Is there any way to have Dorico count the two bars in a two bar repeat ending as one? This is standard and normal in Henle Verlag editions, and other Urtexts.
There’s an old thread here about it, but I wonder if there is now some option I can’t find to do it without having to manually make bar changes all over. I have many to do, so it’s tedious and error prone.
I suppose this will always be manual to take into account repeat endings with larger numbers of bars?
You will indeed have to add bar number changes manually: Dorico doesn’t have any automatic provision for this at the present time.
Andro, there is an interesting problem that arises with the Henle etc. system, in which the measures of the first ending are in a way passed over in the overall count. There is no problem if the first and second endings have the same number of measures, or the second ending has more than the first. But if the first ending has more measures than the second ending, the surplus measures in the first ending become uncounted measures, which may be why Gould does not recommend this for ensemble music.
@John_Ruggero Yes, you could say there are problems. But in Henle, and others, consider this. If you take the Bach Goldberg Variations, most of the variations are exactly 32 bars, in AB form. This was purposeful and intention proportion by Bach. If you count the second repeat you end up with the last bar being 33, and this is very bad, and misleading as it mucks up the symmetry, And in BWV 988 all of the repeat endings are just two bars.
Yes, indeed. And I prefer and use the “Henle” system myself in solo music for that very reason. But the system does have the flaw I mentioned which may make it is harder to quickly identify some of the measures in ensemble situations and theory class.
Any update on this bar numbering question? We would like to use the convention described above for Henle/Urtext editions to prepare our own critical edition.
Is it still true that there is no support for this other than manual re-numbering of bars? As @Andro wrote at the beginning of 2023, doing this by hand will lead to hours of tedious, error prone work over many hundreds of tunes.
@jakeysworld
Please do not post essentially the same message in multiple threads.
This leads to different responses in different threads and wastes the time of those who read every thread (like the Development Team).
Please forgive Derrek – I found the much older thread first and posted there before finding the more updated version of the thread.