Here’s a violin snippet from Haydn:
How can I get the wedge articulations to go under the slur and on the noteheads without having to tediously move each and every one in engrave mode? Is there a setting for this?
This is what I have, but not what I want:
I am not happy with a workaround of placing the slur underneath.
The wedge is a custom playing technique I have created.
I know it’s not a solution to the underlying issue, which the team is aware of, but would using the staccatissimo articulation (Notes panel, on the left) instead work for you? You can edit/replace the design of the staccatissimo in Engrave > Music Symbols if you want to use the glyph shown in your screenshot.
Articulations, unlike playing techniques, are placed inside slurs and there are some additional default settings in Engraving Options > Articulations for whether they should go inside or outside slur endpoints as well.
I had a bit of a play around with Lillie’s suggestion and I think I managed to achieve what you are after.
Step 1 - Enter the notes.
Step 2 - Enter the articulations (from left panel) - 2 mouse-clicks 1) select the whole bar, 2) click on the articulation
Step 3 - Enter the slur - 2 mouse-clicks 1) select the whole bar, 2) type “s”
Step 4 - Engraving Options > Articulations
apply the following settings:
End result:
For fine placement of the wedges, you can either drag them with the mouse or use the alt-up/down arrows (in Engrave mode, of course).
@Lillie_Harris Interestingly, the option for Slurs > Position of staccato, staccatissimo and tenuto relative to slurs: did not make any difference when I set it to Inside slurs, but the two immediately beneath it did.
The Haydn wedge symbol is actually not a stacatissimo, and in most engravings of the period it is thinner and less pronounced. It’s quite subtle. That’s why I created a custom playing technique with a less pronounced glyph. Most editions just obliterate Haydn’s intentions and substitute a staccato dot, which it most certainly is not, as he used both symbols in close proximity in the String Quartet scores throughout. I am essaying an ‘urtext’ based in the 1803 Pleyel edition of the complete Haydn String Quartets. So I guess I have to move them around by hand.
But then, is it possible to use a different glyph of my choosing for the articulation?
Yes it is - my suggestion was more about the available functionality rather than any underlying musical meaning, i.e. what might get you to the result you want most quickly and easily in the app as it works now.
Ah, That’s good. The Haydn wedge is not a staccatissmo, and it’s important that players do not read it as such. As with most music of this period, it’s very subtle, and many of the musical subtleties were crushed out by 19th century editors, sadly. Hence a need for my edition (not that I am competing with Henle Verlag).
Hi Andro,
Do the steps and settings I posted a little while ago help you to achieve the appearance you want? (After you have redesigned the wedge).
Lillie, In the music symbols list, there already exist three versions of staccatissimo…
But only the first appears to be useful (ie it has a key command {). How can I enter a ‘Staccatissimo stroke’ symbol? If I cannot, why does the symbol exist?
Regarding your solution to Andro’s problem, would he have to change the glyph for both above and below?
Yes, just like for playing techniques that are different above and below the staff.
As for the others, I’d guess the variations are due to different designs being adopted historically, and they’re probably not all available as articulations separately because you’d be unlikely to use all three types in the same project. You’d need to ask someone else for more detail though. They’re all included in Bravura. If you don’t want to swap the glyph used for the staccatissimo command, you can create custom playing techniques that use the relevant glyph.
My underlying question was why does Dorico go to the trouble of defining music symbols that you cannot use?
Thank you, but I beg to differ. A wide variety of strokes, wedges and dots are common in the same project, particularly in late 19C practice. And to complicate matters, their usage changed over time. There is still debate over dots v strokes in Haydn and Mozart (a distinction Andro wants to show)
Suggesting that
is unhelpful, since Dorico treats playing techniques very differently from articulations (just as Andro is discovering!) - hence this thread!
As a final aside, can I make a request for Dorico to have curved lines (as distinct from slurs - so no playback implications)?
Thanks for your attention, as ever.
Sorry you felt my alternative suggestion was unhelpful, that wasn’t my intention and indeed is never my intention.
You will have to ask someone else if you want to get into these details because I cannot provide any further information.
I didn’t say unhelpful. Just clarified the subtlety in Haydn’s notation. Dont get me wrong! 
Have you had a chance to have a look at my post yet?
It’s the third one (ie second answer) in this thread.
The discussion seems to have moved more towards the shape and interpretation of the Haydn wedge rather than considering what the original question was!
I would love to know if the (possible) solution I described is helpful for you to achieve the “look” you wanted.
PS
When Lillie said:
I think she was replying to Janus, not to you.
What’s the best way to interpret notation like this when playing? Connect all the notes as in a slur but then add some kind of emphasis to each, what’s your take?
