MuseScore 4.1 is now available!
We are delighted to announce our first major update to MuseScore 4 since it launched last year.
This update includes a significant upgrade to our playback engine (making the app run more efficiently) plus new features for harp and guitar notation, the ability to customise ornaments, new auxiliary channel strips in the mixer, and hundreds of engraving improvements and bug fixes, plus much more!
A huge thank you to the dedicated MuseScore community for supporting this release with implementation, testing and translating. We hope you enjoy this latest version and are excited to hear your feedback!
All the best from,
The MuseScore team.
How to get MuseScore 4.1
I already use MuseScore
You will receive a notification to update to 4.1 next time you launch the app.
If you have the Muse Hub on your computer, you'll automatically get the latest version when you open MuseScore from within the Hub.
I'm new to MuseScore
Download the latest version from musescore.org. The app can be downloaded with or without installing Muse Hub.
Watch the release video
New features in MuseScore 4.1
- New engraving and playback support for ornaments, including the ability to set custom alterations for trills, turns and mordents
- A major improvement to the app's performance
- A dedicated new default reverb, which can be adjusted for each instrument track as well as globally across the entire mix
- New auxiliary sends in the mixer, allowing instrument tracks to be routed to dedicated auxiliary channel strips for applying audio effects
- New engraving and playback support for capos on guitar staves
- New feature for displaying harp pedal diagrams
- Dynamics and expression text now automatically combine, plus new controls for scaling and positioning dynamics
- New live braille feature where the selected measure is displayed in braille music notation in a panel below the score and on connected braille displays*
- Upload audio directly to audio.com, allowing you to build a portfolio of your audio content to share with the world
- View and open your online scores from musescore.com directly from the desktop app
Other updates
- Save to cloud: option to make a score "unlisted"
- Publish to musescore.com: option to either replace the existing published score, or publish the score as a new file
- New loading screen when opening multiple instances of the app
- Fixed syllable-based pasting of lyrics
- A more reliable VST scanning process
- Around 100 engraving fixes and improvements (Read this article on musescore.org for a complete list)
- Numerous bug fixes
Known incompatibilities
- *May not work correctly with certain braille displays on macOS. We aim to address any incompatibilities in future releases.
Comments
Congratulations!
For anyone wanting an in-depth demo, feel free to tune into my MuseScore Café live stream today (Wednesday, July 12) at 12:30 PM Eastern - https://community.masteringmusescore.com/live/musescore-cafe/public (no login required to view). You'll also be able to check out the replay later in https://community.masteringmusescore.com/c/cafe-archive/
In reply to Congratulations! For anyone… by Marc Sabatella
Hi Marc,
No copy to your youtube channel anymore afterwards?
In reply to Hi Marc, No copy to your… by graffesmusic
Yes, that too.
Yay! It does have much better audio. I tried my largest score and it worked with multiple Musescores up and there were no popping noises until I used other apps which is much better than before. Two problems so far though, On the main app, the first one that pops up, the logo isn't there and on the same one a score that I'm trying to save to the cloud is stuck on saving online.
In reply to Yay! It does have much… by beniegenie
Ok, I think I fixed it. I had to force quit it though. It worked in the other Musescores I had up. I guess it was just a temporary glitch.
In reply to Yay! It does have much… by beniegenie
Regarding the missing logo on startup, I saw that on one of my Linux systems at first, then it went away. Might have to do with the system caching images or something, not sure. If you continue to see that, best to open a new thread in the Support forum and provide more details.
In reply to Regarding the missing logo… by Marc Sabatella
I'm not seeing either of the problems now.
This is fantastic news. Thank you! I tested the RC and it seemed much more solid than 4.0.2.
Linux Mint user here. The MuseScore update feature downloaded the new version, then I closed the app when prompted, after which my downloads folder displayed containing the .AppImage. I assume this is by design, but because I'm using the Flatpak release I will look forward to updating MuseScore through the Linux Mint Update Manager when available.
