Repeats and # and b

How can i get, that #s and bs come behind the left-repeat?

May I ask why you want it before?

What you picture is correct. It is incorrect to have the key signature appear after the left hand repeat.

ok. But in many scoring-styles, this “wrong” position is used an many players are common with this “incorrect” notation, so it should be possible to switch between “correct” an “incorrect”.

I must say I am quite interested in that strange behaviour. I had never seen such “:|:” bar cut in half to insert a key change.
I’ve just spent half an hour in Elaine Gould’s Behind Bars to look for such a case, and did not find it.

I’m guessing that you won’t find Elaine Gould advocating placing the key change after the repeat bar, either. Take it from me, folks, Dorico does it right. There might be a workaround, but I’m not sure how that would be accomplished. There would have to be a hidden measure and barline, zero width, to contain the key signature.

I have seen it this way elsewhere, and one does not see a key change before an end-repeat. The reason the split repeat is correct (as pictured above) is that the key does not change before you repeat back on the left, and it does not change “again” when you return to this spot for the 2nd time on the right.

Dear notesetter and Mark Johnson,

I must say what you write makes perfect sense. I hope Helmut Scholz will be convinced too !

But it actually might change again when the repeat on the right is performed – if the section which starts with the repeat on the right has a key-change further into the section which remains in effect all the way to the repeat sign telling the player to go back, then the key signature as shown in the example should be inside the repeat sign on the right so the player is positive there is a key change and that the repeated section should not be performed in the key of the later key change.

Example 1: ||: (new key) bars 101-116 (key change) bars 117-132 :||
Example 2: (new key) ||: bars 101-116 (key change) bars 117-132 :||
For the literal minded reader, example 2 would have bars 101-116 in the key of the later “key change” since there is nothing in the repeated section telling the player to change back to what had been the “new key.”
In example 1 nobody could have any doubt about what key bars 101-116 is in.

Elaine Gould doesn’t mention that situation in her examples on repeat barlines, and I just checked in the much earlier Ted Ross book on music engraving and it’s not mentioned there either.

This is one situation where I wish the engraving program would give us the option and not dictate what we have to do. I can think of several situations where this ability to place the key signature after the repeat sign would be desirable: A) engraving older works where we are trying to simply make more legible the older manuscript while maintaining as much of the original layout as possible; B) we are engraving music for a client who insists (rightly or wrongly) on having the key signature after the repeat sign (the client who is paying us should be able to get what he/she wants); C) it just makes for more accurate sight-reading in a situation where time is extremely valuable and a perfect first-take would be ideal (recording session, for example).

Good point. In this example I would wish for a cautionary key sig at the end of the passage (end of bar 132).

I also would like the cautionary key sig at the end of the passage. What I’ve had to do in other notation programs is to add an extra measure with the key change at the end of the passage (thus measure 133) and then hide everything and shrink the width of that extra measure so that only the key signature is showing. A real bother – it would be wonderful to be able to add a cautionary key signature at any point in the music simply by right-clicking and selecting “Show cautionary key signature.”

Of course it’s easy to wish for things but not necessarily easy to program and with other more major issues to be addressed I wouldn’t expect to see such a capability any time soon.