Hi!
I’m trying to change the “Horizontal offset for rehearsal mark aligned with systemic barline” from engraving options, but that doesn’t seem to do anything:
I’d like to achiece kind of centered look for the B1 -rehearsal mark, but if I use the actual Center-aligned setting, the INTRO -rehearsal mark (its really I + NTRO) looks very bad:
I’ve tried all kinds of values for “Horizontal offset for rehearsal mark aligned with systemic barline”, but nothing seems to change.
This project has been imported from ipad, if that makes a difference!
I think that offset will only apply to rehearsal marks at the start of a system (ie at the left hand side of a page).
However, I’ve just tried that and it doesn’t seem to offset rehearsal marks at the start of systems, whether they are left-aligned with the barline or to the right of the key signature. Am I missing something here?
Positions of rehearsal marks can be adjusted individually in Engrave mode with Alt-arrow keys or in the properties panel.
I also tried every combination of settings (left-aligned, center-aligned, right-aligned) but “Horizontal offset for rehearsal mark aligned with systemic barline” didn’t seem to do anything with any of those options selected.
True, but that option is probably not available in Dorico Elements or iPad.
A limited engrave mode (just the graphical editing bit) does indeed exist on iPad.
Actually the problem for me is not so much the possibility for individual adjusting in engrave mode (I’m working on Dorico Pro), but the size of the project (7 flows + approx. 30 instruments). I’d like to find a robust setting for rehearsal marks that allows texts like “INTRO” and “OUTRO” look natural (without using system text).
And I see it does allow ATL/OPT-arrow to move items, so thank you.
(It took me a while to find the iPad way to enter Rehearsal Marks, which is different from that on desktop versions.)
This might not be relevant to your use case, but I’m working primarily on pop songs and jazz standards where, to make the song structure clear, I use casting off and system breaks to clarify sections of the song, and my rehearsal marks almost always occur at the beginning of a system (the systemic barline).
And I also make use of Intro and Outro.
Edit: corrected to “casting off and system breaks”
Yes, I do that too when possible!
You might want to check out ”note spacing ratio: 2,00” from layout options. That can be very handy when trying to make the form of the music easier to recognize!
In my post I meant to say System breaks.
I have seen a video by DanKreider where he uses note spacing in parts to spread the music over the page in a way which is more readable, but when it comes to indicating sections of a song clearly I think system breaks are the way to go.
I don’t know if it’s a bug or an error in the documentation (at least I didn’t see anything stating this), but that setting only applies to single-staff layouts in my experience. It would probably be a good if this setting could be fixed to work with all layouts or the documentation changed to reflect that it only works on single-staff layouts.
In the gif below they are correctly offset according to my Engraving Options in the single staff parts, but then simply left aligned at the beginning for the grand staff part.
Yes, I can confirm this in my test project.
The offset doesn’t work on a piano, but if I just change the player to trumpet (single stave) it works as described.
Surely this should work independently of the player/ instrument?
Agreed. I was sure this had come up before (I’ve been dealing with this behavior for quite a while now), but now that I’m searching I don’t see it. If this hasn’t been reported before then I definitely would like to see this fixed to work with any number of staves.
It’s probably not sufficiently clear from the way the option is described, but the idea behind this option is that if you end up showing rehearsal marks on a staff in the middle of a system, the offset should be applied to avoid a collision with the systemic barline; it’s actually not supposed to take effect when the rehearsal mark is above the top staff or below the bottom staff of the system, so in fact the bug here is that it applies when there is only a single staff.
Oh! In that case, if you end up changing this, please leave an option to leave it indented from the margin as it currently works for single staves. “To the right of clef and key signature” produces uneven results when some systems have repeats, plus that’s a bit too far to the right for me personally. Offsetting from the left as it currently works allows me to have a nice clean alignment that doesn’t force them up too high in order to clear the treble clef and bar numbers.
Here’s what I get with my current default offsets:
Where I have it above seems mostly in line with where it has traditionally been found with most publishers.
Haydn Trumpet concerto
Ravel String Quartet
Mahler 9
Rite of Spring
If you do change this, please keep this ability to offset from the left of the staff in some way or another. Thanks!
After a few threads where I probably came across as mostly critical I think it’s just as important to say when something works really well. I had no idea this engraving option existed and it’s honestly a great feature. Being able to align rehearsal marks consistently to the systemic barline fixes a lot of layout issues I was trying to solve manually. Really appreciate this level of control — thanks a lot!
Just because I had never noticed this option existed, I came across a crazy idea… It would be incredibly useful if right-clicking on a rehearsal mark (or any other object) gave a quick overview of the relevant options related to that object, regardless of the “level” in which they live. Dorico (thankfully to the developer team) offers a huge number of options but for my brain it’s easy to get confused between what lives in notation, engraving, or layout options. Even just having a right-click shortcut that links directly to the page where the object is handled would be a total game changer.
Ciao @Riccardo_Di_Paola,
the Properties Panel has exactly this function: it shows all the properties for the current selected item (mostly as overrides: it means when you want them to be different then the global options, that you can set in the various options dialogues).
Giving the big amount of such properties, (that include values fields and a hierarchy of possible settings, as well as, for some of them, the switch+checkmark combination, etc… ) relegating all this to a right-click contextual menu would be very impractical and not efficient at all. Also the properties panel has a Search field filter and two Show filters, as well as the possibility to set the scope to Locally or Globally, and also the nice function to show if an override is local or global through the text of that property: bold white is global, normal white is local.
All this things would be quite impossible to have in a contextual menu.
Here the Engrave mode Properties Panel for the selected rehearsal mark, for example:
For many items you have some settings available when you select them and right click (and the contextual menu will only show what is possible to do with the selected item), some of the commands in the appearing menu are very straightforward, but, to confirm what I said about the big amount of options, many of them open dialogue boxes with several settings.
Thanks for the kind reply, I know the Properties Panel and I use it all the time. But as far as I understand it only shows some properties. It doesn’t cover everything that affects a given object. For example the option discussed in this thread about aligning rehearsal marks to the start of the system is not shown there.
Maybe put all those settings inside a right click menu would be messy. But I was talking about pointing to the correct page in the option, having some way to quickly access or at least identify all the relevant settings that affect a selected item regardless of whether they live in Notation Options Layout Options Engraving Options or the Properties Panel.
Otherwise it is easy to get lost. It is not about having more features but about helping users find the ones that already exist.
I am just trying to thinking ways to make the learning curve a bit less steep because talking with colleagues and students this is exactly what keeps many of them from embracing Dorico as a standard.
