Overlapping and colliding systems

I so so love Dorico for composing; it is utterly marvellous. (everything I have written below should be tempered by this remark :slightly_smiling_face:)

I always work in fill view and it lays out the systems beautifully in fill view.

But near the end, when I switch to the paginated view, I just get so frustrated by overlapping systems.

Here I have already hit “the reset to factory defaults” in Layout.

Dorico even knows it’s overlapping because it’s telling me each page is more than 100 percent full.

Have I missed a “do not overfill” pages checkbox. ?

What is the fix here so that it always “works out of the box”. To be consistent with the Dorico philosophy I should not have to make any adjustments in engrave mode.

StringQuartet1.Move1.dorico (2.1 MB)

As I once mentioned before it’s even more frustrating because Dorico always does fill view correctly. So to paginate: All it has to do, having worked out the systems in fill view (for the correct page width), is to simply to pour systems like you pour porridge into bowls at breakfast time in simple succession; starting with the first page and moving to the last page. It really is that simple. No one’s bowl needs to be overfilled with consequent mess on the table cloth.

Sure the last bowl may be a little underfilled but that’s life. (*In any event any experienced Dorico user will then start adjusting note sizes and note spacings so that the last bowl is fairly filled - this is actually something Dorico could do itself , its only a successive approximation problem *).

Fill View does not accurately reflect the layout on the page.

I made only two changes and everything fits…

  • Layout options>Page setup>Rastral Size to size5 (6.0mm) - This is perfectly OK for the Score. You only really need 7.0mm for orchestral parts (and even 6.5mm is OK for quartet parts)
  • Layout options>Stave and systems> Staff labels to None (apart from the first system) - You can’t be confused about what instrument is on which stave in a quartet, and this setting gives you more space to play with on each system.

StringQuartet1-Move1-edit.dorico (2.0 MB)

5 Likes

The factory default Staff Size is size 3, which I’d suggest is too large for ensemble music on an A4 page. (Perhaps OK on a larger sheet.)

It’s OK for keyboard works, lead sheets or even Piano-vocal; but for ensemble stuff, a smaller size is more suitable.

If you’re used to Finale, it would scale the staff size to fit the page, based on your ensemble, in the Setup Wizard. (In my experience, I would always have to ‘correct’ it afterwards anyway…)

In any case, it’s not rocket salad to see that your music needs to be smaller on the page, if you want to fit 3 systems to a page. Your alternative is to fix 2 systems per page in Casting Off, but that seems excessive.

Perhaps you could make it fit, with much smaller distances between objects, and smaller margins at the top and bottom; but a slightly reduction in the size would be more legible.

Maybe Dorico ought to offer an automatic “size the music to the page” function; though this might lead to the circular problem of trying to fit music to the page while changing what can fit on the page…

2 Likes

The truth is that Dorico sometimes makes incorrect guesses when it determines how much music to place on a page. I’m more used to seeing this in cases where staves have lots of protruding notes or multiple staff attached objects, which is not the case here.

Here’s an old but still valid post explaining why this sometimes happens.

3 Likes

Thank you, as always, for your timely and useful replies. And of course my problem is fixed.:grinning_face:

However, it still feels wrong that Dorico should ever overfill a page given it has the option of pushing some last system(s) onto the next page.. And if that next page in turn overflowed then whole process could ripple down onto the next page etc, until the enire document is done. QED

Tony, please read the above mentioned thread:

1 Like

If Dorico were to apply the recursive routines necessary to accomplish what you want, the program would almost certainly be too slow to be practical.

This seems a case of “the perfect being the enemy of the good.”

1 Like

I’ve read it and it’s very interesting.

you may be underestimating the speed of a modern computer.

Even when follow all the wise advice I’ve been given (e.g. reducing font size); in this work page 3 overlaps because Dorico attempts to put four states on page three.

StringQuartet1.Move3.dorico (2.1 MB)

Good news :birthday_cake:: I have found a magic flag that fixes it. If I tell it that I want three staves per page then all is good. So no need to send me a fix.

Secondly I see overlaps very often . I’m told Dorico has an expectation as to how high a set of staves (a ‘system’ will be). But:

  • Often I have much free expressive text and that causes systems to be higher than expected and hence overlap.
  • Or in this case I have deliberately (and unnecessarily) added all bowings and made them visible . I’m quite certain if I were to hide the bowings all would all work .

Hence if Dorico continues to follow its existing algorithm maybe it needs to be more 'inclusive 'when it comes to 'guessing 'how high the staves will be.

As footnote : when I worked as a software engineer (42 yrs ouch! ) it was always company policy to collect unpleasant examples that our awkward customers found of our software ‘not working as expected’ and add them to the relevant regression test suites. Now I am completely :person_in_bed: retired I don’t know anything about software, and maybe not much about music :upside_down_face: .

It may be that you’re just unlucky that the particular notation you regularly use is the worst offender in terms of Dorico’s calculations!

However, as you’ve found out, it’s easy enough to sort out: either by fixing the casting off; adding judicious Breaks; or adjusting the …

Staff Size. :wink: