Closing Parts in V2.0
I have been working on some larger works for Brass that contain 15 or more individual parts. Most of this work has been done in the V1 of MuseScore, and I think I knew how to handle it pretty well. I have been using MuseScore V2 for a couple of months now, and have come to realize it has some significant changes in part creation. Many of these are subtle, but I see value in them - such as making changes to the parts when the score is updated just to name one.
However, I am concerned about always having the parts open when viewing the score. For the most part this comes from having to go into the parts and edit them further after they were created - I have found that the individual parts have too much "white space" in them - a typical march arrangement can on for pages when it should be condensed to one page. This is especially helpful if the work is to be performed outdoors where fewer pages is always better! And if multiple pages are required, having rests coordinated with page turns is useful as well. So to put it briefly, I find managing parts is essential.
So, the problem that I'm having is being able to manage those parts when there are 15 or 20 (or more) of them associated with a score. What I am looking for is a way to close just the parts I want after I have finished working on them and have them saved. I have looked through the online guide as well as the forum, but don't see anything specific to Muse V2
Does anyone know a way to do this?
Comments
There is not.
FWIW, though, you can greatly reduce the amount of work needed per part by defining a style file to auomtatically apply to generated parts. Get one part set the way you like - staff size, system spacing, note spacing, etc - then use Style / Save Style to save that to a file, then go to Edit / Preferences / Score and set that file to be the "Style for part". From now on all generated parts will get those style settings automatically
In reply to There is not. FWIW, though, by Marc Sabatella
Frankly, my experience with parts is that the actual parts need lots of "Tweaking" that I don't believe can be handled by a style file. For example, breaks in lines occur at the wrong places. Things like dynamics, crescendos, and voltas are often times juggled on a score to make them fit appropriately. Often I find that rehearsal marks don't get properly aligned over bar lines, or ar too close or too far from the staff. And lastly, it's a chance to review the parts and catch errors that have been unnoticed so far.
Don't get me wrong - I don't view this as a fault in the software - I have worked with enough software enough that there's only so much you can expect out of a computer/program - it can't read my mind (at least not yet!). I write music for groups I play in, and take pride in having the music presented as well as it can be, so the time spent reviewing and tweaking is time well spent, in my opinion.
But what about my original question - can you close the individual parts once they have been created. Seems like there should be a way to do this - I personally think that leaving the parts open creates a lot of overhead in terms of CPU and memory usage, and also gives errors a chance to creep in once i have finalized the parts.
In reply to Frankly, my experience with by tbdbitl
I'm not understanding what specifically concerns you about having parts open. The reason they need to be open at least internally is that changes to the score affect the part and this can have a ripple effect such that bad things could happen if MuseScore were not allowed to update the part right away. I guess it might be possibly to implement something where the tabs were hidden, but I'm not quite understanding the point.
As for style, I think you might find it more helpful than you might think, but of course it won't eliminate the need for tweaking parts manually. Consider though - if you don't like where line breaks fall, chances are you are finding the parts have either too many or too few measures per line on avergae, so a style file that increased or decreased note spacing would perhaps reduce the need to customize the line breaks. And rehearsal mark positioning is also a matter of style setting. As for things adjsuted in the score, that *won't* be reflected in the aprts if ypu simply wait until after parts are generated to start prettiying up the score. There is probably more than you might realize that can be done to reduce the time spent on the parts. But again, indeed, no way to eliminate it entirely.
In reply to There is not. FWIW, though, by Marc Sabatella
Marc - Just reread your post and see that there is not a way to close the files. That leaves me with two questions.
1. What would it take to add the feature?
2. If it is too much effort, how about the ability to "Lock" the files, and prevent (unplaned) updates to the individual parts.
I have been thinking about arranging an orchestral work for full concert band - that could mean 30 or more open parts once they were completed - sounds pretty unwieldy to me.
Thanks for your time and assistance.
Well, it is possible to save all the parts as separate files (with File -> Export Parts…) and then delete the linked parts from the main score (with File -> Parts…). Does that fulfill your wishes?
For what is worth, in principle, I tend to agree with the OP: once created, separate parts tend to slow down the performance visibly. I never worked with as many parts as the OP (max 6, IIRC), but my files tend to be longish.
Also, it is common for me too that parts require extensive editing, which cannot be expected to be performed 'automagically' by the programme; for instance, incipits are not required on parts and need to be deleted from them, and so on. For all its usefulness, the concept of linked separate parts has its drawbacks.
However, as Marc hinted above, simply closing the visible window(s) containing the part(s) would not be really useful (assuming it was possible): as only the visible window tab (the one you are working on) is actually drawn, the separate part windows are not drawn when the current window is the whole score window and hiding these tabs would not save any CPU cycle; on the other hand, parts should be there somewhere in memory to accept the changes made to the whole score, so the overhead of propagating score changes to parts or part changes to score (which is what really slow down the perceived performance) cannot be avoided.
ZackTheCardshark's suggestion might be useful or not, depending in the workflow of the individual engraver and / or on the size / complexity of the individual score: saving the parts as separate files and removing them from the main score file forfaits the very purpose of linked parts and will leave any editing unsync-ed between score and parts, which should be re-sync-ed by hand. There might be occasions where this is preferable to having lots of (long) parts hanging around, but these are probably the exceptions, more than the rule.
Coming to the OP requests:
"1. What would it take to add the feature?"
1a) In a sense, it is already possible, see ZackTheCardshark's suggestion above.
