SOME MINOR EASY-TO-IMPLEMENT SUGGESTED UPDATES FOR MUSESCORE:

• Oct 13, 2020 - 12:09

All the recommendations listed here seem minor, but all combined can save a lot of time and energy and considerably increase the speed and ease of using MuseScore (and add a plus of elegance and normality to it).

  1. I’ve noticed that you have the “R” shortcut-key when opening the File menu, BUT you don’t have the “S” shortcut (for “Save”) and “A” shortcut (for “Save as”) which are very useful sub-shortcuts used in many types of software: it is quite curious how MuseScore reached its 3.4 version without these almost “elementary” meniu-shortcuts. The same for the common dialog when exiting MuseScore without saving: the message box has different options but without ALT+letter shortcuts for different options (which are usually used under all versions of Windows, Office applications etc): that is why I suggest that such high mouse-dependence should be solved in the future versions of MuseScore.

  2. I also recommend the implementation of the F2 shortcut key for renaming any system or staff text, including chord (it is much easier than using the double left-click of the mouse so often).

  3. I also recommend using the “4” (number) shortcut-key for the crochet (quarter) because of its mnemonics “4” as ¼ (quarter), “5“ for double, 3 for eighth/quaver etc: it will surely worth sacrificing the shortcuts for the 64th and for the 128th in respect to this simple basic mnemonics of “4”=1/4 (quarter).

  4. When entering notes in “N-mode” (initiated by pressing “N”) directly from the keyboard there is a problem in my opinion: when you’ve entered a note with wrong duration (other duration that you’ve meant) an return (with the left arrow) to that note and try to modify its duration using the durations shortcuts (3,4,5, etc) you cannot directly modify that (wrongly chosen) duration other than by exiting the N-mode (with N-key), modify the duration and then re-entering the N-mode again. That is a major drawback of MuseScore when writing directly from the keyboard (and having to exit and re-enter the N-mode when actually modifying a duration of a note SHOULD BE an attribute of the N-mode also).

  5. Implementation of the possibility to copy-paste a staff spacer from one measure to another would be also great, because it saves considerable time (so that the user won’t open again and again the box of spacers as long as it already has one spacer in the score and wants to copy it to other measures too).

Best regards and health possible!
Thank you in advance for implementing these features!
Dr. Andrei-Lucian Dragoi
www.dragoii.com
www.dragoii.com/gcp
www.dragoii.com/gci


Comments

Hi. I read you other post(s) with interest.

As for #4 here: when you enter the wrong duration and go back (still in insert mode) just change the duration and re-enter the note.

Have a good day.

In reply to by xavierjazz

Of course, I know this inelegant workaround you propose: it is inelegant simply because it is very time-consuming when doing it often!. Why change the duration and re-enter note when it would be more elegant and significantly times-sparing to change the duration without deleting the note? I vote for evolution and elegance, NOT for standing still in the same bugs for years. MuseScore is a jewel: I'm just trying to suggest possible refining for this jewel to become more elegant and more close to perfection. However, most people are very resistant to change, even when that change implies more programming elegance. As in medicine, we work with "client's material"!

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

  1. The proposed shortcuts for the File menu are so basic than even Notepad has them (from its first Windows 95 edition!): why not implementing them in MuseScore? Because of too much proud, maybe?! I’ve implemented them in many of my software written in Visual Basic 6 around 2000 and in the following years AND you say that they are still discussable? This is manual/ABC for any programmer applying the principle of as much mouse-independence as possible. It seems that you don’t respect one of the main/basic principles of windows programming. Hard to believe, but true! I never thought that I’ll find a programmer that rejects some basic File menu shortcuts that even Notepad has! Great proud indeed! Unless you just open Notepad’s File menu and imitate what you see by implementing those ultra-basic ALT+letter shortcuts in MS: it is so easy! However, proud seems a major inhibitor!

  2. Another user has already replied to you on this item: Windows explorer has this F2 shortcut key from Windows 95 until present AND it is much easy to use repeatedly than forever double-clicking as you suggest. It is never too late to learn from Microsoft programmers, don’t you think? Editing a textbox in a score is like renaming it, that is why! It is such a basic function that it truly deserves a one-key shortcut! My humble opinion!

  3. I’ve just found that the shortcut keys for duration are NOT true default shortcuts but can ALSO be tackled so that I can modify this setting for my own use!

