'Incipit' idiosyncracies
I am editing a series of 1742 motets for a modern edition, and have encountered two rather odd behaviours in Musescore related to the 'incipit' showing the original clefs and time signature.
1. I use a horizontal frame to separate the incipit from the actual beginning of the music. This works quite well, and is easy to do...but once I have left 'edit' mode (after placing the frame in the system after the first measure and then dragging the handle to make it the proper width), I can no longer select the frame no matter what I do.
2. A side-effect of using the horizontal frame is that Musescore duplicates the 'long instrument name' at the beginning of the next measure after the frame. This would be a very minor annoyance--because I can easily make those extranneous instrument names invisible--but unfortunately, everytime I close the score and re-open it, those extra instrument names magically become visible again. In addition, when I upload such a score to the Musescore server, the extra instruments names are visible in the on-line version.
I have attached a screenshot of the first few bars of one of these motets so you can see what I'm talking about.
Any thoughts on these odd behaviours?
Thanks.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Frame & instrument name 2.png | 431.18 KB |
Comments
I have done a bit of experimenting on the frame thing. It turns out that If I do NOT pull the edit handle back across the left hand edge of the frame--in effect, folding the frame back upon itself and thus creating a 'negative-width' frame--then I have no trouble re-selecting it after I leave edit mode. But since I want that space between the incipit and the main staff to be fairly narrow, and there are those extranneous instrument names in there, I have had to make those frames negative width. The frame you see in the screenshot attached to my first message has been pulled back over itself in precisely that way, as you can see from all the superimposed invisible elements.
Attached to this message is what one winds up with using a zero-width or positive width frame. As you can see, there is way too much white space left.
You might consider not using long instrument names at all, but instead adding a horziontal frame before the incipit and adding the names manually to that. Seems that would address these issues.
it is true that instrument names customizations can't be saved. It really shouldn't be possible to do those customizations at all - to avoid raising your hopes. Names are generated on the fly as MuseScore decides where to put system breaks, so their properties are not persistent.
In reply to You might consider not using by Marc Sabatella
I had thought of that work-around, but aligning all those text frames manually would be a moderately annoying PITN. I will just have to deal with making them invisible all over again everytime I open the score, and tolerate their appearance in the on-line version (which is only for the use of my associate editors and proofreaders). As long as they're invisible at the moment I export the score to PDF, they don't show up in the printed scores, which is the really important thing.
I'm sorry to have to disagree rather strongly with your statement that it 'shouldn't be possible' to customise instrument names. I know your main focus is on the music-setting capabilities of Musescore, but I think it's important to remember that the program is, in the final analysis, a graphics program. Yes, it is a highly specialised one, and it can do things no ordinary typesetting program can do, but printed music contains much more than just the notes and staves. Imagine taking out ALL the text matter in a typical score...? Worse, imagine having to combine the music from Musescore with text and graphics generated by a separate program? The only way to do that would be to go back 35 years to the days of 'mechanicals,' or paste-ups, and then shoot a neg, strip it into a goldenrod, and burn an offset plate from that. We would lose all the advantages of digital technology in the process, as well as a fair bit of resolution quality.
The music-setting capability of Musescore is excellent, and is getting better all the time thanks to input from professional users and the code-writing abilities of guys like you and Miwarre and Jojo (to name just a few). But the control of text material produced by the program isn't as fine as it could be. As I've stated a number of times, I am TOTALLY incompetent to even think about writing code for the program (which means that sometimes I ask for something without having any idea of how complicated it might be to accomplish), but what I AM better at than most people is graphic design and high-quality typography. But no typographer, no matter how skilled or experienced, can produce a high-quality finished print master if he can't control all the typographic parameters of every visual element that will appear on the page. Such things as kerning, leading, and character compensation can make the difference between an acceptable 'office quality' page of type, and a professional product that Barenreiter, for instance, would be happy to publish.
I urge you to broaden your outlook on this sort of thing, Marc. I do realise that writing code to provide user controls for certain visual elements is not simple, but I have confidence in the ability of you guys to overcome those difficulties.
In reply to I had thought of that by Recorder485
But if you make changes to just one instrument name, at the beginning of one system, and then you enter a couple of extra notes that makes the line break in a different place…? Think about it. Never mind what would be possible to make happen; I don't know what should happen.
In reply to But if you make changes to by Isaac Weiss
Zack, I'm not sure I am following you on this. The 'Long Instrument Name' only appears at the beginning of sections--that is, at the very beginning of a score, and after each section break or inserted horizontal frame--so there is no need to try to make the systems break automatically at different places.
If you noticed invisible/not-played notes buried in the incipit, they are only there to provide an anchor for an equally invisible lyric so that the vertical spacing of the incipit system matches the vertical spacing of the rest of the music (which contains lyrics).
In reply to Zack, I'm not sure I am by Recorder485
Sorry, I misunderstood before. If we're talking about long instrument names only, then there could theoretically be a way to make it work.
In reply to Sorry, I misunderstood by Isaac Weiss
Okay, I'll leave it with you and the other code-writing geniuses to figure out how 'set invisible' can be made permanent for particular instances of the Long Instrument Name. As I said, this particular anomoly is a relatively unimportant one; so long as I can export to PDF with those extranneous instrument names staying invisible, it doesn't affect my final product.
What I would be interested in fixing is the inability to select a 'negative-width' frame. The problem therein is that if I can't select something, I can't edit or modify (or even delete) it in any way, so I'm stuck with it as is.
In reply to Okay, I'll leave it with you by Recorder485
No code-writing genius here. I haven't even done the "hello world" thing. ;-) There are people around here who do know code, but I'm not one of them.
In reply to Okay, I'll leave it with you by Recorder485
Work around to select the 'negative-width' frame:
- Select a measure near the frame (in the same staff)
- Right klick > Object Debugger
- Look for "HBox" und select it (see attachement)
- Klick the button "Select" at the top of the dialog
- Close the dialog
- Use Ctrl+E for Edit mode
- Use the Left or Right Key for adjusting the frame
In reply to Work around to select the by KHS
I think this is only available in the nightly build, not in the official releases though? But you can save as mscx open that with ein e plain text editor, search for hbox and correct the negative value there.
In reply to I think this is only by Jojo-Schmitz
Objectdebugger is available in de official release for windows at least that I am using.
In reply to Objectdebugger is available by Henk De Groot
Ah, here too, sorry.
In reply to Objectdebugger is available by Henk De Groot
Jojo, is this something that could be addressed/corrected in the next stable release? Making 'negative-width' frames selectable in the normal manner, I mean...? It might be a somewhat specialised usage of horizontal frames, but the ability to place graphic elements wherever they need to be strikes me as important.
What do you think?
In reply to Jojo, is this something that by Recorder485
In order for thie request to not get lost, better fill a bug report or reature request in the issue tracker
In reply to In order for thie request to by Jojo-Schmitz
Okay, I'll do that. Thanks again.
In reply to Okay, I'll do that. Thanks by Recorder485
Okay, Jojo--it's here: https://musescore.org/en/node/94311
In reply to Work around to select the by KHS
That work-around works perfectly. Thank you.
In practise, I shouldn't often need to re-edit that frame once I establish it, but it's not good to have something in a score that can't be touched. And your work-around is a way better solution than having to delete the first few measures of the score and then re-write them manually.
Thanks again.