In reply to This is fantastic news… by daveburkevt
This is a a pretty janky way of doing things honestly I was surprised to see an update offered since I’ve installed MS through an official repository. I wasn’t keen to try the update since two-timing your package manager is not usually a good idea.
If it’s just an Appimage, that’s fine, but just downloading it without asking where and then dumping the user in a file manager with potentially a long, random list of files in front of them, is not exactly the acme of user interactions.
Also, for me, out-of-the-box the Appimage doesn’t play any sounds.
In reply to This is a a pretty janky way… by Moilleadóir
Can you explain what you mean in more detail? If a third party provides their own build of MuseScore in one of their repositories, that’s their right but is out of MuseScore’s control. Indeed often those builds don’t work well and are very often way out of date. Which is the whole reason we started providing AppImage builds in the first place.
But if you’re encountering some sort of issue with the official AppImage, please start a new thread in the support forum and describe the problem in more detail there.
In reply to Can you explain what you… by Marc Sabatella
“Often these builds don’t work well”
I have no idea what you base this on. It’s certainly possible for anything to happen when a program is packaged, but if you’re going to make wild generalisations like that you should back them up with some data.
If the Appimage is now the recommended format, that’s fine, but since I don’t have a problem with the version installed by the package manager, but I do with the Appimage (no sound), there’s not much incentive for me to change or to spend time debugging it for you. Appimage only distribution would also further entrench a second-class status for Linux though (due to lack of integration out-of-the-box), but fine.
It is still disconcerting for the user to have something labelled an upgrade when it’s just downloading a file and opening a file manager. That’s not an upgrade. It doesn’t integrate with menus, launchers, panels, etc. or anything in the OS or window manager, it’s just a disconnected file that you can run.
A better distribution-agnostic format for Linux would be flatpak, which does integrate but is probably a little more complicated to set up.
In reply to “Often these builds don’t… by Moilleadóir
"if the appimage is now the recommended format"
It has always been the recommended format, in fact it has always been the only provided format by the MuseScore team, therefore the only format for which they can guarantee that the compilation options and the dependencies were correct.
You are of course free to use MuseScore compiled by anybody else, including yourself with potentially your own fixes, but the version on which they can work and fix reported bugs is the appimage.
In reply to "if the appimage is now the… by frfancha
Which is a bit self-defeating. E.g. if I don’t use (or have need of) the appimage then I can never report a bug?
The people most likely to report a bug are probably not the ones using the appimage.
I’m still not sure that the update procedure is that great even if you start from an appimage. Does it use AppImageUpdate? Does it update the file in-place? Does it require the user to construct their own scripts/.desktop files to run some changing version-named filename downloaded to some random folder?
AppImage has its virtues, but it’s very messy compared to flatpak, snap or distro packaging. It’s not a guarantee of a good user experience.
In reply to Which is a bit self… by Moilleadóir
For me I think AppImage is "cleaner" than those other formats (well not the distro package, I guess). Both snap and flat pack require a bunch of dependencies and I always have trouble with them living in their little sandboxes where they can't access certain areas that I actually want them to be able to access sometimes. I still report bugs with the AppImage, what's stopping you?
In reply to For me I think AppImage is … by reddiesel41264
As previously explained, I have no need. I’ve always used the distro version and it works fine. I would have to do some extra work to integrate the AppImage.
A difference between AppImage and flatpak (or snap) is that flatpak can share some of those dependencies between programs, making the installed size smaller, but each AppImage has to include everything. Flatpak & snap also have better integration out-of-the-box & easy/automatic upgrades.
This is way off-track anyway. My point is that the upgrade experience is not optimal and makes some assumptions about how the app is installed. Maybe someone will take that feedback onboard, maybe not, but there’s not much value in having a format feud.
In reply to "if the appimage is now the… by frfancha
Well, not quite "always"!!!
Musescore did not begin using Appimage for Linux until version 2.0.3 in April of 2016. Before that you could either compile your own or depend upon the distributors for your version of Linux.