  4. You’ve skipped your answer on this one, and that is why I reiterate it:
    “When entering notes in “N-mode” (initiated by pressing “N”) directly from the keyboard there is a problem in my opinion: when you’ve entered a note with wrong duration (other duration that you’ve meant) an return (with the left arrow) to that note and try to modify its duration using the durations shortcuts (3,4,5, etc) you cannot directly modify that (wrongly chosen) duration other than by exiting the N-mode (with N-key), modify the duration and then re-entering the N-mode again. That is a major drawback of MuseScore when writing directly from the keyboard (and having to exit and re-enter the N-mode when actually modifying a duration of a note SHOULD BE an attribute of the N-mode also).”

  5. You’ve skipped (intentionally?) the answer to this item, thus I reiterate it:
    “Implementation of the possibility to copy-paste a staff spacer from one measure to another would pe be also great, because it saves considerable time (so that the user won’t open again and again the box of spacers as long as it already has one spacer in the score and wants to copy it to other measures too).”

  6. I’ve also found a major bug in MS 3.5: when trying to rescale the Preferences windows (by dragging the top margin of the windows toward down) the entire window hides to the bottom of the screen and I lose control of it: my laptop has a narrower screen and I’ve discovered this bug in many sub-windows of MS 3.5.
    Regards!

In reply to by andrushkkutza

1) I don't quite get where the response and personal attack towards Jojo is coming from, as he linked you to the issue addressing this as well as a pending fix for it (by his hand even!). I fail to see how this can be considered as rejecting the idea as it is, in fact, quite the opposite

4 and 5: Is there really any value in every person addressing every item in a post if another reply already addressed it?

Also keep in mind that MuseScore is cross-platform, so yes, it won't follow all of the microsoft conventions. Can we learn from them? Yes, hell, we even hired one of their UX-designers. Should we blindly follow them? No.

In reply to by jeetee

I wish you good luck then: I've already offered you too much of my patience; my time as an MD is too valuable to still try to explain to you how much time it may gain using F2 (instead of double click), the advantages of using the CTRL+SHIFT+up/down arrows to move a note between adjacent (but distinct) instruments in an orchestral score (so that to experiment various sonorities/timbre changes), to correctly number/index the staff-lines from bottom-to-up AND to can change the duration of a note without exiting the N-mode and without deleting a note. Maybe my son (who is now 2 years old) will see those updates in MuseScore 10!
I shall keep this dialogue (saved on my hard drive) however, to can prove to anyone that "AT LEAST I TRIED, BUT DIDN'T KNOCKED DOWN THE PRIDE"! However, I'm afraid there isn't just pride, but ALSO narrowness of views in music and programming (and that is sad also). My advice is to hire a professional which has at least 10 years of experience in both programming and composing: HOWEVER, it seems that you are too proud to appreciate my 25 years of experience in each of the two (programming AND musical composing) which can give anyone a unique view on both, thus a unique view on perfecting a music editing notation software.

Regards!

In reply to by andrushkkutza

I'd just like to point out that you might consider re-reading the responses:

Both Jojo and myself agreed that having a keyboard shortcut command to enable text editing is a good idea.

I responded to your point 4 showing you no less than 4 readily available commands to change/correct the duration of a note without even having to back up the input position nor having to leave note entry mode. Consider using your precious time to actually read and try out the given response.

You also seems somehow confused about what cross-staff notation is; not just within MuseScore but musically. All cross-staff notation does is to displace notes between staves of the same instrument visually. It doesn't move notes at all, the notes remain part of the other stave and as such also of that timbre etc.. That's not just MuseScore, that's music. Cut and paste however does actually move things.
Then again, if all you want to test out is timbre, then set loop playback and change the assigned sound using the mixer. When you've found your chosen sound, you can then either cut and paste to the corresponding instrument or change the staff you were on to become that instrument.

I also highly doubt you really want to try and pull the musical and programming experience card here; as far as pride goes, that's a step up that ladder one shouldn't take. But here goes anyway; you were hoping to speak to someone with at least 10y experience in both music and programming: here I am, trying to understand your request and help you out.

Your son doesn't have to wait until MuseScore 10 for your suggestions, he'd just need the open mindset to be willing to look at the methods already present and get half of your suggestions today. That's not saying there can't be improvements made to the current workings at all. We do so all the time and mostly only just because users (such as yourself) come along and post their ideas.
This is not about being too proud to value contributions and ideas; many of which have no relation at all to the length of one's duration in a relevant field. It is about trying to understand a request, the possible value for all users and a good implementation for them that doesn't break existing use cases.

