This topic relates to a previous topic of mine which can be found here and the reason why I write separately about it is because I believe by my experience that there is a real problem with the fanned beams notation in Dorico and I feel that it needs farther consideration from the Dorico team.
That said - I am starting to realize that perhaps Dorico was not intended to certain types of music - but at the same time - introducing the fanned beam notation in the palette will make it appear as if it would aim to incorporate such music.
Fanned beam had been used in music notation since the 2nd part of the previous ct. as far as I know and its origin is coming from traditional far east music which have been around for thousands of years.
When you insert the fanned beam notation onto a Dorico score - you don’t get with it the corresponding changes in the accelerando & crescendo variables - what you actually get is a graphic apparatus - but the simultaneous fx of having both of these changing together - doesn’t happen unless you start to program it manually.
The problem in that is that although you have a ways to define accel. & cresc. what you will get is:
1). Both values must now be shown underneath that fanned beam notation - so there is a redundancy…
2). when you define use of the accel. command on that specific fanned beam ( the resulting ending tempo - you need to do this to get the desired effect ) - from my experience - if effects the entire music over that time segment because there is only one tempo track for the entire piece and not per instrument and you can’t add more… ( see in play mode ).
So if lets say I have several instruments playing together - in my case - two pianos - and I’d want to have one piano use the fanned beam fx - I’ll see the entire music tempi changes and not only over the fanned beam figuration alone… - which is a shame really…
Another example is - suppose I use fanned beam notation in piano 1 - lets say an aggregate of 1/16 being accelerated - and then I write lets say 1/8 notes accompanying arpeggio in piano 2 - these 1/8 notes will now be affected by the fanned beam accel. in piano 1…they will not keep to their steady 1/8 notes accomp. tempi… but will change in accordance to the accel. instruction in piano 1.
in the present situation - to achieve this kind of independency between the two ( or more) instruments - will require a very meticulous work in piano roll. which might(?) be better done in Cubase - that I am not sure though. But will Dorico’s piano roll will know then to decipher Cubase’s piano roll values for that meter? That I don’t know as of yet …
There is a work around which is to set a separate note values for each note member of the fanned beam figuration that’s while the original tempi is being kept the same for all players… but as I’ve said will take a lot of work in the piano roll…
Also comes to mind an open time signature in parallel to a set (like 3/4) t.s.
It is certainly true that Dorico’s current implementation of fanned beams is focused on the correct drawing of the beams themselves and not on showing the progressive acceleration or deceleration of the music within the beam. We could certainly do some more work in this area in the future, but it’s not something we are likely to have the bandwidth to take on in the immediate future.
Thanks very much for your reply.
I was surprised not to be condemned in this forum after all that I’ve written…
Yet again, sorry to hear that your decision is not to deal with this issue in the near future because what it means for me is that I’ll have difficulties trying to complete my composition via Dorico and it seems everything was going more or less ok so far. Although I can understand the economical considerations in establishing a team to deal with this issue…
I still think that this must be implemented.
( Fact is that fanned beams in the way I’ve described them as well as other musical articulative graphics are an obvious in the mind of many composers since the 1950’s and we are now @ 2022.
The world of computer music gave these composers tools and open new horizons in electronic and computerized music revealing new worlds of humane expression so much needed after w.w.2. and aside to that - a way to simulate and “perform” their work but for most of them the simulation was limited and the obvious way was still the direct contact between the composer, the ear, the musical instrument, the pen ( no simulation but a live performance if you could achieve one ).
Obviously as computer music evolved this to was changed and many musicians and composers are looking for a solution as a way of life within computer music tools - and Steinberg - as a premium member in this industry - must provide for them with these tools and even light the way ahead with innovations - and in the scope of notational software - not to want to desire to lay backwards bound by musical notational conventions related to the 19th ct… the same innovation that evolved Cubase and the world of VST must be applied to your new adventure - named Dorico.
Further more - you can’t say composers are not professional musicians so if you are building a pro program - you must provide for them tools needed to complete their compositional endeavors - or - in a music world of graphics expressiveness innovation - a way ( preferable an easy and intuitive one ) to create and defines midi meaning for a graphic musical expressing intended forms.
→ It is important to remember that fanned beams and other forms of musical expressions must be able to appear in the score free and detached from time and whatever limitations and regardless of whatever steady tempo is going on around it as well as being able to combine into them musical elements from all simultaneous parts also their inherit tempos should not effect on the music surrounding them ( to have fanned beam accel. have an impact on music surrounding is simply ridiculous sorry… ). )
In short - please implement a.s.a.p an elaborated section of musical graphics related forms and midi meaning - as well as fanned beams with a more serious attitude towards the tempo issue .
Best to you - Rami.
Graphic notation (music) - Wikipedia.
We do absolutely plan to address many of the conventions of music notation that emerged through the twentieth century in future versions of Dorico – not only fanned beams but also cut-away or scrapbook scores, changing the number of staff lines, adding continuous profiles for electronics, frame notation, stem decorations, to name but a few – but these are not small features that can be picked off by a single developer in a matter of days. Each one represents a significant effort and many months of work.
It’s very hard to prioritise development work in such a way that maximises the current capabilities of the team and delivers maximum business value. And although I think you will struggle to find a more communicative and transparent development team than the Dorico team, there are nevertheless still limits on what we can share in terms of our future plans and the rationale for our decisions about what we work on, and when.
So all I can do is ask you to be patient and rest assured that we know these features are important to many composers who are using, or would like to use, Dorico, and they will be addressed in future.
Well Thank you for sharing the good news about Dorico’s future planes as they all sound very exciting and I am sure that considering the ease of reach Dorico offers to its users for all the countless notational aspects - that these too will be served in an exciting way for the user. Adding the obviously needed electronic profile as well as all the other qualities you have described will surely place Dorico at a 1st place amongst composers and composition enthusiasts. I totally understand that each of these requires significant work not only in the doing but also in establishing the base ground for all of these to happen and yes of course you are right in all that you say including your comment regarding openness for future planes.
Just so to let you know - when I completed just recently my 1st piece with the amazing help from the Dorico team - I added a thank you note for you guys on the dedication page of it.
Every pianist who will receive the score will learn about Dorico team etc. ( well that doesn’t say much though… ) .
However, just in case this one might be easier to achieve - a possibility to increase the grid lock resolution so that it will corelate with the notes input capability on the left , as well as the option to cancel the grid lock entirely and independently in determined sections and per instrument - might help a lot . who knows - maybe to do this will require relatively shorter wait, but sure enough only Dorico will decides about Dorico and I wish you the best in doing so.
Thanks very much for you containing and very polite reply to my situation and thanks again for the very encouraging news and I wish on that the best of luck.
Cheers - Rami. .
I agree, but FWIW ornament and fermata playback is not yet implemented too, and they have been around much longer
I actually have found a way around the fanned beam issue, which might be a bit dumb but still - imitating the sound with dotted notes - here the alt + . - really helps because they are all over… and then add an ossia with the fanned beam painting on it. This will work for few bars but for a long passge there might be a need to use insane m.m. like 500 due to very large note values… this will force re notating the entire passage… but for 3 - 4 bars - it can work.