Regarding Rehearsal Marks

Hi team–
I’m sorry if this has been addressed before. I would positively love it if the option to turn off “avoid collisions” would be added to additional score elements, most notably rehearsal marks. I am becoming increasingly frustrated with the very drastic spacing changes they cause even when you turn down their respective settings.

Attached are 2 images-- one before, and the second after adding a rehearsal mark. That is literally the only thing I did. As you can see, on this particular page, there is more than ample room to accommodate the mark, and yet adding it to the mix completely changes the spacing—and drastically at that. I have yet to discover why this happens or how to avoid it. Any help would be appreciated.


This looks like the option ‘Only justify distance between systems when page is at least… % full’ on the Vertical Spacing page of Layout Options is kicking in. Adding the rehearsal mark probably made that page cross the threshold. Try increasing the value a bit.

Nevertheless, I second your request to add that property to more types of objects. Either that or change the spacing algorithms somehow… I usually exclude text objects from collision avoidance because they cause too drastic changes as well.
And it would be great to be able to exclude individual dynamics from the spacing calculations when there’s enough space to nudge them sideways manually instead.

It’s actually more likely the setting to justify both systems AND staves, not systems alone, from the look of it. In the first example, the large spacing between staves is a result of justification, not a result of staff spacing settings. You also need to increase the space between bracketed staves. It’s too low.

Adding elements to the score to push it over the threshold for justifying systems would not compress the staves.

I do agree with the request, as rehearsal marks often demand a lot more space than I feel they require.

Here’s another good example of just how much they can skew things. Again, there is plenty of room for this marking without adding all that extra space before the second stave.

You weren’t necessarily asking for opinions, but I don’t really like the effect of justified staves for frames with multiple systems. It’s often visually confusing, as the difference between staves and system breaks isn’t clear.

I typically use staff justification only for single-system frames (full scores). In your case, I’d recommend justifying only the systems, not the staves, and increasing your staff-to-staff spacing so you can set it yourself, rather than relying on justification for that. Just my unsolicited advice! :slight_smile:

But you’re right about the rehearsal marks.

I’ve come across this, too.
Especially since at those places where you want a rehearsal mark, chances are high that there is also a tempo change, a style change or other stuff that’s already taking up space above the system. Add a hearsal mark to the mix and you find yourself in Respace Everything Manually Land.

… which would be less cumbersome if the staff spacing tool worked like its note spacing sibling, i.e. if adding or removing space at one position would cause a recalculation of the whole page. I don’t know if that’s technically possible, but if it is… consider this a feature request. :slight_smile:

I will say this-- if they make such a change, they better make an option to turn it off too. I like being able to manually adjust things without having other things moving. It’s a big pet peeve of mine when I adjust something ‘just right’ and then move something else and then the first object moves! I can’t stand that.

Yes, I agree this can be irritating. If (a big if) they add this, the current behavior should be available too.

Still, after I got used to how the note spacing tool works, I started wishing I could work in the same way with staff spacing. It would kind of fit into Dorico’s philosophy: tell the program ‘I’d like a bit more space here, a bit less there’ and let it calculate a solution. That’d be more elegant than rearranging all staves on a page by hand.

Regarding the advice, I’m always in the market for ways to improve the look of my scores. I guess I’m a little confused however, as I didn’t realize you could only justify staves vs systems. I thought it either justifies everything or nothing. TBH, I get frustrated with the justification settings and there are times I wish I could turn it off all together. I have been known, on occasion, to adjust every page by hand, even on simpler layouts.

It was confusing to me as well, initially. I was used to doing all spacing by hand in Finale. I’m getting the hang of it now, and I do find it works well.

To clarify: you can either justify everything, spacing it all out evenly, or you can justify only the distance between systems and leave the staff distances alone. When I have multiple systems on a page with multiple staves, I typically use only SYSTEM justification, not STAFF justification. Because staff justification can result in some pretty enormous distances if your “minimum percentage” is too low… and it can make the score confusing to distinguish between systems. I only do staff justification when I have a full score that takes up one system per page.

Actually, I do allow for some staff justification, I just set the value pretty high, so it rarely triggers.

I prefer to set the Ideal Gaps section to my liking instead. Then the spaces between staves is constant throughout my layout.

Once you fiddle with it and see how the results change for different values, I do indeed prefer this method now.

And one notices that, despite adding all this white space, the collision was not actually avoided anyway (with the “p tutti”)

Just in case you’re not aware; if you hold down alt(/option) while dragging, the other staves will move proportionally, which make these manual adjustments much simpler.

Thanks!! I think I learned this when I first started learning Dorico and then promptly forgot it! Helpful.

Yes, that’s called concertina drag or something, right? I was aware of it. Kind of. But thanks for pointing me to it again, I may actually use it more often from now on because it turns out to be more useful than I thought. :slight_smile: I hereby withdraw my feature request.