In reply to by jeetee

Dear Mr. “jeetee”,
I surely have more in common with you than with Mr. “Jojo” concerning views and hybrid experience in both musical composition and programming. If you have 10 years of both composing and programming then MAYBE you can imagine how it is to have 25 years in both (like I have): can you? My advices for flexibility and generalizations (of both the “linked” and the “cross-staff” concepts) (see thread https://musescore.org/en/node/311588) may come from your distant future (because they are condensed from a far larger experience), believe me! It's clear for me that my ideas come from your distant future simply because you are not visionary enough to transform MuseScore (MS) in an almost perfect “jewel”. You still have obvious problems to learn basic smart facts/approaches from Sibelius and Finale and to also implement them in MS! Sadly, complacency seems a speciality for both Mr. “Jojo” and you. Out-of-the-box thinking is also not a quality of yours either: that's clear!
Consider this as truly my last answer: my generosity (with my time and patience) has limits and you’ve reached them.
1. I cannot pay attention on all the replies and comments as long as Mr. “Jojo” literally bombards me with N^2 one-line low-value messages. This is FAR from a professional attitude and approach! If you and Mr. “Jojo” both work in the same technical team of MS then, it would have been a much more professional attitude that you firstly analyze my proposal, create a common answer (after putting you in agreement with each other, because there are obviously disagreements between you both!) and THEN come with an answer: that is being truly professional, which is not your case.
2. However, you’re clearly a BIT more open-minded than Mr. “Jojo” to whom I have an additional info to give: the windows dedicated to establishing “Advanced style properties” (opened from the “Stave properties”) (which also establishes the number of lines for a chosen stave) ALSO DOES NOT allow rescaling and also disappears when rescaled (like the Preferences window)
3. Proposing me various “workarounds” instead of fundamentally and profoundly correcting the bugs of MuseScore (or at least accept that they should be applied elegant solutions, not improvisations!) ISN’T a professional method either, but more an “artistic”/improvisatory one: thus try to update your pragmatism with some elegant long term solutions to those reported errors! You have the tendency to find excuses for almost any reported bug (and tend to apply the 3-step technique: denial of the problem, minimization of the problem and then faintly whisper that “yes, there may be a problem and a solution to it!”; and that’s not professional either). I rarely found a situation where a programmer of MS to firmly (and manfully!) recognize: “Yes, that’s a problem that definitely needs to be solved!”. You’ve transformed this discussion in a kind of Turkish “bazaar” in which you persistently negotiate anything and tend to hide (by ignoring them in your answers) some flagrant reported bugs.
4. You have spoke not even a word on the bug I’ve reported on MS NOT allowing to add a “linked stave” to the bass/F-clef line of a piano score: thus you’re highly selective in what you reply (and clearly avoid talking about some obvious bugs of MS) and that’s not professional or shows a low degree of rigour (thus of professionalism) (Americans and English are NOT Germans, that’s for sure!)