The Appimage works quite well and is a huge improvement over the previous method of distribution. A much better choice than Flatpak.
In reply to “Often these builds don’t… by Moilleadóir
The statement "Often these builds don’t work well" is based on my 12 years of development experience on the MuseScore project. Virtually every single release of MuseScore, one or more Linux distributions has included a build that simply doesn't work correctly due to things like wrong build flags, incorrect versions of dependencies, missing files, etc. Plus of course, often the repositories are just plain out of date, still delivering years-old versions.
Throughout the early history of MuseScore this made for an unacceptably poor experience for our Linux users (including myself), and that's why we took on the additional work of building and delivering ourselves in AppImage format - sometime during the MuseScore 2 lifecycle as I recall. So there is nothing new about using AppImage - it's been the main supported way of obtaining current and correctly-built versions of MuseScore - including all MuseScore 3.x and 4.x versions.
AppImages do - or can, anyhow - integrate with your desktop environment (menu, etc). Simply run from the command line with the "install" option and it installs normally - creating a desktop file, placing icons in the correct locations, setting up MIME types etc - the whole deal. Run with the "update" option to update, and that works beautifully, automatically downloading the new version and installing in place. Not all AppImages support these features, but MuseScore certainly does.
So anyhow, if the version from your package manager happens to be current and to work correctly for the current release, great! But in general, if you encounter problems that don't seem to occur for other people, know that this is indeed a possible cause. And that the AppImage is a likely fix.
Quick question, did 4.1 switch over to QT6 or is that coming on a future update?
In reply to Quick question, did 4.1… by Joshua Pettus
No, it is still on Qt 5.15.2
In reply to No, it is still on Qt 5.15.2 by Jojo-Schmitz
Thanks! That's actually good news for my purposes! I don't have to figure out how to get QT6 working on PiOS just yet :)
Though makes me think they didn't have to drop all those OSs if it they were just going to stick with QT5 for so long. But hey, hindsight is always 20/20
In reply to No, it is still on Qt 5.15.2 by Jojo-Schmitz
What does QT mean?
In reply to What does QT mean? by beniegenie
Qt is the GUI framework that MuseScore uses.
In reply to Qt is the GUI framework that… by bb94
What is GUI?
In reply to What is GUI? by beniegenie
Graphical User Interface. It's the software that manages the windows and their contents, like icons, buttons, menus etc
In reply to Graphical User Interface. It… by peter.edwards
Ok. Thank you! I like to know that stuff so this helps me a lot.
maybe finally this will run better on my pc
In reply to maybe finally this will run… by threffyboi
It works better for mine. I can actually do stuff when it's playing. I used by largest score, a ten minute long one with over twenty instruments and I heard no popping sounds with the playback until I had the mixer open and I was using Safari.
This is a REALLY important upgrade
Yes!
No jack audio and midi for linux yet?
In reply to No jack audio and midi for… by alextone
MIDI should work, JACK won't though
In reply to MIDI should work, JACK won't… by Jojo-Schmitz
Jojo, i did mean jack midi as well as jack audio.
I think we've all got the message though. I continue to appreciate your work on 3.7. Thanks.
In reply to No jack audio and midi for… by alextone
Sorry, not yet.
This might end up needing to be something we ask developers in the community to help out with.
This could be added to the "list" of missing functionality for Linux (Incl. VST and LV2, which are currently on our Community Projects board: https://github.com/orgs/musescore/projects/30).
In reply to Sorry, not yet. This might… by bradleykunda
Are there any Linux devs on the Muse team?
In reply to Are there any Linux devs on… by reddiesel41264
Yes
Good afternoon,
after several attemps it is not possible to load Musescore 4.1.0.231921402-x86_64 on my computer. The announcment tells me that the type of processor dose not fit. The same problem with loading the Muse-hub.
This app cannot be loaded on my computer with the windows-10 Home program version 22H2.
Please tell me wat I have to do because this program is very important for me.
With kind regards.
