Working with large scores in Dorico 4: ideas?

“Back in the day” I used Wordstar word processor. You could include multiple files, and it would automate the page numbering. (Word might still have that function?) Maybe that could be done some day with Dorico. I know you can specify a starting page number now, but increasing page count means redoing that starting page no.

Another thought is to be able to lock pages (like InDesign), so they can’t be changed. Then Dorico wouldn’t have to recalculate those. (Like I know how Dorico code works!! ha). I’d want lock more so I couldn’t mess them up, though, rather than speeding up the software.

I remember using word processors with such an “INCLUDE” feature. An INCLUDE references a separate file, but doesn’t import it until you print
the file that contains the INCLUDE. You could then work on parts of the document as separate files, then print the “INCLUDE” file to get overall page numbering and a TOC.

It seems this would be a great approach for Dorico: have separate files for individual numbers or movements, and a master file that INCLUDEs the separate files as flows. That way you could process a large work as a single entity, but not have any large file that contains the whole thing.

So the pages wouldn’t respond to a change in Engraving Options? Font Style? Both of these could change the disposition of pages. Having ‘local’ font styles and options would be complex and confusing.

We already get people here who can’t understand why changes they’ve made to the Master Page aren’t being applied – (because they’ve over-ridden the page).
“I keep changing the Engraving Options, but nothing happens!!!”

That was really a ‘workaround’ in the days when computers didn’t have enough memory to store the document in RAM. Having everything in one single file is a good thing, not a problem.

1 Like

When I was trying to do the entire show in one project I’d have a flow for each song, a full layout for each song, then various layouts per song with different instrument combos, so voice and guitar, all voices, voice only, guitar only, etc all the different combinations that the performers needed. So obviously with 15 songs, the layouts get a bit lively. Add to that a couple of aliterate keys for certain songs…

Since I’ve started doing it in individual songs per project this is much more straightforward. Though with D4 I have yet to try a project self-contained with the newer features like Jump etc, so I’m unsure which method may work best for my type of writing.

I’d welcome suggestions if anyone feels I’m going about this in an awkward way, but keep in mind that I need to be able to export individual songs as PDFs to import into Affinity to then add extended cue pages, script etc.

Obviously, I don’t know your exact requirements, but who would need “voice only” layout but not “all voices”? I’d generally give singers one vocal score, with all the voices in it, and some kind of reference to the accompaniment.

If you’re putting the whole thing into Affinity anyway, I’d also just export one PDF Layout of all the songs, and then import that into Publisher, to add the extra pages (and page numbers).

If you want to have multiple flows in each layout and you want to print the flows separately, you will need some form of workaround, because you can’t do it by default. It’s that simple.

If you’re not keen to do the extra workaround then keep them separate.

For what it’s worth, I still can’t decide and so I’m glad I don’t have a need for more than one flow currently!

You can re-order layouts in Setup mode, and then renumber them if needed.

Thanks Lillie - I did know this, and mentioned it in an earlier post. I referred to moving them in the other table - meaning of course in set-up mode…!

I also acknowledged my disorganised way of working - which is why computers are a godsend when they organise for me - like folders for example…!

people using their iPad (or worse - iPhone!) to read in rehearsal, they don’t have a lot of real estate there…

1 Like

Dear jjm_335,
I have made so far a series of important orchestral scores, the most complex being Saint-Saëns Organ Symphony (4 flows, 131 pages, 42 instruments, 40 layouts, 1147 bars) and Tchaikovsky Piano concerto 1 (3 flows, 202 pages, 25 instruments, 23 layouts, about 1050 bars). For both projects, I intensively use condensing.
I made each project in a single file, and do not regret it: this way, you keep a consistent layout through your project. And Dorico 4 makes it much easier to add special pages (like cover pages, editor’s notes, et.).
When editing music, I do that always in galley view (in condensed music, it is not practical to do that in page view), and generally in the full score. My part templates are organised so that I have very little to change for final print. If you have only about 30 players, I suspect you can organize the instrumental parts also in about 30 layouts, not much more. But I rejoin the suggestion of Dr_Scardo to have a folder structure for the layouts, similar as the the ensemble structure we can already make for the players in Setup.
True: you need a decently fast computer (I work on Windows, 12-core processor, 4 GHz, 32 GB, 1.5 TB SSD), but most of all: a large screen. I switched 18 months ago from a 2560 x 1440 screen to a 4K screen and then realised I should have done it years before… My workstation has now 3 screens: 4K, 2560 x 1140 and HD. Very practical, and I do use them simultaneously when working on my orchestral scores (respectively for Dorico, the virtual instruments and … Dorico online help + forum).
So, should I tackle such project as you described, no hesitation: one single project file. And a workstation with large screens.
I wish you a lot of pleasure and happiness with your project!