1b) However, parts which are not updated with changes to the score are no longer real parts, but just separate and independent files lying somewhere on the disk, whose contents by accident happen to be related to the contents of the score (in other words, you/we know they are parts of that score, but this 'feature' would prevent the software to know this as well).
"2. If it is too much effort, how about the ability to "Lock" the files, and prevent (unplaned) updates to the individual parts. "
2a) See comment 1b) above!
2b) The word "unplanned" above subsumes pages and pages of discussions...!
The best compromise I could find so far is to defer part creation as much as possible, at least after all the music have been entered and proofread, all lyrics -- if present -- added, all segmentations (line breaks, section breaks, ...) and as much of the layout as possible defined. From that point on, editing should be minimal (just catching errors) and the overhead manageable.
In reply to For what is worth, in by Miwarre
Indeeed, linked parts currently come with a performance penalty with the need to basically lay the whole score out twice for every change, and simply hiding the tab wouldn't address that. On the other hand, there is definitely a desire to find ways of improving performance by limiting what needs to be laid out on each change, so hoepfully at some point parts become a non-issue performance-wise.
There is also a desire to have non-linked parts that are truly separate scores that are nonetheless still saved / loaded with the main score. It's on my list of things I am looking at for 2.1. That and/or the ability to break links for individual elements within parts. It's still an open question how this might work, and I'd love to hear more about the use cases people envision for it. Incipits are something I had not thought of. Seems that use case is similar to the case recently mentioned about wanting cues in the parts but not the score.
BTW, to the extent th part tabs are visual clutter, the problem I see with allowing them to close would be having an interface to open them again and needing to go through it and thus losing whatever time you save not needing to scroll through the lsit of parts to find the one you want to work on. But if the tabs could be rearranged, or perhaps collapsed or grouped, that could be interesting.
In reply to Indeeed, linked parts by Marc Sabatella
OK, I'm beginning to think that Linked Parts was not the best thought out new feature in Version 2.0.
Here's why I say that. On the plus side, it makes the link between updates in the score, and in the individual parts "seamless". I make a change to the score, and it's taken care of in the individual parts. Who could ask for more. Whenever I make a change, I don't have to worry about the individual parts.
But what about someone who doesn't want/need this overhead? Version 1 allowed us to create the part, then close it. If I need to "freeze" a version of a work and then experiment with a different idea, I possibly don't want to have everything done in the parts at the same time. It has been suggested that deleting the parts would work, and it does to a point, but it is not a very elegant solution for an otherwise outstanding program.
Having the parts open all the time also has the potential to destroy the "tweaking" that goes on to make the parts perfect. And as someone else has pointed out, tweaking is needed; it is not realistic to expect "automagic formating" to be perfect - at least I don't expect it.
One test I haven't run yet is to determine what happens to stuff that gets deleted from a part? Does it get added back in when it is determined to be missing? For example, My scores for large works include a title page - basic stuff like the name/composer/arranger in a larger font, then a brief description of the work, historical notes, etc. - stuff that might show up in program notes. None of this is needed or wanted on an individual part, well the program notes, that is - the font sizes and centering for title/composer/arranger are needed, but not in the same place. Are these going to be changed all the time too?
I don't understand the difficulty here. (And before you dismiss me as a moron, let me add that I worked for 35 years as a systems programmer and technical support person, writing and modifying software on many different platforms). What I am asking for is the ability to create the parts, arrange the notes as needed, and then close the files. Make this an option - not everyone will use it, or need it, but those of us that do will find it very helpful.
Let me close by passing on a bit of knowledge I learned from the developer of a software package that had a very large following in its day. The developer spent many, many hours developing a product that he thought would save countless programmers a lot of time, and make there lives much easier. And he succeeded, but in ways he never imagined. For what he discovered was that when the software was put in front of real life users, they discovered that while it could do all the things the developer thought of, there were many, many other things that could be done with the software that, although he had developed it, had never imagined. AND THAT IS A GOOD THING!
I believe MuseScore falls into that category exactly. Yes it can write all kinds of music - lead sheets, combos, jazz tunes, Bach works, etc. etc. etc. Allow the software to be as flexible as all of your users are. Marc, I am more than amazed that you spend all the time that you do on the product, but please don't try to understand every possible way that the software can be used - it can't be done. I am a firm believer that you have created a masterpiece. But don't try to limit what I need or want to do if it is at all avoidable, especially when there are overhead issues and constraints that make the need questionable.
I have taken much time here than what I intended. Keep up the good work.
In reply to OK, I'm beginning to think by tbdbitl
If you don't what the overhead, don't generated linked parts, but do it the same way as in 1.3
In reply to OK, I'm beginning to think by tbdbitl
I appreciate your comments, they should be helpful as we continue to develop MuseScore.
I don't think it is fair to say the feature is "not well thought out", though. I find it *extremely* well thought out, and I believe it *exactly* fits the desired use cases for probably 99% of users. But indeed, as with any feature in any product, there are always those 1% who, for whatever reason, have different requirements from the norm.
It sounds to me like the ability to break the link between score and parts will address your special needs, and that is a feature I plan to work on. But you can do this already - simply save your part to a separate file. Or use File / Export Parts to save them all at once. So if you don't want changes to a score reflected in a part, you can have that behavior already.
In reply to OK, I'm beginning to think by tbdbitl
So, I think what I suggested at https://musescore.org/en/node/69891#comment-319326 would fulfill your wishes very well, then.