N.S.J. Hoogland the Netherlands
mail to: nico.sj.hoogland@upcmail.nl
In reply to Good afternoon, after… by N.S.J. Hoogland
I'm assuming we still still don't have JACK compatibility back then.
In reply to I'm assuming we still still… by mrmjb
Excuse my ignorance, aren't all the major distros moving to pipewire these days anyway? And then if they are implementing VST support in linux, where does JACK fit in I wonder? I guess what I am curious of is how do you find jack useful for musescore? Speaking for myself, JACK always seemed like a real neat thing for what it's designed to do (I.E orchestrating many inputs at low latency in a live audio setting), but for Musescore terms I never could find a practical use for it that I couldn't already simply do with ALSA Midi. But I always figured someone must have a use for it, I was always curious what that was.
In reply to Aren't all the major distros… by Joshua Pettus
I really don't think that jack is on the radar anyway.
And 'they' in "And then if they are implementing VST support in linux" is the 'the community'. Meaning that the core team will not do it. It will only be done if someone else does it.
In reply to I really don't think that… by graffesmusic
I don't think anyone can definitely say that the core team would never choose to do it, but clearly it can get done a lot sooner if someone in the broader community volunteers. And to be clear, that is precisely how MuseScore has always worked. There has always been a tiny core of programmers implementing the overall framework (for many years it was literally two people) and then hundreds of community volunteers adding features, fixing bugs, and generally keeping things running smoothly. The same is true of most open source software in fact. It's indeed what open source software is all about.
In reply to I really don't think that… by graffesmusic
Yep, that seems to be the unfortunate reality for linux users. Werner built jack into muse/musescore originally, as THE core dev. He realized the importance of jack. That no longer seems to be the case.
In reply to Yep, that seems to be the… by alextone
Genuinely curious, what is the importance of JACK for MuseScore? Most of the professional audio engineers I know use Macs, and never even heard of it. The protocols they use are Apple AU or VST. JACK seems to be a very niche product even among audio people.
Hot take perhaps: we Linux users are always very vocal about our tech, but we are a tiny fraction of the wider world. I can't say we always advocate to push our small resources in a way that is the most effective for the most people.
In reply to Genuinely curious, what is… by Joshua Pettus
JACK is pretty flexible and can be used for multiple purposes that involve connecting applications, but in particular, on Linux, it's the primary way one might take MIDI output of MuseScore and route it to the input of a DAW, or sync with a video player, etc. It is or has been available on WIndows and macOS but it's indeed not as well-known.
As far as I personally am concerned, JACK is more a means to an end than something I care about in itself. I'm personally more concerned with seeing those sorts of connections made equally simple on all platforms than I am about which specific protocol is used on any one given platform. But perhaps others have other uses for JACK they'd like to clarify.
And yes, it's true that because MuseScore originally ran on Linux only and was forked from a Linux-only sequencer, it of course relied on Linux-only MIDI and audio protocols from day one. On the other hand, it had zero support whatsoever for Windows or macOS until the user community became involved and ported it. And even after the original core team was in place, without the contributions from the community, MuseScore would not have had support for tablature, accessibility, chord symbol parsing and playback, customizable fretboard diagrams, slash notation, single note dynamics, MusicXML import or export, or dozens of other features we all take for granted. This was all done by the community.
Again, the involvement of the community is a huge part of what has made MuseScore what it is over the past 20 years. Expecting the core team to implement every single feature anyone might possibly want just isn't reasonable - it isn't how open source software works. And that's a good thing, as it allows us all to take some ownership and play a role in shaping MuseScore, and frees the core team to do more.
In reply to JACK is pretty flexible and… by Marc Sabatella
Thanks for this. There was a lot there I didn't know. Love how large and committed the community is for MS.
