This is the first feature I’m trying in Dorico 6 — it’s great! Thanks to the whole team 
This new version looks really powerful!
6 Likes
I agree - this looks like a bug. We’ll take a look. It seems to depend on exactly where in the bar the barline is.
2 Likes
I’m a bit confused because there are only 7 8ths in that bar and with 4/4 (1+1+1+1) that’s one short.
There’s an intentional repeat barline midway through the bar.
ahhh, missed the far left bar – thanks
I am chagrinned to see how many (obvious) errors I’ve missed that the new proofreading tool has exposed.
I’m grateful for this new feature.
11 Likes
It’s going to get better and better… But it’s already a feature I wouldn’t live without!
6 Likes
Thanks for all the improvements in Dorico 6. I, too, am really pleased with the proofreading because I always miss something when I proofread my own work.
I also have already found the following also to be very useful:
- Looping
- Tempo marks on two lines
- Converting staff text to system text
- Control of large time signatures
- Paragraph styles control and easily finding and changing styles
- Flow heading overrides
- Lyric extension lines and dragging
- Improvements to the jump bar
- Fill view
No doubt I will discover more as I work with it. Well done, folks!
3 Likes
I’m loving the proofreading too. What’s already here is great, and the potential here is amazing.
1 Like
I had always hoped to see this kind of thing. What is there already if very useful, and one can easily imagine additional intelligence, perhaps even some AI analysis, maybe as added value modules for different genres, you know, like to suggest more lyrics about dogs, pick-up trucks and wimmen that done you wrong if it looks like you are working on a country music score. 
Coincidentally, last evening I started to resurrect a big band score that a colleague had done in Finale a long time ago. There were some issues, and it needed a lot of work with phrasing, harmonizing, dynamics and such. When I went to bed last night, I had just begin to tackle the dynamics. Waking up to the new proofreading tool made me almost wish I hadn’t slept in this morning – almost. I think the tool found about 40 suggestions, most of which were very reasonable and helpful.
The only ones that I struggled with a little were:
- One bar that supposedly had the wrong number of beats – but actually looked correct. I added a meter mark and then deleted it, and that seemed to clear up the proofreading hint.
- The one that is a little more troublesome has to do with dynamics in endings. I had some cases where the main passage was mp, but the endings both needed to be f. Dorico complained that it was extraneous to put the f in both the 1st and 2nd ending, but that is really necessary. I decided to bring the affected players in at the f level the bar ahead of the endings, so there is no ambiguity.
Anyway, this is brilliant and a very pleasant surprise.
2 Likes
the proofreading found some errors with the placement of some hairpins,
but annoyingly told me that some doublestops that are patently simple and quite easy were “too much of a stretch” (they involved open strings.)
Proofreading also highlighted some “repeated dynamics” that I prefer as cautionary after 15-20 measures of rest. Oddly enough, it would point to the cello as having a repeated dynamic, but not to the identical line in the contrabass.
1 Like
Proofreading is amazing!
I am aware that it’s possible to filter issues. I’d also love to be able to Hide issues that I want to disregard, for cases where I don’t actually want to Resolve them.
14 Likes
Oh, oh… could the Dorico team add the expression “via sord.” as an option for “senza sordino” please?
I was wondering why the proofreading feature kept telling me to add a “senza sordino” to the 3rd movement, when the 2nd half of the 2nd movement was played without mutes. until I realized it didn’t recognize “via sord.” as a valid text for removing mutes.
1 Like
I’m not against this proposal, of course, but is there any precedent for “via sord.”? I’ve only ever seen “con sord.” (-ino/-ini) and “senza sord.” in Italian, and I’m assuming that “via sord.” is from Italian as well.
4 Likes
I’d really love to see some proofreading for structural issues added too. If there’s a D.S. al Coda or D.C. al Coda, proof for a To Coda and a Coda. If there’s a D.S. al Fine or D.C. al Fine, proof for a Fine. If there’s a D.S. al Fine or D.S. al Coda, proof for a Segno. Stuff like that …
8 Likes
Hi @Michel_Edward,
you can add/edit/customize Playing techniques as needed:
you can change the appearance of any Playing Technique, as desired, so that you don’t break the connection to the intended Playback Technique (in this case Open 1 ) and Dorico proofreading will not give an error, and all will work as expected.
Here visual guide:
3 Likes
I wouldn’t ask for it if it weren’t a real thing.
So yes, there is ample precedent for it. it means “mute off” (or “remove mute”) rather than simply “without mute”.
It would be quite easy to simply google it.
3 Likes
And page-turns.
I’m sure they’re on the list.
3 Likes
