I need to find a fix for this condensing issue. I will try to explain this so it is understandable but I am confused myself on how to explain it. Please see the 3 screen shots of several measures in Clarinet 2 & 3… The first is my original Finale score. The second is the Dorico score of the same measures in Engrave Mode and the 3rd is the same measures in Write Mode with condensing turned on. I would like for the condensed Dorico score to look like the original Finale score. Notice the 3ed measure from the end and the 5th measure from the end in all 3 scores.
In shot 2 (Dorico) the two parts are rhythmically correct. When I condense them (shot 3) the 8th notes in the 3rd Clarinet become tied 16th notes in the condensed version.
How do I get these two measures to visually look like the #1 shot (Finale)?
I hope that all makes sense.
Thanks for any help you can offer.
Easy: use condensing changes !
You need to understand how Dorico handles automatic condensing. It uses phrases which are series of notes surrounded by rests. In the example you give, there is no rest. So everything will be handled the same way. But inserting a condensing change (you need to tick the instrument that should change behavior with the change) will be a manual way to instruct Dorico that a new phrase starts there (from the condensing point of view).
You should insert a condensing change at the start of 5th bar from the end, another one at the start of the 4th, another one at the start of the 2nd, and at the start of the last… Each time the number of voices canges, basically.
You can alt-click the changes but you’ll need to tick those clarinets 2,3 group each time, IIRC.
Marc,
I actually did do a manual condensing change in those spots and even tried to isolate just the offending measures but to no avail. The manual condensing change seemed to make no difference. Could I send you a sample of the Dorico file to see if you can have a go at it if you are willing to try.
Thanks.
Gary
Are you positive you’ve inserted the changes as I described them? That means almost one change at each bar, from the moment you’re switching between one voice and two voices.
Marc,
I will play around with it some tomorrow. I will try following your advice to the letter. I have set up custom condensing for several instruments such as 2nd and 3rd CL., 2nd and 3rd Trumpet, 2nd and 3rd Trombone and sometimes F. Hn. I will try to go back and make sure I select only the sections within the phrases and will let you know how it’s going.
Thank so much for your responses.
Gary
O.K. I finally figured this out with your help. I was doing everything right EXCEPT in the Condensing Change window at the bottom I was selecting “Manual Condensing” under Condensing Approach instead of “Reset”. That made all the difference in the world.
Thanks again.
You actually literally just need to tick the appropriate condensing group (clarinets 2 and 3) and this is all you need to do, in all those condensing changes. Once they are all in place, you’ll see that Dorico will do what you’re after. Of course, if it’s not the case, then use manual condensing to explicitly make it do what you want. But here, honestly, I am confident it would be the default behavior.
Marc,
Awesome. Thanks so much. I am learning new things every day and it is so overwhelming at this point that I am keeping a notebook of everything so I can keep track of it all.
Gary
Marc,
I do have one followup question if you might know the answer. The condensing is going much better now but I really don’t need the number of “a2” designations that Dorico is giving me. (See Screenshot). It appears that Dorico is giving me new “a2’s” whenever the score enters a new system and after any rest that the two parts share in common. I am guessing there is not a way to limit the redundant “a2” designations to only when there is a change.
Thanks if you know the answer to this. I can live with the redundant a2 but I am constantly trying to make the scores less “busy” and really don’t need a2 when there is actually no change in that status.
Thanks.
Gary
That a2 hypertrophy is a known problem. You can select them and hide them in the properties panel but it is not really satisfying anyone. The Team knows about it. The problem is it could be a real problem if some a2 were missing. Now it’s up to us to decide which are redundant and which are not
I am guessing this is not an easy fix but deserves strong consideration. The scores tend to get very crowded and cluttered when there are potentially 8 to ten of them on one staff on one page alone.