R
IPOWilliam
In reply to Aren't all the major distros… by Joshua Pettus
No problem. I will answer under my own experience. I really need Jack MIDI for musescore (i use 3.6) because is the Audio system I use. Simply. I dont want bridges. I dont want to enable/disable the server. AND I WANT ALL MY JACK AUDIO APPS RUNNING WHEN I WRITE SHEET MUSIC. (Reaper, Audacious, Carla, etc.). We love Routing. We love programming. We love Music. We love Recording. We love producing. And we love Linux. So JACK is the answer. Pipewire?? No I have no time. Maybe someday.
Excuse also my ignorance, aren´t Musescore seed on the Linux Pro Audio community? I dont know any musician friend using Linux, and all of them (windows and Mac) Uses SIBELIUS. (I think I'd probably use also because some useful features like adding staffs just in some parts of the sheet). But anyway, It seems the deveolpers target are the Sibelius market and had forget the basis that represents JACK MIDI musicians, but again, Excuse my ignorance
In reply to I'm assuming we still still… by mrmjb
Really appreciate the replies and history lesson folks. Personally I would like to see JACK support back firstly because I use it with JACK all the time and secondly just ideologically it seems a backward step for music production on Linux. Unfortunately the contributions I can make to open source projects are limited to advocacy and financial - I'm not the person to be trying to implement this feature.
My own use case is that I like to compose by recording stuff and then transcribe it later - I do a lot of writing backing vocals in particular like this. So I'll have JACK and Ardour running and record into that then have MS3 open connected via jack sharing plugins and midi keyboards so that I can quickly switch into MS3 to transcribe as I go.
In terms of the wider music production on linux - this is not something I know a lot about and I'm happy to be told I'm wrong - I believe that to be considered a professional production ready environment for film (multimedia I guess) there are a number of tools that the environment must have and they must be able to connect to one another and linux was able to tick every box but no longer because now the scoring software is unable to connect with the other bits.
As regards Pipewire - again not something I know lots about and again please let me know where I'm getting things wrong - my understanding is that it will solve a lot of audio problems and remove a lot of the need for JACK but I don't think it's production ready yet and I'm also pretty sure I remember Paul Davies saying that there'll still be some niche use cases that pipewire won't solve and which JACK will still be necessary for - I don't think he elaborated on that but he does know his stuff and I'm inclined to believe what he says.
I do think it's a real shame that JACK support is gone but MS is great software and this release is smashing and I still advocate strongly for MuseScore over anything else - I always recommend it to my students and colleagues.
Congratulations and a big thank you to everyone involved in the development <3
In reply to Congratulations and a big… by takatuka
Yes, and that also includes the actively contributing and patient users in the MuseScore community.
Hooray! So happy that MuseScore is progressing so wonderfully with so much support behind it!
I did notice that when adding articulations, the system has gone back to the "On or Off", rather than the new three-stage "Some, All, or None" method that was introduced in 4.0. Is this a permanent change? If so, is there room to add the ability to switch that input mode back on? I found it to be super useful, and it'd be a shame to see it go.
In reply to Hooray! So happy that… by Dionne Hendricks
Can you explain what you mean in more detail? The only change I am aware of to how articulations are added has to do with how combined articulations like tenuto-staccato are handled - they can now be positioned independently with improved automatic layout. I don't know what "some" means in this context, though.
In reply to Can you explain what you… by Marc Sabatella
I've put an explanation in the attached file.
In reply to I've put an explanation in… by Dionne Hendricks
Hmm, sounds like 4.0 - 4.0.2 had a bug that is fixed now as the command was always meant to toggle, but maybe there was a specific exception made on purpose? There was a different change made to how the articulation commands work and maybe this was just a side effect - that I'm not sure of.
Anyhow, the usual way to remove all the articulations from a selection would be to first select them (eg, click the first, Shift+click the last) then press Delete. Or use Select / More to make more complex selections. This also has the advantage of being the same method you'd use to delete other types of markings as well (eg, dynamics, chord symbols, etc).
For further questions about how to use MuseScore, best to ask on the Support forum.
