I am trying to input the espression text ‘molto espressivo’. I understand that to add it as a dynamic I have to include the immediate dynamic (‘p’) and then hide it but Dorico will always interpret the text ‘p molto espress.’ as ‘molto p espress.’ no matter the order I type.
Any clues as to how to reproduce the attached?
Having entered a dynamic, look to the properties panel. Remove “molto” from the prefix box and add it to the suffix box.
For what it’s worth, because of such shenanigans I ended up defining an “Expression text” paragraph style that I now use most of the time.
(Being more royal than the king, inputting these markings as dynamics doesn’t quite fit into Dorico’s semantic approach anyway, does it?)
Update, having actually tried it: it’s probably easiest to add a dynamic, then turn on the Suffix property, then type molto espress. into the Suffix box. Then hide the intensity marking.
I think, it would be smart if Dorico detects the position of “molto” in the text entered into the popover and chooses “prefix” or “suffix” automatically…
I think so too. Otherwise the popovers are no time savers.
The development team have evidently decided that it’s smarter if “molto” is detected as part of the immediate dynamic - not the same thing as a prefix.
Has anyone had any success with this ‘fix’?
I cannot seem to get the words in the right order. I either get molto ff espressivo, ff molto molto espressivo if I change the suffix, or espressivo molto ff if I change the prefix.
Welcome.
What is the outcome you are trying to get?
I’ve just tried in 4.0.20 and my steps still work here. Again
thanks! that did it!
I thought I was supposed to type “molto espressivo” in the dynamics bar
just for molto espressivo to stay together with the dynamic either in front or after the expression. But I had it explained, so it works for me now 
I can definitely recommend creating a Paragraph Style that looks identical to dynamic modifiers (key shortcut suggestion: Cmd-Shift-X) for when you want to bypass the dynamics altogether and place this kind of text wherever you want.
I know that bar! Fig 18…
David
It’s one of the very few old Sibelius habits I reinstated when I started using Dorico: to have an ‘expression’ text style, and using it instead of the dynamics if the expression doesn’t involve any loudness indication. I think applying dynamics, then adding text to them, and then hiding the actual dynamic is, well, a bit weird. IMO, it’s a silly workaround unworthy of the Dorico philosophy of pursuing semantical correctness.
I generally agree. However, there are some expression marks that do have a dynamic implication: Composers up to and including Beethoven frequently used dolce as a particular dynamic; also sotto voce and en dehors etc. clearly have dynamic implications…
Although molto espressivo, en dehors and sotto voce have practical dynamic implications, these are more open to interpretation than ff or pp, which indicate basic dynamic levels that form the background against which the other three make modifications.
David
Which is precisely why I think Dorico’s approach is helpful. The ability to associate some expressions with a dynamic level is a good thing.
That said. There are many expressions that are indeterminate with respect to dynamic, which is where I would support @PjotrB in his desire for a Sibelius-esque expression text.
One problem is that these kinds of markings don’t have a consistent placement or font design. Sometimes above the staff, sometimes below; sometimes following a dynamic (but clearly meant for the same position), sometimes below or above a hairpin; often but not always in italics. The best position often depends on the range of notes. It seems to me there’s too much variety to codify a use case for the software; the best we can do is position Shift-X text manually using an appropriate font.
Another advantage of Shift-X text is that you can turn off collision avoidance on it and really place it wherever you want. Also useful when you have some pile-up of text-based playing techniques messing up the spacing.