  1. I’ve proposed you a generalized concept of “linked staves” (not to mean just “mirror/clone” staves) and a generalized “cross-staffing” between distinct instruments (with timbre change [if wanted by the user], not only position change): these are out-of-the-box approaches which clearly remove you from your confort zones!
  2. There are also piano scores with 3 (or even 4) parallel staves: why doesn’t cross-staff function allow to move a note between the 1st and the 3rd stave for example? (it just limits me to move a note between the 1st and the 2nd one, or moving a note between the 2nd and the 3rd one, but not between the 1st and the 3rd and vice-versa): that is a easy to solve issue I think! (I somehow workaround this bug in my demo on the periodic musical staff https://musescore.com/user/363391/scores/6391390 )
  3. I invoked my 2-year-old son and MS version 10 because of my past experience with MS: it’s almost 2 years since I’ve reported the line-numbering error of MS (but also other useful improvements, recognized as so!) (see my past thread https://musescore.org/en/node/281144 [a thread in which Mr. Sabatella received some good lessons from many other users besides me!]) and THE ERROR STILL PERSISTS! And you speak me of high-standards of good professional intentions? It is clear that I have a stricter definition of what “professionalism” really means. In fact, I know you better than many new users on this forum!
  4. You may have proposed me other methods of modifying a duration from the N-mode: it is however disappointing for me that you DON’T understand (or fake/simulate misunderstanding!) that it is a PROBLEM/BUG that note-duration ONE-KEY shortcuts like “4” (for eighth), “5” (for quarter) etc DON’T WORK FROM THE N-MODE! ONE-KEY IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN TWO-KEY SHORTCUTS whenever possible: that is another general principle in programming!
  5. As programmers, you should learn more from mathematics and mathematicians regarding generalized functions which are the equivalent of a generalized algorithm in (music) programming. Evolution in mathematics means generalizing (or extending) over and over again various functions, theorems etc: that is what evolution should mean in programming too. That is why I’ve proposed you two generalized “link” and “cross-staff” tools in MS.
  6. Let me give you a more specific personal example from mathematics (from number theory to be more specific) on the power and importance of generalizations. Maybe you remember the notorious Goldbach conjecture (GC) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldbach%27s_conjecture): I ask, because I had the bad surprise along the years from some programmers to NOT know it! (and to cannot state it correctly, although it is very simple to state). As a young programmer I’ve firstly approached Goldbach’s conjecture at about 12-13 years old (I hope you did the same, as GC is an already basic/classic theme of programming for [intermediate] beginners!). Furthermore, I’ve generalized it on prime numbers with prime indexes of any order/number of p-on-p iterations and called that briefly named that meta-conjecture as “VBGC” (see https://www.vixrapedia.org/wiki/VBGC and http://www.sciencedomain.org/abstract/21625). Very few university math professors (obviously with PhD in math!) actually understood my VBGC, although VBGC was already independently verified by many reviewers of OEIS as the main reference of two OEIS-approved sequences of numbers (http://oeis.org/A282251, http://oeis.org/A316460) and even cited by a famous Chinese mathematician Zhi-Wei Sun in one of his submitted OEIS sequences (http://oeis.org/A218829), but also by other mathematicians (http://www.revistarebram.com/index.php/revistauniara/article/view/638 and http://www.revistarebram.com/index.php/revistauniara/article/view/638/p…). Why should I expect more from you? I realize now that I shouldn’t have expected you to understand many ideas of mine, simply because visionary music programmers are very rare, like visionary mathematicians or MDs are too.
  7. As you may see from my answer, professionalism means also building rigorous and well-argumented answers, not just to throw low-value one-line answers like Mr. Jojo does, like an “air bomber” (maybe he’ll change his MS Forum nickname to this one)! I expect more rigor, correctness and broadness from you: it is obviously clear that my expectations are too high for the moment! Maybe the future will teach you the GREAT lessons named “RIGOUR” and “ETHICS” (so that to NOT intentionally omit giving replies on relevant reported bugs)!
  8. You may put this message to your saved messages collection: I’m sure no one on this forum (in the history of MS) dedicated you so much of his/her time and patience with such (undeserved!) generosity as I did. As years will pass, you’ll surely (I hope!) remember some of my lessons received in this last message of mine to you. You may consider yourself as one of my “adult intellectual patients”. You’re however lucky because I write text on the keyboard at the same speed as I speak it and didn’t take too long to write you this last message.
  9. PS. See my site: www.dragoii.com/pms (I’ve just created this site today; you don’t want to know how many teaks I had to do so that to surpass the flagrant chronic problem/bug of MS to NOT correctly numbering staff-lines! See and wonder: https://musescore.org/en/node/281144; I’m quite sick of that thread and I’m now sorry for the time spent there with NO result! Mr. Sabatella SURELY didn’t deserve my valuable time then, but also the valuable time of the others who agreed with me NOT with him at that time!)

Regards!
Dr. Andrei-Lucian Dragoi
www.dragoii.com
www.dragoii.com/pms (I’ve just created this site today; you don’t want to know how many teaks I had to do so that to surpass the flagrant chronic problem of MS to NOT numbering staff lines correctly!)
www.dragoii.com/gcp
www.dragoii.com/gci
PS. I dedicate you this phrase: “Vanity, my favorite sin!” (says the Devil played by Al Pacino to his advocate in the last scene of the famous movie “Devil’s advocate”)

In reply to by andrushkkutza

"Don't ask what MuseScore (and its user community, contributors and developers) can do for you, ask what you can do for them!"
(free after John F. Kennedy).