Hello there!!! I just want to know what to do because in my laptop musescore crashes all time. It doesn't run correctly, so I can't work on it. When I try to work it freezes alomost evey 5 min, and then 20 seconds later it beguins to work. What should I do? Do I have to download another thing to make it work correctly? I downloaded 4.1 hopping it would be fixed but it is still that problem. Any help, please. Thanx.
I hope this 4.1 update fixes the playback selection problem where it plays only the track selected instead of the whole score. This poorly thought out change has kept me at Musescore 3.6.2.
In reply to I hope this 4.1 update fixes… by guyfrosty
That's a feature, not a bug. Works the same way in Sibelius, I think, and is a fast and easy way to solo a part or a selection. To avoid it, just select a note rather than a track, and it will play back the complete score. You'll get new habits quickly, I'm sure :-)
In reply to I hope this 4.1 update fixes… by guyfrosty
This feature was actually included briefly in a version of Musescore 3.x. I find it's incredibly useful. Perhaps they could include an option to disable though for people who prefer not to use it.
In reply to This feature was actually… by reddiesel41264
There’s never a time when it’s not useful to have this ability, so instead of disabling it, what makes sense to me is to simply to have two playback commands, one that solos the selection and the other that doesn’t. Then at any moment you choose the one you want rather than needing to constantly enabling and disable something. Or something like that.
In reply to There’s never a time when it… by Marc Sabatella
If I remember correctly Sibelius did/does this. Space to play selected, Ctrl+Space to play all
In reply to I hope this 4.1 update fixes… by guyfrosty
As mentioned, it’s standard in lots of software and I promise you’ll adjust to selecting a note or pressing Esc before starting playback if you stick with it. Totally worth it for the convenience of the feature as well as the incredible improvements in both playback and engraving.
Good morning! I've been using Musescore 3. Everything works fine. I'm very happy with the results. So I installed Musescore 4. But the sound is dragged, broken, fragmented. I have 64 bit AMD. Could someone evaluate the reason for the fragmented sound?
Thanks!
Dante
In reply to Good morning! I've been… by trakumplish
It helps to not use other apps while you're using MuseScore 4.1. However it's a lot better than MuseScore 4.0.2.
In reply to Good morning! I've been… by trakumplish
Find your audio device settings and be sure the sample rate is 44.1 kHz. Then if you still have trouble try increasing the MuseScore buffer size in Edit / Preferences / I/O
Have you fixed the problem with selecting sound patches in the sf2 and sf3 soundfont?
In reply to Have you fixed the problem… by likemat496
We aim to provide the ability to select specific sounds within a soundfont in the next release. Please see: https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/17233.
Sorry for the delay on this, and thank you for your patience!
In reply to Have you fixed the problem… by likemat496
I'm very much looking forward to this! Meanwhile, though, note you can still select individual sounds as long as the soundfont is packaged as separate files for each sound rather than one "monolithic" file. I have provided a ZIP file for MS Basic that does exactly this - see https://community.masteringmusescore.com/c/resources/ms-basic-individua…. There are also free tools you can download to split any other "monolithic" soundfont into separate files for similarly easy use. And on Windows and macOS. you can use the free Sforzando VST to access sounds.
Wow, love to see all these new updates! Just some quick comments:
-Musescore won't open after the update because is trying to open the Waves vst3s, i have to manually remove them every time i use the app and and reinsert them if i wanna use them in my daw. (in b4, yes, the license is up to date)
-I was trying the partial capos feature, im amazed to finally see it in musescore and im looking forward to using it a ton, BUT, it bothers me that i can't put a full capo AND a partial one, as in full capo in 2nd fret and partial capo in 4th fret (if i can, i haven't figured out how). I know i could just transpose the score up to match the full capo and then use the partial capo funtion, but this is one of the things that make guitar pro more comfortable to use when writing weird guitar parts.
Anyways, nitpicks aside, great work and thanks for everything!
