I have 2 half notes in a 4/4 bar (with forced duration). The first one has a trem on its stem, the 2nd doesn’t.
As soon as I tie those 2 notes, the 22nd note receives a trem sign, too. This is very inconvenient and I would like to tell Dorico not to do that. Is that at all possible? (I know I can remove the trem again in Engraver mode, but that is very, very cumbersome. )
It does not happen the other way around as can be seen in the little video’s first example.
I don’t think that there’s a way around this, unfortunately. I didn’t even consider trying it the opposite way though!
Use a slur. A tremolo is a repeating note, so the following half note is just one more repetition.
Slurs are currently set to extend to the last note. Since there are many syncopations that also go over barlines, slurs are not a solution, because they need a lot of adjusments.
@dspreadbury I do not understand why Dorico acts this way in the given example. Adding stuff to the score that I have to remove again speaks against “fast workflow”. Is there any chance that this can be suppressed/fixed/turned around? (I have to edit a score for UE, which is full of tied notes that sometimes have trem, sometimes not; and it is not the first score that uses that kind of notation.)
PS: I would look for tremoli symbols in the “tr” section rather than in the “repeat bars” section…
I can understand why Dorico has Tremolos within the Repeat menu. But, I agree that it would be very helpful to not have to take the few extra clicks to Engrave Mode just to remove the tied tremolo.
@DanielMuzMurray Ah! Interesting to read that you understand why the trem can be found in the repeat section? My thinking is simply that a trem is a tr with the same note. May I ask what you thinking is behind that?
Only because it is basically a repeated note etc. That being said I wouldn’t have been surprised if it was found in the Ornament menu either - I mean, a trill is two alternating notes that repeat as well and it’s in Ornaments.
You are fighting against Dorico’s basic logic!
Connecting a tremolo note to a normal note is a slur (as @Derrek rightly said) not a tie. And a tremolo is a repeated note, which is why you can easily specify the degree of repetition (1 or more strokes). It is not an ornament.
If you are concerned about slur end position, just amend the property where needed.
Good call.
Thank you for your feedback, but I’d rather not go into that discussion, @Janus.
The point is that Dorico shouldn’t add something I didn’t ask for, only to then remove it again – a function it offers, but in the wrong workflow order. Aside from the fact that it is inconsistent, because if the first note does not have a trem (but only the subsequent one), Dorico does not apply any changes to the first note… so in this case I mean to detect and inconsistency in Dorico’s “base logic” as you call it.
And, as mentioned above: fixing slurs is even more time consuming than removing the unwanted tremolos.
Now that you’ve established that Dorico treats tied notes as a single entity, and rolls the properties of the first notehead to subsequent ones (no pun intended), why not skip the first step altogether and just add the trems where you want them from the Engrave mode properties panel?
This sounds right to me as well but I’m confused why when you tie a trem to a non-trem that it changes the tied note, but not when you’re tying (spelling??) a non-trem to a trem. (As per the video from the OP)
Now you are moving the goalposts. Dorico makes slurs easy enough to manage.
@Derrek weird comment…
It seems you are not experienced with the topic at hand. Maybe you wanna try inputting what I outlined so you see the relation between adding slurs and tremoli…
Before there are any more comments of such nature let’s please concentrate on the problem at hand:
Dorico adds items that I didn’t ask it to do – and it does so inconsequently.
It is without doubt a workflow problem that does not fit well with Dorico’s principles (“getting beautiful results quickly”) because of its time-consuming nature (I’d even says Finale-like nature, since it requires a lot of “jumping around” – you can choose if that happens before or behind goalposts) . Often enough we can read that, if Dorico decides to implement a feature, it will do so in a “future-proof” or “efficient” or whatever manner. This is not the case here. And who knows if other parameters are affected by it.
I am pretty sure we all can agree on that. So I kindly ask the Dorico team to have a look into that problem and consider providing an improved solution. Thank you!
@dspreadbury
I’m guessing that the logic is something like:
If you’re tying notes together, they become one note, of a different duration. Ergo- if you tie a tremolo’d note to another note of the same pitch, the assumption is you want that same tremolo action to continue for a (now) longer duration. I’d hazard a guess that this would indeed be what many people would find helpful, although clearly not in the case of the OP.
Sluring attaches (so to speak) two different notes, whether they differ in pitch or attribute (trem vs. non trem). Arguably, shifting from tremmed notes to non-tremmed is indeed not a case for tying, especially considering that trems are shorthand for rhythm values.
One day somebody has to explain were this myth is coming from. This is simply wrong. There is no logical nor practical reason whatsoever why a regular note should not be tied to the very first note of a tremolando which is, as we all agree, a repitition of notes). Neither why the last note of a trem should not be tied to a regular note.
But aside from that: no notation software should dictate the rules here. Especially not one that excells in providing customisation.
I agree and I think this is a great way for it to work, but if this is the case then why shouldn’t it work the opposite way as well? If I tie a non-tremmed note to a tremmed, why isn’t it assumed that I want the same note for a longer duration?
Another little video concerning this topic: tring to apply ties over a group selection, where some notes have tremolos:
@DanielMuzMurray No, it is wrong to assume that notes cannot be tied to or from trem. Therefore please do not enforce to make “the other way around” work, as well, because that would double the error. The only solution here is to not add unwanted items.