  • As far as I can tell you haven't yet helped to answer a single user's question.
  • Regardless of your alleged 25 years experience with programming have not yet contributed a single line of code.
  • You have not helped in translating the handbook or the software itself into your mother tongue, your native language (the Bulgarian translation definitely needs help, and there you could even add the mnemonics you're missing, actually I just did add the ones for Save, Save as and Print the other day).

Instead your boasting about your vast knowledge and experience, resort to personal attacks, apparently largely due to not having read and/or understood the replies (as short, concise and to the point as they were) and write overly long and convoluted essays (including a rather long footer time and time again that is not needed at all) rather than single short concise topics. On thread per issue you have, not one thread starting with 5 issues, which you then extend to 13! And then you call that 'professional behavior' ...

I'm working in technical customer support since more than 25 years now (and no, not with MuseScore, here I'm just a mere mortal volunteer and contributor, and that since more than 10 years), but never in my life have seen or experienced such inappropriate behavior with any of the customers I had to deal with (actually not quite true, it happened once, and I did put the phone down on that customer, he apologized on the next call). At work though I'd have not much choice that to deal with it, but here I have that freedom, EOD.

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

This answer!

But that kind of behaviour, looking down their noses, being incapable of following normal issue tracking workflows, not contributing anything or (at best) throwing something at the world (which may or may not be in a shape even useful for the general public in its initial form) and then not maintaining it… this is what I’m used from academics.

In reply to by andrushkkutza

> If you have 10 years of both composing and programming then MAYBE you can imagine how it is to have 25 years in both (like I have): can you?

Since you're adamant on comparing sizes; You asked for at least 10y and I indulged you. So fine, here are the specifics if you really want: I have 27 years of musical experience and 17 years of programming experience. Hopefully this information now satisfies your thirst for establishing such facts as if they are relevant to the discussion at hand.

> My advices for flexibility and generalizations (of both the “linked” and the “cross-staff” concepts) (see thread https://musescore.org/en/node/311588) may come from your distant future (because they are condensed from a far larger experience), believe me! It's clear for me that my ideas come from your distant future simply because you are not visionary enough to transform MuseScore (MS) in an almost perfect “jewel”.

The "issue" with both of those proposals is that first and foremost you didn't seem to even understand what a linked staff currently is. And from all of your scattered replies it still is very unclear to me as to what you want to "generalize" this into. Because if it's just to apply an octave transposing key to them, then what's holding you back to not currently just doing exactly that?
Secondly you wish to expand on the cross-staff concept; but your proposal so far makes no musical sense. I have asked for a use case for this beforehand, and none have been provided.

> You still have obvious problems to learn basic smart facts/approaches from Sibelius and Finale and to also implement them in MS!

Just for your pleasure I looked up cross-staff notation in the manuals of Sibelius, Finale and Dorico. Interestingly enough all of them also only allow for that within staves of the same instrument and only to an adjacent staff. Dorico especially mentions that this is only possible within a grand staff.
So how again is MuseScore not doing these basic smart facts?

> Sadly, complacency seems a speciality for both Mr. “Jojo” and you. Out-of-the-box thinking is also not a quality of yours either: that's clear!

Ah yes, unfounded slander, the base of every validly argumented discussion.

> Consider this as truly my last answer: my generosity (with my time and patience) has limits and you’ve reached them.

What you do with your time is your choice. It might be because English isn't your first language, but considering replying to questions for clarification a generosity on your part comes across as a slight god-complex. But I'll just assume that this is due to the language barrier and try to carry on by focusing on the actual discussion.

  1. >I cannot pay attention on all the replies and comments as long as Mr. “Jojo” literally bombards me with N^2 one-line low-value messages. This is FAR from a professional attitude and approach! If you and Mr. “Jojo” both work in the same technical team of MS then, it would have been a much more professional attitude that you firstly analyze my proposal, create a common answer (after putting you in agreement with each other, because there are obviously disagreements between you both!) and THEN come with an answer: that is being truly professional, which is not your case.

Neither Jojo nor myself are part of the MS team. We're first and foremost rather experienced users. But as MuseScore is open source and we are programmers, we both are also volunteering contributors to the code.
Jojo indeed can be concise in his replies, but that doesn't mean you have to jump on each and everyone of them right away (I know I don't).
Take your time to process the replies and then post your responses if you so desire.

It is precisely due to the open nature of MuseScore's development that we are able to discuss our view out here. And yes, often not everyone involved in development is in agreement with every decision. On some points we do, on others we don't and try to work out (often here in the open) together with our users what approach would be best for the product.