Hello, I must say I love MuseScore as it is an amazing and clean notation software, and with MuseScore 4, the sound library has expanded greatly, as if there is an actual live orchestra playing your projects. I would like to ask something about the sounds - I myself am an accordionist, and I see that the sound library for free reed instruments has not been updated in MuseScore 4. I understand that getting a better sound for free reed instruments such as the accordion may be difficult, but do you have any plans on adding a better sound, complete with working registers? Cheers
Actually, it's cool, of course. I was happy to take advantage of the reverb. And you can finally choose where to upload the file (to an existing file or create a new one)
But compared to the previous version I now have bad midi export. I exported midi before 4.1 and everything was fine. But now I do it and the following happens. The synthesizer notes disappear altogether. And the piano notes get changed. The program FULLY ignores strokes, tremolo, fills (plays as normal eighth notes), accents and so on.
So I'll have to somehow roll back to the old version now to try to export midi again.
In reply to Actually, it's cool, of… by RaptorTV
I checked and really on the previous MuseScore version (4.0.2.) the MIDI is exported normally. All fills, tremolos, etc. work as they should. The program takes them into account when exporting. (I remind you that in 4.1. Musescore bail on it / give up on it).
Please, correct the flaw! :(
In reply to I checked and really on the… by RaptorTV
If you are experiencing a problem with MIDI export, please open an issue on GitHub - https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues. When you do so, attach the score you are having trouble with (you'll need to ZIP it first) and describe exactly how to reproduce the problem.
i found an issue on mac with this update: it’s crashing when i open my online score(s) and, when i change the playback to musesounds it’s crashing. the device is mbp 2018 with ventura 13.4
when i tried on my lenovo windows laptop it is fine (used the same mscz). tried re-installing musescore via musehub and without musehub doesn’t seem fix the issue. does anyone facing this issue? how to fix this?
In reply to i found an issue on mac with… by RheinNabeel
Did you update to 4.1.1? It prevents crashing and reduces lagging, allowing you to listen to your scores while using other apps.
In reply to Did you update to 4.1.1? It… by beniegenie
yes, the issue is in 4.1.1
In reply to yes, the issue is in 4.1.1 by RheinNabeel
Please open a new thread in the Support forum and attach the score you are having trouble with and steps to reproduce the problem, so we can try to confirm.
In reply to Please open a new thread in… by Marc Sabatella
https://musescore.org/en/node/352993
Excellent! MU4.1 is performing much more than 60% better for my setup. Thanks!
I am glad to see new handling of multiple instances of the app. But I can't see anything different.
In reply to I am glad to see new… by griffin25
It’s not new handling per se, just a new “loading” dialog to replace the old splash screen that would appear for each instance - to make it seems less like something is going wrong.
In reply to It’s not new handling per se… by Marc Sabatella
Ah yes I see. Thanks Marc
Possible bug? Is anyone else having a weird playback issue with appoggiaturas (grace note slurred to the main note?) since upgrading from v.4 to 4.1? The issue I have, since the upgrade, is that both notes will hold on for the entire bar - see screenshot attached. In the screenshot, the notation for Tpt.1 is what I want to hear (and was hearing before the upgrade), but Tpt.2 is showing an example of what I'm actually hearing from Trt.1. Is this the same for everyone??
In reply to Possible bug? Is anyone… by rewright1
Sorry to hear you're having problems! It's hard to say much from just a picture, but if start a new thread in the Support forum and attach the score itself, we can take a look and advise further.
Only reason I don’t used musescore 4 and I still use 3.6 is cuz it lags. If you guys could make a feature so note input was faster or manually set how much ram and CPU it can use that would be nice so it is less laggy. Also more drumline features. I use MdL and idk if muse. 4 has it also.
In reply to Only reason I don’t used… by jamsch5188
Can you explain more about what you mean by "lags"? Lag between what action and what reaction, specifically? What OS, and what system specs (CPU, RAM, graphics & audio device)?
MDL isn't yet supported in MU4 but should be in a future update.
In reply to Can you explain more about… by Marc Sabatella
As in like when I place a note down in the staff. The delay before the note actually appears in Mu4 vs Mu3 is slightly slower and made inputting notes slightly annoying,
But that was probably just the change from m3 to 4.
