Is it or will be possible to make time sigantures in brackets? What would be the best workaround at the moment?
Another question to the same issue: when I type via shift + m the 3/4 and the composers wishes to have additonal 6/8 in brackets for the conductor what would be the best way to achieve such a notation?
If you have an alternating time signature, e.g. 3/4 (6/8), then the second time signature can appear in parentheses. Try typing ā3/4 (6/8)ā in the popover; you can then change the separator between the time signatures if necessary via Properties.
Dear Daniel, thank you for your answer it works perfect!
I do have an additional question: if I want to have only one time signature 3/4 in the score what is to be done? If I type (3/4) into the popover nothing happens so far. I didnāt find an option for it. Would be great if you could help. Sometimes after senza misura I need to repeat the time signature in bracketsā¦ The option in the properties panel with different parenthesis doesnāt seem to work for this case
No, it wonāt work in that case, Iām afraid. Weāll see about adding an option to display a single time signature in parentheses in future.
For my edification, can someone explain the situation where that is wanted?
Hi Mark,
if you mean the sitation with single time signature in parentheses it could be after a long senza misura. I am working on a project now where I have to use it quite a lot. Another issue would be, if you have some big opera or ballet score and after say 10 pages you have a new scene after a double barline with a new name but in the same measure some composers would like to add a single time signature in parentheses as a reminderā¦
There is a number of cases where it can be useful. For example in some complete editions you have to put time signatures in square parentheses or normal ones depending on the issueā¦
This feature is awesome; so easy with the popover.
Is it possible to separate the second or the first numerator into groups? e.g. 4/4 (3+3+2/8) If I use the Properties panel itās either none or both (e.g. 4/4 (8/8) or 1+1+1+1/4 (3+3+2/8). I canāt find the option to separate just one. If itās not possible, what would be the best workaround to obtain this?
Youāre right, at the moment itās not possible for one time signature within a group of alternating time signatures to show different properties. Iāll make a note of this as something for us to address in future.
Hi there! The new v1.1 is so brilliant I just canāt get enough. Thanks for everything!
I wanted to askā¦ Has this issue been approached somehow? I still canāt find a work-around. Any help? I need to use an alternating time signature, but with the second one in groups (e.g. 4/4 [3+3+2/8]).
Unfortunately we have not been able to address this yet.
Bump - Iād like to be able to put the time signature in parentheses. It is a very useful function for any music where the meter is not particularly important, but that it is divided into bars for ease of reading. A good example would be Ligetiās Monument ā¢ Selbsportrait etc.
It would be good in fact if these standard font functions were easily over-ridable to allow flexibility for anything - if you can notate it with the presets provided with the program, it would be great if you could then take the elements of that and use it in any order. I understand that it might make it pretty difficult for the program to interpret what you mean
Daniel said they would make a note of it. He does what he says; bumping it wonāt make it happen any sooner and only irritates the team (and a lot of other people on the Forum).
To be fair, despite starting with ābumpā, eddjc added a useful example.
Hi folks - thank you for the pointer on forum etiquette. āBumpā is an old message-board tradition where someone wants to lend weight to an unresolved issue by ābumpingā it up the forum, without waisting anybodyās time by writing a new post. As this is an old style message board it seemed fitting to use it here. When you talk about software development, bumping something is supposed to help support a request, and demonstrate that it is not just the one user that has this issue. With respect, iām sure the team donāt need protecting from a bump.
I personally have no love for bumping threads or for ā+1ā posts, but I donāt suppose my own distaste for them will turn the tide of decades of forum culture. And no, we donāt need protecting from ābumpsā or ā+1ā posts.
Iāve wondered, did the team ever considered a āGraphics Modeā where all the stranger aspects of notation could take place? I envision some sort of simplified Illustrator-kind of thing, maybe with a library of relevant glyphs for easy access. Then the workflow would be writing your āstandardā notational bits in Write Mode, then add the stranger stuff - which could be anything from semi-normal notation not yet semantically implemented in Write Mode to absolutely crazy avant-garde off-the-charts experimental nonsense, if thatās what you want. After that - as it already is - you make it look nice in Engrave Mode and print or export it in Print Mode. Obviously, the graphically input items wouldnāt affect playback, but so donāt i.e. Shift-X texts.
I realize that this could be taken as giving up on the wonderful and highly appreciated semantic approach that is so great in Dorico. On the other hand - as anybody can see just browsing this forum, not to mention existing contemporary scores - music notation is a VERY broad topic (including the occasional desire to write something āwrongā), and it is obviously impossible to have any thinkable option readily available.
I think this could be the best of all worlds: all the practicality of software understanding your intentions AND the option to go beyond the limits when needed.
I understand that itās not a little thing Iām asking for! But has it been considered for the future?