing, reading your thread made me think that at times we might view these as a Dynamic Wose.
Middle English Dictionary Entry
wōse n.(1)
(a) Glutinous mud, slime, ooze; also fig. and in fig. context; (b) the sediment or mud lying on the ocean bottom or the bed of an estuary; also, the slippery, loose mud on a bank of the ocean or other body of water, a miry or marshy stretch, esp. at water’s edge;
For that one specifically, like Mark said you can just increase (or decrease) dynamic intensities using those menu options. I recommend mapping these to a keyboard shortcut to make life easier and faster – you can even select multiple dynamics (even different ones) and they will increase or decrease by relative steps. I use the key command all day long and in the 7 months since I started this thread, it has become second nature for me and it saves so much time!
Same with simply selecting a text dynamic and adding a hairpin using the shortcut (as Mark suggested) - a lot faster than dealing with popover entry.
However I do think in future updates they could make the popover behavior a bit more versatile and clear for users wishing to go about it that direction. It can get quite confusing when you think to change a dynamic by simply editing what it says, and it creates new ones on top of the original (which I can’t imagine any scenario where that would be desired, so IMHO it does feel like a bug or loophole which has not been closed so to speak).
In the past few weeks I’ve actually found myself frustrated more than I realized I would discovering that dynamics weren’t linked, and actually constantly having to relink them. So instead I re-checked that preference, and created an easier shortcut for link and unlink. I now find it’s much easier for me to create (or copy/paste) dynamics and then when I really want to isolate a particular one, I can quickly unlink it. Now I know.