1 Like

Robrecht_Paternoster,

Thank you for all of this. I am now using two monitors: one 27" 4K in portrait mode and a slightly smaller monitor in landscape. I have not really been using them both at the same time for Dorico and am wondering if you might share anything about exactly how you use those three monitors. Do you have the score open on all of them at once? Do you maintain separate staff sets on each one?


At the left: 2560 x 1440 display: the Vienna Ensemble Player, here with mixer displayed
Center: 4K screen: Dorico in full screen. Sometimes, when I have for example 100+ instruments, the mixer at the left is extended to span two or even three screens.
Right: Dorico forum and Dorico help screens. I find them almost always useful, so it’s easy to have them at hand.
Your idea to work with a 4K screen in portrait mode is interesting. (I did it earlier with my HD screen). But I cannot flip my 4K screen in vertical mode …
By the way: all my screens have the same pixel pitch (100 ppi), so that a mixer displayed at the bottom of the three screens displays in a continuous way. My 4K screen is 40", which I find to be much more practical than my 32" screen (also 4K, as 2nd monitor for my laptop), and certainly a 27" screen, because the score is easier to read (the staffs and notes on 40" are physically 50% larger); That’s why I said to use a large monitor. A physically small monitor is not so useful for large scores, even if it has a high resolution.
Success!

1 Like

Robrecht,

This is very interesting and potentially helpful to me. I see you have defined “additional” players (e.g. Fg. I-II and Trombe I-II) in two voices. Presumably these were condensed by hand and will be hidden from the Full Score when it is printed, the single wind parts being used for printing the orchestral materials. I am contemplating this in order to get around the problem that “auto-condensing” doesnt work after a change of instrument. In the score I am working on, Beethoven Overture Leonore II, the horns change key (i,e, crooks) twice. However, I am wondering what your reason is for doing this, as I cant find a similar problem in the score I have of the Tschaikovsky concerto.

Another question: How do you make the titles on the grey background on the L.H. Players panel (e.g. 2 Flauti).

Many thanks for any help. Keep fit!

All best wishes,

David

Those are player groups. You can add them as per here, and they allow you to show player group labels.

Thanks!

David

Thanks Lillie!
@David_P:
You noticed correctly that I created manually the additional staffs for condensing, like the Fg. I-II and Trombe I-II. But that was when I worked in an old version of Dorico, when condensing did not work yet as it does since version 3.5. The screen I published shows that I am now deleting these manual condensing staffs, because Dorico does the condensing much better than I could do it manually :-), particularly because you can use Condensing changes for every system in Engrave mode, which turns out to be an extremely powerful feature (and as far as I know unmatched by competition).
Indeed, you are right, after changing an instrument (such as the horns in Leonore II, or in many pieces where piccolo and flute, or oboe and oboe d’amore are interchanged), there is no condensing possible (at least, I did not find a trick to get it done). Except if you create a manual extra staff, like I did in my old version of Tchaikovsky I.
Tip: I do use extra staffs for playback, if the score contains ornaments that Dorico cannot render correctly (particularly in baroque and classicist music). So in general I have three “full scores”:

  • a conductor score: contains all the staffs that are necessary to render a historically correct score; this is the only full score that gets printed.
  • a rendering score: contains the staffs that are necessary to create a correct rendering; generally, most staffs are shared with the conductor staff; frequently the solo instrument (in a concerto) gets a playback staff where all ornaments are fully written out, but this playback staff is not part of the conductor staff;
  • a full staff: contains all the staffs of both conductor and rendering score; the rendering staff of an instrument is always next to the staff used for the conductor score (and the instrument part), so you can immediately see if the rendering score is the real expression of the instrument score notation.
2 Likes

Many thanks for this very full response, Robrecht!

It is reassuring that I was thinking along the same lines, although I am not interested in audio “rendering”.

I have been working with Dorico since the beginning (and Sibelius since before 2000, when it was Sibelius 7). I restricted my work with Dorico almost entirely to early keyboard music, which has its own challenges, as until recently it was not clear to me that the program could provide all I need for my orchestral scores and I continued with Sibelius for those. I am very happy that, with these work-arounds, Dorico is now a real option.

I hope the development of the program continues at pace, to give us more options that render the work-arounds redundant!

Keep fit!

Best,

David

Wow—a 40" screen is a LOT of real estate. I’d like to try that, though I’m not sure my desk can support it. :slight_smile:

Thanks for sharing the approach. Very helpful.

But as he says, that’s only 100 ppi, which is quite low. You can get displays with the same number of pixels at 24 inches!

1 Like