  1. > However, you’re clearly a BIT more open-minded than Mr. “Jojo” to whom I have an additional info to give: the windows dedicated to establishing “Advanced style properties” (opened from the “Stave properties”) (which also establishes the number of lines for a chosen stave) ALSO DOES NOT allow rescaling and also disappears when rescaled (like the Preferences window)

Logged as #311713: Advanced Style Properties minimal height excessive so it may get fixed in a future release.
Resizing a window though has not ever made it disappear to my knowledge; I have seen some window managers where the window gets reduced to a very small bar at the bottom of the screen or gets placed underneath the main window, so do make sure that is not the case for you.

  1. > Proposing me various “workarounds” instead of fundamentally and profoundly correcting the bugs of MuseScore (or at least accept that they should be applied elegant solutions, not improvisations!) ISN’T a professional method either, but more an “artistic”/improvisatory one: thus try to update your pragmatism with some elegant long term solutions to those reported errors! You have the tendency to find excuses for almost any reported bug (and tend to apply the 3-step technique: denial of the problem, minimization of the problem and then faintly whisper that “yes, there may be a problem and a solution to it!”; and that’s not professional either). I rarely found a situation where a programmer of MS to firmly (and manfully!) recognize: “Yes, that’s a problem that definitely needs to be solved!”. You’ve transformed this discussion in a kind of Turkish “bazaar” in which you persistently negotiate anything and tend to hide (by ignoring them in your answers) some flagrant reported bugs.

Your opening post of this thread mentions 5 items, none of which are bugs. They are all suggestions for improvements: "recommendations" you called them. The facts here work against your statements and the issue tracker is filled with reports as a result of developers straight up saying: "yes this is a problem".
Again, let's try to keep focus on the actual requests and issues, shall we? After all, your time is limited and precious..

  1. > You have spoke not even a word on the bug I’ve reported on MS NOT allowing to add a “linked stave” to the bass/F-clef line of a piano score: thus you’re highly selective in what you reply (and clearly avoid talking about some obvious bugs of MS) and that’s not professional or shows a low degree of rigour (thus of professionalism)

Right back at you: https://musescore.org/en/node/311588#comment-1032591 point 2.
First off: this doesn't even concern the topic at had but is about another topic of yours. Once again, it helps discussions to keep them on topic.
If you can't be bothered to read my replies that's one thing, but then going on and calling me out for not replying is a blatant lie. Especially if the reply gives thought to 2 other related use case scenarios that you've likely overlooked as much as the current MuseScore implementation has overlooked them.

> (Americans and English are NOT Germans, that’s for sure!)
Not quite sure what this statement is supposed to mean at all. But as you're so keen on comparing personal information: You've been corresponding with a German (Jojo) and a Belgian (myself). Again, not that this had any relevance to the discussion at hand..

  1. > I’ve proposed you a generalized concept of “linked staves” (not to mean just “mirror/clone” staves) [...]

A "linked staff" is indeed a very rigid concept, purposefully so.
If by your proposal you mean this post (again, a completely different topic then the one at hand in this thread...) then so far, from what you've written you've mostly just defined staves belonging to the same instrument. Something that has been part of MuseScore since v1.

> [...] and a generalized “cross-staffing” between distinct instruments (with timbre change [if wanted by the user], not only position change)

As mentioned a few times, such a notation doesn't make any sense musically speaking. Please provide examples or use cases for where it does.
So far the only use case has been "to test out sounds", for which (to put it very bluntly) this would simply be the wrong solution. Moreover so because sounds are not solely defined by the instrument staff something is notated on (just have a quick look at the many different piano sounds available by default).

> these are out-of-the-box approaches which clearly remove you from your comfort zones!

It's not my comfort zone that's being targeted by your proposal, it's the current musical meaning and definition of some usages. And yes, I'm not too keen on changing the musical notation system just for someone who doesn't want to turn on loop playback and use the mixer to change sounds.

