This beaming is technically incorrect, but it is what I need:
Dorico seemingly will not let me do it. I produces this:
I can’t use the split beaming property because it won’t let me set a secondary of 32 in this context. There is no unsplit beam function as far as I can see. Using beam together of course does nothing.
The time signature in the bar is 2/4.
Try beaming together the whole group, then select the C natural and Split Secondary Beam.
Alternatively select the C natural and type ; 5:5 Enter. Then hide the resulting nested tuplet bracket and number from the properties panel (with the locally/globally switch set to global, if this music appears in more than one layout).
Out of topic… Isn’t there a typo on the flat of the 4th note ?
Well spotted. It’s microtonal. Always difficult to get 'em right!
That does not work.
But that does.
Seems a bit fiddly. Sometimes I wish Dorico would let me do the ‘wrong thing’ without being so teacherly pedantic, although I know that is very helpful to many people doing scores.
…e pensare che con MuseScore è semplicissimo!
FWIW, it works for me
(Me, too, or I wouldn’t have suggested it.)
I suppose it could be dependent on Notation Options. I suspect it’s more likely that that group of notes had already had a load of forced beaming applied to it, and needed a Reset Beaming first.
Hi there
I’m glad you’ve got a solution.
In situations like this, where the beaming contradicts the tuplet, I wouldn’t leave it as the manuscript. As it lies, the 5:4 16th-note tuplet is making it harder to read the rhythm.
I’d split the tuplet into two 5:4 32nd-note tuplets, which would give the correct beaming by default, doesn’t contradict the music, and therefore helps to read the rhythm.
cheers
Jeremy
Salve,
ecco in allegato Pdf come scrivere il “gruppo irregolare” sopra illustrato:
Allegato.pdf (71.3 KB)
Buona Musica a tutti
Thanks for your kind advice. Yes, correct, but the colleague I engrave for is a member of the New Complexity School [although none of them like being called that…] and he is extremely meticulous about his personal beaming style, which often goes against correct practice, as I believe he feels this aspect conveys certain meaning to the players. I can’t talk him out of it, and it’s his score after all. I am merely the faithful drudge engraver! It’s not up to me to change it. 
It’s not the beaming choice here, but the tuplet choice.
Using two tuplets instead of one, it could be argued, is more complex. Maybe he’d like that, haha.
J