As it was mentioned previously, there are cases, where the available options for modifying the default properties of glissando lines and text do not suffice.
For particular reasons, I need to make glissando line dashed (i.e. not solid) and put a custom text on it.
Has anybody come up with (or can think of) making that kind of modifications?
I use hairpins with 0 aperture and dashed property to make dashed lines that stick to the rhythmic positions. I’m not able to input a text other that horizontally though. This could still help you, couldn’t it?
Thank you Marc! Excellent solution!
It’s incomparably better than my attempts to use a slur by straightening it up with control handles and applying dashed style.
As to the text rotation, let’s hope one day it will be there.
I need better glissando notation for harp music. There is this technique called a “double (or 2-hand) glissando”. In the (technically difficult) case when two or more notes are glissed in the same direction while maintaining the interval, it’s easy to create multiple lines between the multiple notes. However, the technique can also refer to a much simpler technique whereby the two hands alternate in the same direction creating a “swooping” effect. I believe that’s also called a double-glissando but even harpists I’ve asked aren’t very helpful (if anyone knows a more specific term, please let me know!). The ability to change text on a glissando would solve this problem and many others.
There may be a notation with three staggered parallel lines over the gliss that indicates the latter type of double glissando. I accomplished that by creating three lines in a graphics program, iterating to find the correct angle, and then putting the lines in an image frame. This is not a good solution because any change whatsoever (like adding pages, or moving a song in a book, or the measure changing length) requires special treatment.
Can you post an image of exactly what you are trying to achieve? I’ve found it’s pretty easy to do parallel gliss lines in Dorico just by having them attached to a note, and then hiding the note. Something like this is actually pretty simple:
If you need them staggered, it’s easy enough to adjust the endpoints in Engrave. Is that sort of what you need to do?
Thanks for the suggestion! This might work nicely. It’s similar to pedal changes for a harp gliss: write the changed notes, calculate harp pedal, then delete the notes. I was pleasantly surprised that the pedal changes stayed in in place.
Adding an horizontal line works, but each time I have to reshape it so it’s not horizontal, right?
Related to this subject: I need this gliss line to start on measure just after the high G and continue until the low D (as is the decrescendo), but because of the page change, it is not working. Any solution for that?
Ok thanks. What about the other question: the gliss line doesn’t going to the second measure because of the page change?
I tried to use a solid line with “gliss.” as a text (instead of using a gliss.) on the two “empty” measures (where the gliss is supposed to happen). But that’s the result I got:
Are these two notehead-attached horizontal lines, attached from the first tremolo notes to the second tremolo notes? Or have you input four rhythmic-positioned attached lines, two in each bar that the gliss goes across?
Could you please attach this project, or a version of it just showing these pages? I cannot mindread what’s going on via a screenshot.
I see. That’s a problem, though, because it affects the part (although you can do it with “Set local properties: Locally”) and if you insert a measure or the layout change for some reason, it becomes disorganized again. Not only for the gliss attached to noteheads, but also for the solid lines attached to rhythmic position. It’s something to be developed in further versions of Dorico (@dspreadbury ).
I thought I had already posted a similar video onto one topic, but I couldn’t find it so I am posting this video here. I selected the 2 measures before the forte (it shows the gliss selected). Then I added the forte dynamics. However, for some reason it pulls the forte back to the end of the previous measure. Is there a way to avoid this, so the forte remains where it was?
You did post about this in another thread, and I’ll give you the same answer I gave you there: when the dynamic is positioned at the start of a bar with a rest, the dynamic will be moved back to join the end of the gradual dynamic that ends at that position.