First - Second ending structure where there is no repeat sign

I have searched the forum and the manual but see nothing which pertains to my problem – that may be because I’m not sure how to phrase the search term. I apologize if this has been answered before and I just don’t know what search term to enter.

I am engraving an old-fashioned march where the trio section is built with a 1st/2nd ending structure where there is no repeat sign at the end of the 1st ending, so playback should jump over the second ending and continue from the next measure. At the end of the trio is a D.S. al Fine back to the start of the trio, to end at the second ending in the middle of the movement.

I’ve constructed the D.S. al Fine properly, I’ve placed the Segno where it belongs, and the playback works correctly except that on the first pass through the trio Dorico plays the first ending, then the second ending, then continues as it should. On the D.S. playback skips over the first ending, plays the second ending and stops, just like it should.

What should I do to have Dorico’s playback skip the 2nd ending on the first pass through the trio?

You really can’t. This is non-standard. A lot of those old marches did such tricks to save space on march sized paper (5x7 inches in the US). This is properly notated with the 2nd ending as a Coda (if I visualized it correctly).

1 Like

Sometimes the goal is to faithfully reproduce an old score even if the notation is non-standard. I think the following project provides the desired ending structure and playback sequence:

First - Second ending structure without repeat sign.dorico (876.8 KB)

Some old waltzes also have that structure. It’s not really non-standard when a large number of pieces have such a structure. It may not be common these days but that’s no reason that a notation program shouldn’t be able to handle it.
This particular old march was for an orchestra, at least this version of it, and it’s printed on full-size paper, not the 5x7 paper you’re talking about. It was published in 1919.

That’s it exactly! What did you do that I haven’t done? I’m not at the computer which has my file on it so I can’t post it here, but if you could describe the steps you took to create that playback model I’d appreciate it.
The only difference I can see between yours and mine is that I have a double-bar at the end of the first ending and the first ending in the piece I’m working on is a single measure, as is the second (Fine) ending…
Thank you for your help.

The trio is in a separate flow from the music which precedes it, and the Gap between flows during playback is set to zero in Library > Playback Options > Timing. The repeat marker at the end of the piece is actually a D.C. al Fine with custom text which makes it look like D.S. al Fine. The segno at the start of the trio is actually just staff text using the SMuFL glyph U+E047 and not a repeat marker. The piece ends at the Fine after the second ending, but Dorico does not allow two repeat markers to be created at the same rhythmic position, so I changed the rhythmic grid resolution to a 32nd note and moved the Fine to the left by pressing Alt/Opt-Left Arrow in write mode. To skip over the second ending once the first ending has played, there is a hidden D.S. after the first ending and a hidden Segno after the second ending.

Thank you for sharing your solution!
This is something I hope will be implemented in a future update to Dorico, since the old shortcuts which help keep a piece of music on a single page can be very useful in many different situations.
Thank you for being so creative – using different flows is not something I had considered!

I guess what I’m hoping for is some sort of user-editable playback map such as Sibelius has. In Sibelius we can define which measures get played when, regardless of any repeat/DS/DC/Fine/Coda structure in the music and it would be nice to be able to do the same in Dorico.
Even in Finale the user can define how jumps are handled at endings so that an ending structure such as I’m asking about can be dealt with by the user if the program doesn’t automatically do things as desired.

1 Like

Not that that wouldn’t be a convenient system, but I wonder if it will go against the Dorico semantic philosophy.

In a program which is trying to be the best notation program ever and become the gold standard and work its way into the music publishing industry I think that it would be a great addition. The more versatile they make it, the broader the appeal.
However how Dorico keeps track of the starts and ends of measures may be so different from how Sibelius and Finale track such things, it may be much more difficult to accomplish that same capability.
It’s always easy for us end-users to think of things that we’d like but most of us have no clue about the ease or difficulty of actually implementing them.

1 Like