gradual dynamics: proof reading, how to speed it up

Hello,

I have copied out a big score which has a lot of gradual dynamics, like dim. and cresc. but also hairpins like > and <
I can all input them with the SHIFT+D popover, which is fine, but:
This does not get respected in the parts…
In the parts the input dynamics are put back to the default gradual dynamic style.
So it is either just hairpins or just text.
How should one deal with this behaviour?
Is there an intelligent switch somehow to reproduce the dynamics in the part layouts, without having to go through all of them manually again?
May be a script to do this all at once?
At the moment I have set the Engraving Rules for gradual dynamics to be displayed as hairpins. So all hairpin dynamics are fine. But for each cresc. or dim. I have to scan through the score, select it, switch to the part layout, change the property, change back to the score. This takes about 1/2 minute per dynamic instance. How can I speed this up?
Please have a look at my screen recording (the time nothing seems to happen is after I have pressed W to switch between score and part layout):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wsfo3qzkjs1cjxg/proof%20reading.mov?dl=0

This is something I’ve had problems with, too, and I’m hoping that this behaviour (dynamics overrides being layout specific) is improved in future. For example, if I input “sfp” Dorico interprets this as “fp subito”. I can override this in the score but I then have to override it in the part too. I can’t think of any instance where it would be desirable to have this inconsistency between part and score.

Back to your original question, I have a guess. I’m not in front of Dorico just now, so this may not work:

Open a new tab showing your part layout.
In the score layout select all.
Filter gradual dynamics.
Switch to the part tab (not by pressing W but by clicking the tab at the top of the window).
Are gradual dynamics still selected? If so, you should be able to flick the switch and override all instances in one go.

k_b, you are right, the property that changes the display of gradual dynamics does not get “pushed through” from the score to the parts (yet).
I have not found a very fast way to check every instance.

I have two screens, and I can open the score on screen 1 and the part on screen 2. That drops the time needed to switch between them to zero.

pianoleo and Estigy, thank you very much both of you.
I have not taken the tab solution seriously so far, but it really speeds up the whole thing (also since one can change tabs with a key command).

pianoleo,

Open a new tab showing your part layout.
In the score layout select all.
Filter gradual dynamics.
Switch to the part tab (not by pressing W but by clicking the tab at the top of the window).
Are gradual dynamics still selected? If so, you should be able to flick the switch and override all instances in one go.

Yes, the selection carries over, but then I can only override all of them at once. Problem, when it is mixed… So I will probably first select them in the score one by one (may be for a whole flow), switch tab and then set the property right. Anyway, faster like this, thank you.

To extend this: we still need a lot of workarounds in Dorico, if things are not following a standard. We have to use text instead of dynamics, we have to use pedal or gliss lines, if other lines are not yet available. A lot of manual adjusting has to take place, not just for the gradual dynamics. Stem direction, dynamic placement, tie and slur directions, hidden accidentals. And all these little workarounds and overrides want to be carried over to the part layout and done there a second time. If one has a third layout, it is even three times…
A simple script which does all this in one step would be wonderful…

I noticed, one has to repeat these steps in all layouts…
So if one has different versions of a part layout, one has to make sure to go through all of them.
I am proof reading a horn part here (focusing on gradual dynamics), score window at the bottom and a second window with a horn part at the top, both in galley view. I would love to be able to speed it up further: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4cd8sw42u6aukdm/proof%20reading%20Horn%20part.mov?dl=0

What I’d really like to see in future versions is dynamics handled in the same way as accidentals:

By default they spell however they’re spelt in the score. If you want something different in the part you override it in the part layout.
Obviously if the developers have something “better” than this then great.

In the case of dynamics I just can’t think of a single situation under which I’d want the “flexibility” that Dorico offers - it’s just a total waste of time going through and proof-reading dynamics, and the thing that slows it down further is there’s absolutely no way of knowing which dynamics differ unless you have both a part layout and a score layout in front of you.

Attached is a screenshot of a couple of things that have really slowed down my work (when they come up hundreds of times in a project), chosen as examples here because, missed in the proofing stage, they can actually cause confusion for the players.

I really hope the team can find a way of fixing this relatively quickly.

The case for which we think there may be a good reason to allow a difference between the score and part layouts is for gradual dynamics, which you may (for reasons of layout and formatting) want to show as hairpins in one and e.g. text followed by dotted lines or hyphenated text in another.

But that’s the thing; it’s not “allowing” a difference, it’s forcing a difference every time I choose to input a textual crescendo in a score that is set to default gradual dynamics as hairpins.

Hence my suggestion for handling dynamics the same was as accidentals - give users the flexibility of showing things a different way when they want to, but don’t force them to proof-read every single dynamic marking.

Or at the very least, give us some sort of flag that says “this dynamic doesn’t match the score because you’ve overridden the defaults in the score”.

Yes, I do recognise the problem, believe me. We are searching for a solution that retains Dorico’s flexibility but helps to eliminate this kind of error-prone busywork.

Sorry, I was clearly editing as you were typing (and it’s not really you or this that’s irking me right now, it’s the screaming baby at the next table - the joys of standard class on the Kings Cross to Edinburgh line)

pianoleo, you lucky person :grinning:

Ha - we just left York 5 minutes ago!

Sorry to bring this thread up again, apparently the problem doesn’t only apply to gradual dynamics, but also with accidentals. When I hide the cautionary accidentals on full score, they still pop up in parts.

so now, if I want to follow the score completely I’d have to go through all the parts, and hide those ought to be hidden…

… yes one has to proofread twice, once for the score and then a second time on each part…

I think the best way to do it would “simply” (I know it’s not simple, but) have it the other way around: that the standard is that the parts adapt to the changes made in the full score, and if you want to override it you have to do that manually. Of course the flexibility is good, but it must be much more common to want to have the dynamics (as an example) written the same way in the parts as in the score than not.

I, too, would prefer the parts to reflect the score unless overridden,…

…but I may alter my opinion a little when options arrive to compress separate instrument parts on one staff but separate them for parts. The current implementation may be keeping options open for that eventuality.

I’m no computer expert and surely I won’t be able to imagine how much work it needs to be done with the developer side of the programme, but I’m quite disappointed that this issue has not been solved still.

It doesn’t only affect gradual dynamics and cautionary accidentals, but also “Barline interaction” e.g. if I want the hairpin not to cross the barline, as well as “sforzando”. This particular one is quite annoying, as if I set in the Engraving option to display all subito forte as sf, and if I need a sfz on a certain note, the part still should sf instead of sfz, which isn’t what I intend to write. Whatever changes I made in the properties window, I always need to double proofread, shouldn’t the part be simply… follow what I type in the score in the first place?

Kenny, this has been solved. Have you updated to version 2.1 ?
In Dorico it is called Propagate Properties

Propagate Properties – after setting the properties for an item to look just right in the full score, apply those same properties to all other layouts where the item appears with a single click

https://www.steinberg.net/en/newsandevents/news/newsdetail/article/dorico-pro-21-and-dorico-elements-21-released-4836.html

Oh!! My bad!! will check this out now.

Thank you very much k_b.