Repeat an accidental after a tie

Hello, I cannot find the option to force the visibility of an accidental on a tied note, (and to put it into brackets). I could use a slur instead but is it possible to make it look like a tie without changing all the parameters manually ?


You can do this in Engrave mode, setting the accidental property.

1 Like

Yes, you can select the 2nd notehead in Engrave mode, and change the property.

But I wouldn’t copy that manuscript exactly – perhaps they decided to add the tie after they wrote the notes?

It’s not usual to repeat the accidental, unless it occurs over a system break.

1 Like

Yes ! Thanks a lot. Really subtle as the the options look the same between engraving and writing modes but have different consequences.
I also thought so but that’s occurring all the time in the score and it feels like it’s on purpose.

Yes, but to what purpose? The second note of a tie is always the same note that you started on! No one would change note because the accidental wasn’t there.

Composers don’t always get it right. Are you going to flip the tie to go under the notes too…? :grin:

:smiley: My guess would be that it’s to make sure it doesn’t ressemble a slur to a natural note as it is “atonal” music. You are right. It raises the question of who has the last word on the project :wink:

This is a relatively common practice among some contemporary and mid to late 20th century composers. Here’s an example from Boulez Structures 1a:

Not really my preference, but it is an established notational practice with certain composers and styles.


… and french publishers… :slight_smile:


Yes, these practices exist, but I strongly doubt they apply to the passage in the OP. The standard notation (no restated accidental, in the same system) cannot be mistaken for a slur from E♭ to E♮ – if that were intended you must mark the ♮. (Such a slur could not be firmly distinguished from a tie without the courtesy accidental.)

BTW the Boulez example is the style that shows an accidental on every note, regardless of anything else.

Boulez doesn’t restate the accidental on tied notes within the bar, just on notes tied across the barline, so it’s not quite the same as the every note style.

1 Like

Oops, sorry – I was too hasty to reply again.

(But still I don’t think the Boulez applies to the OP.)

1 Like

Given the look of the manuscript, I think you’re probably right.

That makes sense in a manuscript, where slurs and ties are basically indistinguishable. In dorico, they usually have slightly different curvature and it’s easily possible for musicians to spot the difference.

It’s standard notation in e.g Messiaen/ed.Durand …

1 Like