If I want to have the following result (see figure 1),
I think Dorico does not behave very logically and makes it difficult for me to enter the data quickly. Actually, the quickest way to type would be for me to select the beams (or in other situations the whole bar) and use the crescendo or decrescendo popover. But the result is always one grid too long (see figure 2)
and reaches below the following, unselected note. That means I have to shorten the length of the gradual dynamics each time. This seems like a small effort at first, but in the orchestral work I’m working on at the moment, it has an estimated 500 of such instances. So my small wish for improvement would be that Dorico really sticks to the selected notes when entering gradual dynamics and doesn’t make a correction (which I think is wrong). Of course, I can select less during selection, but that is not always possible and slows down the work process considerably. Here a real WYSIWYG would be desirable and would speed up my work a lot. The quality of a program can at its best be seen in those little things.
Engraving Options>Dynamics>Gradual Dynamics>Advanced Options>“Allow to cross barline”. You can turn this off for the entire project. This can also be set locally as a Property of the hairpin. It is by design that you have a choice in this, because when a hairpin ends on a target dynamic, in most cases you would expect that to fall on the 1 of the next bar. Looking at it that way would make it a lot less “illogical”.
andgle, I know this option, but it’s solving just the barline interaction and is done in the properties, that means it’s even slower, than shortening with the keyboard shortcut. And besides the problem of the gradual dynamics that aren’t crossing a barline isn’t solved by your advice. To make my point clear, I would like, that Dorico just follows my selection, and that would speed up my engraving work a lot.
I have to agree with the OP, that one thing that has always tripped me up is how hairpins always extend past selections. Crossing the barline is one thing, but it is frustrating to select the 4 16th notes and then get a hairpin that is longer than the 4 notes (especially when they are not at the end of a bar). It simply has never made sense to me why the hairpins extend longer than my selection, especially when they aren’t followed by an explicit dynamic marking, and therefore are not extending to reach it.
It’s when they are followed by a dynamic actually that trips me up more. Conceptually it does not seem intuitive that selecting a group of notes, Shift+D, <f will put the dynamic on a note I didn’t even select. It also gives a different appearance whether my selected notes are followed by another note or a rest. I’ve more or less gotten used to it, but it still seems more intuitive to only apply the hairpins and dynamics to what I’ve actually selected.
The problem seems to be Dorico’s semantic approach. Note heads are seen as the start of a sound event. Imagine a virtual timeline, where each note head marks the beginning of an event. Then the way hairpins are displayed makes sense.
We are irritated, because our brain actually works different, when looking at music notation. In our imagination we see notation as a sketch for something we will have to complete. That is why we actually do not need an exact copy of the events.
As an example: not so long a time ago no musician would have a problem reading semibreve („whole notes“) being placed in the middle of a bar (rather than at the beginning).
Maybe it’s just me, but this does not make sense. If I select a group of notes, create a hairpin and put a dynamic at the end - I expect the dynamic marking to be underneath the last note I just selected. That’s the end point of my gradual dynamic. What Dorico appears to be doing is selecting the beginning of the next sound event (whether another note or a rest) as the end point of the gradual dynamic.
Here’s what the manual says:
The ends of gradual dynamics are centered on the notehead at which they end, or immediately before an immediate dynamic at the same position.
FWIW I’m with John and Klaus on this one. If you have a note with a crescendo, the crescendo goes all the way to the end of the note, unless you’re a percussionist. Even as a pianist, we do something different, at least mentally, to account for the inevitable decay following a note that has a crescendo printed.
I entirely understand that Dorico doesn’t handle this in the same way as other software, but I can’t disagree with the behaviour.
It’s the same problem that choir directors have with singers who don’t really understand the meaning of note value. A note lasts until the beginning of the next note or rest, it’s that simple. (Technically, even if the notes are staccato. The note in performance is shortened by the staccato dot, but the note VALUE lasts until the next note or rest.). If a group of sixteenths is grouped together in a crescendo or decrescendo (or anything else), the dynamic or whatever lasts until the next note or rest. Period. All Dorico is doing in these cases is showing the logical ending point of the marking.
It does behave like a slur. The thing is that the behaviour of the slur has to do with the beginning of the slurred note, not how the last slurred note “lives”. Which is absolutely different with a hairpin, sorry for bringing this contradiction.
I truly fail to comprehend why Daniel or anyone else needs to ‘clarify the behavior.’ A crescendo or other such marking does not end at the beginning of the final note. It continues to the END of that note, and that’s exactly what the marking shows. What’s to clarify?!?