Got another thought about Dorico as I plow through my wonderful first few days with it. Had an idea that seems so logical, I feel like you probably CAN do this somehow, I just haven’t found it yet . In fact I just double-checked because I don’t want to embarrass myself asking for a feature that already exists. Still could have missed it, but I tried. And to any Dorico employees reading, this is low rush low priority, just wanting to document a feature that may be easy, and makes a lot of sense to me.
Here’s the idea: doesn’t it make the most sense that the “hide empty staves” option, which has the effect of condensing/simplifying a score, be wrapped into the condensing feature in Dorico? Put another way, it’s really a binary situation – I either want the full palette in front of me in the form of all empty staves while writing, or I want things as condensed and simplified as possible once the editing process is complete, to analyze, or create a print-ready score. My opinion is that the “hide empty staves” and “condensing” states of a project would toggle in tandem easily more than 50% of the time. That makes the most sense for my workflow, but I’m curious if there are objectors. Currently it’s a tiny pain point on both sides – condensing and changing that option to condense, or the opposite, in order to blow things up and make edits or revisions. It’s a two-step process in both cases that feel like it could (should) be one.
If there were holdouts who wanted the flexibility to have all combinations of these two options, perhaps a box to check within condensing options that reads “follow hide empty staves preferences when condensing” would work.