NOTATIO

poch. is not going between the hairpins. I specifically want it this way.
there were missing dynamics, I hadn't finished going over those bars. I was mostly trying to figure out how to deal with that solo violin.
the dashed barlines are there because they are present throughout the piece. yes, it might be "obvious" what the subdivision is here, but there has consistently been a dashed barline in all 5/4 bars (and some other rhythms here and there) and I would rather stick to that visual consistency.

I understand what you mean about the dotted quarters, and would normally agree. I'm generally a stickler for the "correct" usage of rhythmic spelling. However, in this particular case, doing so clutters the score so badly (it really looks overly-busy and considerably more complicated than it needs to be) that I elected to use the dotted values.

From your latest example: 'tutti la 1/2 interieure' is confusing. Either it is 'tutti' or it is 'la 1/2 interieure'. In this case I would just write 'la 1/2 interieure'. Then, in the last bar, 'tutti div.' is good.
Consider splitting staves in parts. I know in the score this can be too much of a burden.

NeeraWM wrote: 09 Sep 2026, 06:26 From your latest example: 'tutti la 1/2 interieure' is confusing. Either it is 'tutti' or it is 'la 1/2 interieure'. In this case I would just write 'la 1/2 interieure'.

I agree.

I was finally able to work it out so the soloist has their own staff.
there are now two staves: solo, and gli altri.

on the gli altri staff, the first entrance is marked ½ intérieure.
The last measure I have ½ extérieure... I wonder if I should just replace that with div. since now the whole staff is "tutti" by definition (gli altri)

sometimes it takes me a while to figure out how to do certain things in Dorico.

@MichelRE, I would use actually a French version of "gli altri" – you write everything in French, even the instrument shortnames.  I think Debussy and Messiaen would write it in French - everything!

Yes, and if you do not want a specific part of violins to play it (last four desks, etc), just use the rest above the divided line in the penultimate measure, and so you really don't need either "tutti", nor "div." nor "la 1/2..." (because you are already divided in the M337, correct?).

As someone stated above, poch. is not a shortened pochissimo, but rather pochiss..


P.S.
What text font do you use for expression (pochissimo) and technique (tutti)?

Indeed: use '1. solo' and 'les autres'.
Please also put 'dolce' in italic.

sometimes I resort to using the Italian terminology because the French equivalent would be too many letters.

but I'll go back and see what I can change.

should I repeat the ppp dynamic for the upper part of the 1st violins?
or will they see the ppp dynamic under the staff and understand that that applies to them as well?

MichelRE wrote: 09 Sep 2026, 15:55 should I repeat the ppp dynamic for the upper part of the 1st violins?
or will they see the ppp dynamic under the staff and understand that that applies to them as well?

It is good as it is now.  Divisi doesn't affect the dynamics unless specified.

even if that half of the violins is actually coming in after a few (three) bars of not playing?
so I can presume that they will look at the dynamic under the staff and understand it applies to them as well.

I know, I keep re-asking the same questions with different words... but I'm paranoid about making mistakes that can cost rehearsal time.
This work has already been played three times by different groups, but I've since made major revisions, including that solo violin, which was in none of the scores for those initial performances.