There are Engraving Options to reduce the line length to accommodate accidentals, or for runs of ‘short notes’.
Thanks, Ben. So if that option is selected, the spacing in the example in the OP back in 2017 would be improved automatically?
No, because the spacing in the original post in this thread is uneven because too much music has been forced onto the system without telling Dorico that it is allowed to allocate less space in general for notes. It’s easily resolved simply by telling Dorico that the ideal space for a quarter note should be smaller, either for the layout as a whole (on the Note Spacing page of Layout Options) or using a Note Spacing Change for a particular passage.
Thank you, Daniel. If the ideal space for a quarter note were made smaller, would the ledger lines be automatically reduced in length to prevent the ledger lines contacting each other? What I am trying to determine is if Dorico will prevent ledger lines from touching in all situations by reducing the length of the ledger lines rather than reducing the space around non-ledger line notes.
Ideally, the note size and/or shape would also adjust to prevent the ledger lines touching in tight situations. Right now in Finale one must in extreme cases even substitute a note head from another font to avoid this. This was how hand-engravers sometimes dealt with this issue.
I was just looking at this as I couldn’t reproduce the original collisions, and realized Note Spacing/Custom Spacing Ratio plays a role here too somehow.
If I overfill the system with a Custom Spacing Ratio checked, I get this:
With the default spacing (Custom Spacing Ratio unchecked), I get this:
Obviously the root issue is that the system is overfilled, and spacing goes a bit haywire when that happens, but I do find it interesting that Dorico avoids the C-D collision with a custom ratio set. It looks like increasing it just a bit to 1.43 avoids the collisions.
Ideally the software would be able to cope with over-filling by shortening ledger lines and changing note size and shape as necessary to keep the spacing as even as possible, because in actual practice over-filling is sometimes necessary.
In hymnals, probably half of all systems are overfull!
I think the term overfilling is self-explanatory. If Dorico took care of it automatically, it would no longer be overfilling.
Yes, sometimes overfilling is necessary, but that takes one into the realm of artistic license: one can do whatever one wants, but the responsibility (and extra work required) for success (or not) is then all on the artist.
And that would be a very good thing. Overfilling is a Dorico construct. The only “overfull” measure is one that is impossible or at least difficult to read.
To a certain extent, you can set what “overfull” is on a per-layout basis using the layout’s default note spacing settings. If you want the layout’s “overfull threshold” to be very high (i.e. allow notes in general to be spaced tightly together), set the note spacing for the layout to be low.
You can then override this from a selected position onwards using note spacing changes, if you e.g. from halfway through a flow want much more generous spacing.
Thank you, Lillie_Harris. Despite not being a Dorico user, I was under the impression that that was possible in Dorico, and I do understand the logic behind Dorico’s “overfull.”. However, at a certain point, ledger lines must shorten, and note head size and shape must change to maintain clarity in difficult spacing situations. This can be a tedious process and best done by software. So this would be a important feature to consider for future versions of Dorico.
Such situations occur frequently enough that a very fine engraver I know had to create a note head font to deal with them.
I was about to modify the last sentence of my last post to say: the only “overfull” measure is one which is impossible to make legible despite all legitimate means.
It would be nice to see screenshots of a measure or two illustrating this approach to engraving. Either modern usage with software or a traditional plate engraved approach. Please feel free to contact me privately and don’t feel obliged to honor my request. Thanks.
One doesn’t have to look very far to find them, notesetter. You will see a wide range of note head size and ledger line shortening in Ravel’s Ondine:
Thank you, John. Engraving of this quality and detail is way above my pay grade, but nevertheless makes for fascinating study.
I took a look at Henle’s edition of Gaspard which shows their take on the spacing challenges. I’m assuming they used Finale since the slurs look very familiar.
It would be non-standard and confusing in a score for the notes that fall on the last eighth note not to be lined up vertically over each other. You could space the notes in the octuplet closer together so the spaces are not so wide at the end of the sextuplet. Engrave Mode>Note Spacing.
Thank you for your answer! Even though I did the note spacing change it’s still too wide. Is this really how it’s supposed to be?
The spacing between the notes cannot always represent how long they actually last. The faster note values must dictate the spacing of the slower. In earlier times (1700s) they were more casual about note placement. Now the notes must line up to show exactly how they relate to each other rhythmically. Notation programs do this automatically.
I would suggest looking through a lot of well-engraved music from good publishers when you have questions of this type to see what is done.
What’s the system fullness? I suspect it’s just too full, and the accidentals are moving notes apart.
It’s not going to get better without only having 2 bars on that system (use a System Break); or reduce the Staff Size if it’s happening throughout the document.