In reply to Can you explain more about… by Marc Sabatella
I have 16gb ram, intel i7, RTX 3060, and just my speakers/headphones. I’m running it on Windows 10
In reply to Only reason I don’t used… by jamsch5188
MDL works well in MU4 (on Windows) but requires a slight work-around. Here is how you can use MDL in MU4:
Download and install MDL in MU3.
Run MU4. On the Home or StartUp page, select "Open other..."
That is all there is to it! It takes longer to type it out than it does to actually do it.
At what point will the Version 4 compatible scores open in the ipad app please? It's a pain having to go back to a PC just to open and export stuff back to the ipad again
Hi,
I use Musescore to write scores, a lot of the time! Version 4.1 is very cool, stable, ok !!! I would like to know how to use it with tabs and a single instance. Current version appimage 4.11...
Thank you for your help!
Ismar
In reply to Hi, I use Musescore to write… by ismarrussano
You are unable to use tabs in MuseScore 4, except for with separate parts.
In reply to You are unable to use tabs… by beniegenie
Yes, that's right!
In reply to You are unable to use tabs… by beniegenie
Ok !!!
Thanks
when the f is there even gonna be a new update?? unless the so-called "staff" at Musescore have just been vacationing this whole time (I wouldn't be surprised), it's been almost 4 or 5 months already.
In reply to when the f is there even… by PianXtremeYT
Um, have you not been actually following this Announcements forum? 4.2 is in beta, probably will be releasing any day now. But also, 4-5 months between release is not at all unusual. In the past releases have rarely come faster than that. MuseScore 4 is actually pretty unusual in how many updates there have been in only a year. And you can always follow the progress on a daily basis by checking out the nightly builds, and the history on GitHub.
In reply to Um, have you not been been… by Marc Sabatella
mm, yes, and yet even with the update :
Any Muse sounds are still delayed when hitting the play button
Invisible engravings cant just be clicked on and made visible again, you have to move the page a little, THEN click on it, but you have to move around again to make something else visible again
there is not even a "pedal without line" thing, so I'm forced to use a rosetta which is unprofessional in different circumstances in music,
Dynamics are still awful when using two, ie MF in bass and P in Treble
The piano keyboard setting doesn't play like MS3 does, flashing when nots are changed.
Arpegios still fckd when trying to use them in more than one voice in the same stave
There isn't even a fucking soft pedal feature
Using muse sounds limits you to ONLY play as loud as whatever dynamic you choose, and the velocity of that dynamic can't be changed and is stuck to 64.
Need I go on, no.
Go ahead and run you guys' software, site, and nonsense however y'all want; I quite frankly just find it sad that after 4 months very little has been done, and the issues that are most common like these STILL haven't been fixed.
These are common issues, and all I get is literally as if I am still using MS 4.1
So whatever...idc
In reply to mm, yes, and yet even with… by PianXtremeYT
I think you need to calm down a bit. This is free software that’s primarily for scoring/printing music. The fact that you can also play that music is an added extra. I’m sure we’d all like it to be better, but if you’re not involved in development you can’t judge how difficult or how long these things take to implement.
Even paid software is not guaranteed to fix everything you want in four months.
If you want total control over MIDI you should be using a MIDI program, not one for musical notation.
In reply to mm, yes, and yet even with… by PianXtremeYT
Invisible elements can be selected directly if you haven't turned off the option to show invisible elements.
If you prefer the pedal symbol with no line and also no rosette, just clear the end text for the version with the rosette. You can also customize the text and symbols to notate una corda.
Muse Sounds is still new and improving steadily, but be aware you can get more customization (eg, for velocity) if you switch to a soundfont if you should need it.
Improvements to arpeggio and dynamics playback and other features are in the works. Profanity won't speed the process. Meanwhile, should you have other questions about how to use MuseScore, feel free to start new threads in the Support forum.