Tutorial/Information request - Daniel


I saw the post on Facebook about the 10 music notation programs and the associated PDF. I have done side by side comparisons, and have personally found the Dorico version to be the best, clearest version. Except for 1 case… in the 1st 2nd ending, there seems to be an additional fermata there. And also in the 2nd first ending as well. Not sure if this was an accident or if was omitted from the other versions. But I digress…

I would like to learn how you did the coda at the end with the gap between the music. It looks great and is something I have been trying to figure out how to do. Was it done with separate flows? If so, is there a way for either a video or perhaps and textual description of how you got everything to look the way you did?


In case anybody else wants to look at this, the file in question is here.

The fermata is (in musical terms) correctly shown in both voices at the position at which it occurs, in both of those bars. If you wanted to prevent them from appearing in the lower voice you could set the fermata’s properties to show only one per staff.

The split system for the coda was achieved using multiple frames, as you can see in the attached picture.

Thank you so much!!! That helps a lot!

I wasn’t so concerned about both voices (up and down), as I was the note before it, which might have been a voice 3? None of the other pieces had the fermata on the dotted quarter. But still I digress…

Excellent work! And I know this should probably be known by now, but the use of separate frames, since they are linked, flow the music from one frame to the next? I haven’t done extensive work in engrave mode, mostly just Write Mode.


Yes, there are three frames in the chain, and the music starts in the top big one, then flows into the bottom left one, and finally into the bottom right one.

Thanks Daniel!!! Quite awesome, and the printed page looks incredibly good. Better than the rest in my opinion.


Yes, I think so too. But there is a great deal of variation in how much work has been put into each of the engravings, I think, so it’s not very scientific: several of them look like pretty much default results from that application, but some of them, e.g. the Finale one, have obviously been tweaked quite a lot, which is to their benefit and in many ways a truer reflection of the capabilities of the application. If an application has questionable defaults (as Finale certainly does) it shouldn’t be penalised in such a comparison because the operator doesn’t know how to, or doesn’t take the time to, make some improvements.

I didn’t have to do a lot of tweaking to the Dorico page, but I did change a few default engraving options (beam slants, tie shoulders, stem lengths) and tweak the positions of a few rests and ties.