Hi Dorico friends and Dorico team, I’ve been playing with the new Proofreading feature in Dorico 6 — what an amazing tool!
I just opened a score I worked on some time ago, and it showed 99 considerations! Some of them are really helpful, while others are not so relevant in my case.
I wonder if there could be an option to mark as considered. That would make it much easier to keep track of what has already been reviewed. Currently, I have to re-read everything each time to figure out which issues you’ve already dealt with and which are new.
For example, there are 3 considerations at the beginning of my score suggesting changes to the percussion clef. But I’m completely fine with what I wrote there. Unfortunately there’s no way to tell Dorico that these are “handled.” So when I look for new considerations later, I still have to read through all the old ones again.
A “Mark as Considered” (and perhaps even “Unmark”) function would be extremely helpful.
You’re not the first one to bring this up, see here or here for example, and one of Daniel’s answers here. The trouble with it is that the proofreading remarks are constantly recalculated, and an issue that you’ve previously ‘marked as considered’ (i.e. hidden) might change relevance because of subsequent edits to the score, and suddenly it should not be hidden anymore.
Hi, just found this thread. Brand new Dorico user here coming from Finale and I want to say I like this feature and it has been very helpful. However, I do wish there was a way to select a particular proofreading suggestion as “mark as correct” or something. Here, for example, it tells me that sul tasto and flautando are incompatible. That’s not true. Sul tasto is about where the bow is placed, flautando about bow pressure/speed. It also says I haven’t marked the end of the flautando, but when I select it it has an ending and I marked “nat.” in the score like it requested. I don’t necessarily want to toggle off those proofreading warnings because what if something actually valid pops up later I don’t catch? Kind of seems like a nuclear option.
I suspect what’s going on here is that your “flautando” playing technique has a duration (like the “sul tasto” technique above it) but Dorico is warning you because there isn’t a continuation line to show the player what the actual duration is. Feel free to attach an example project here if you want me to take a look.
Hey, update: so apparently, flauntando does not automatically have the continuation line selected as showing. That fixed it for me. However, it still claims that flautando and sul tasto are incompatible which, as I’ve stated, is not true and not a valid proofreading remark. I do still wish that there was a way to select “mark as correct” or something.
It can be a little more complicated than this. Sul tasto is clear, there is no question there. Flautando is more complicated. In contemporary scores, it is true, flautando often refers specifically to light bow pressure and high bow speed and only that. But historically, it referred to a flute-like sound, and this flute-like sound is only realistically possible to accomplish by playing sul tasto with low bow pressure and high bow speed. Sometimes it was also taken to mean playing with harmonics as this can also result in a flute-like sound but I think this is a much more rare interpretation.
So if you use the definition from contemporary scores, flautando just refers to light bow pressure and fast bow speed. If you use the historical definition, flautando refers to the combination of sul tasto plus light bow pressure plus fast bow speed. In the case of the historical definition, this makes a “sul tasto” indication redundant because if you’re indicating flautando there’s no other way of doing that aside from playing sul tasto plus light bow pressure plus fast bow speed - again, assuming you are using the historical definition.
In contemporary scores there is sometimes a call for a technique that is like flautando but played sul pont instead. So in this case, flautando is redefined as referring to only speed and pressure and excluding the normal “sul tasto” portion, to allow for the otherwise contradictory combination “sul pont.” and “flautando” together. You could argue that this modern meaning is the illogical one since the sound of sul ponticello with light bow pressure and fast bow speed is not flute-like at all - but unfortunately we don’t have a better term to mean “light bow pressure and fast bow speed” on its own.
Of course it is mostly contemporary classical music that uses the newer definition in contemporary times. Film scores are also contemporary, but are often based in a more traditional language and in that case flautando refers to the historical definition (including the sul tasto part). So you might have a situation where the same performer can be playing as a session musician in film scores (and similar commerical music) and at other times playing contemporary classical music, and interprets the “flautando” differently in these different scenarios, assuming it includes “sul tasto” when playing film scores.
These differing definitions make it difficult for Dorico proofreading to determine how the individual doing the engraving personally defines flautando.