  1. > There are also piano scores with 3 (or even 4) parallel staves: why doesn’t cross-staff function allow to move a note between the 1st and the 3rd stave for example? (it just limits me to move a note between the 1st and the 2nd one, or moving a note between the 2nd and the 3rd one, but not between the 1st and the 3rd and vice-versa): that is a easy to solve issue I think! (I somehow workaround this bug in my demo on the periodic musical staff https://musescore.com/user/363391/scores/6391390 )

It doesn't allow that because cross-staff notation is to an adjacent staff by definition. I personally would be fine though with allowing cross-staff notation between all staves of the same instrument, so feel free to put that suggestion into the issue tracker.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't have used any cross staff notation at all to create your PMS examples, but entered the notes on their own staves directly. You also might want to use the inspector to set the height for that fixed spacer explicitly so that the spacing is correct; you've now likely dragged it with the mouse and eyeballed it, resulting in the G4 of m7 not really ending up on the line it should, make it 2,60sp.

  1. > I invoked my 2-year-old son and MS version 10 because of my past experience with MS: it’s almost 2 years since I’ve reported the line-numbering error of MS (but also other useful improvements, recognized as so!) (see my past thread https://musescore.org/en/node/281144 [a thread in which Mr. Sabatella received some good lessons from many other users besides me!])

I've just read through that entire thread and I agree. Staff line numbering should be bottom-up. You'll notice that even Marc agrees as well (https://musescore.org/en/node/281144#comment-889438).
But what I also agree with is that this change alone won't solve the transposition issue with less-than-5-line staves you had.

> and THE ERROR STILL PERSISTS!

From that thread, I also see no link to an issue in the tracker so that developers might pick it up and implement it. So yes, it's no surprise that this hasn't been addressed. Not that it's any consolation, but there are issues that have been outstanding for much longer and have way more impact that are not included yet either.

> And you speak me of high-standards of good professional intentions? It is clear that I have a stricter definition of what “professionalism” really means.

I don't believe I have been preaching about that to you, if I have, then that was (up until this post) not my intention. In this post however, yes, I will be calling you out on it as I have done above multiple times. For me professionalism means also staying away from attacking the person and trying to keep topics on topic instead of cross-linking to older grievances.
It also means looking past that when someone is venting their frustrations alongside some valid points.

> In fact, I know you better than many new users on this forum!

You have just now amply demonstrated you do not. And even if you somehow did, you'd be wise enough to know that my persona is entirely irrelevant to having a topic discussion on how to move forward with your suggestion to improve this software.

  1. > You may have proposed me other methods of modifying a duration from the N-mode: it is however disappointing for me that you DON’T understand (or fake/simulate misunderstanding!) that it is a PROBLEM/BUG that note-duration ONE-KEY shortcuts like “4” (for eighth), “5” (for quarter) etc DON’T WORK FROM THE N-MODE! ONE-KEY IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN TWO-KEY SHORTCUTS whenever possible: that is another general principle in programming!

Please look up your definition of what a bug is.
Now as for the feature suggestion to have the duration keys also affect the highlighted input position during note entry mode, my stance is the following: It needs more in depth thought about the consequences. If after having changed the duration the input cursor would advance again, then you've just broken all the use cases in which the pitch needed correction as well and doubled their keystrokes.
However if you use Q and W (both single keystrokes in case you weren't aware) that whole problem goes away.

Then again, from your other posts, it seems that you mostly need to correct duration after the fact because you have muscle memory for different duration shortcuts than the MuseScore defaults and weren't aware you could just change them.. I trust that now that you are aware, you'd find yourself much less in a state where you have to correct errors.

  1. > As programmers, you should learn more from mathematics and mathematicians regarding generalized functions which are the equivalent of a generalized algorithm in (music) programming. Evolution in mathematics means generalizing (or extending) over and over again various functions, theorems etc: that is what evolution should mean in programming too. That is why I’ve proposed you two generalized “link” and “cross-staff” tools in MS.

As a programmer that majored in mathematics in high school and was raised by a mathematician (there, some more personal comparison facts for you) I'm possibly aware of some mathematical approaches. However I'm also enough of a programmer to understand that generalization is not the holy grail. It has its place and if the model calls for it, we should indeed use it.
So far the model simply doesn't call for it.

  1. > Let me give you a more specific personal example from mathematics (from number theory to be more specific) on the power and importance of generalizations. [...]

Congratulation on your paper. Now can we get back to the actual topic?

> Why should I expect more from you? I realize now that I shouldn’t have expected you to understand many ideas of mine, simply because visionary music programmers are very rare, like visionary mathematicians or MDs are too.

Agreed. You shouldn't expect others to have your background and mindset when posting your ideas. Then again, you might consider actually explaining them when asked for clarification on them.
And for such a purpose, keeping a single thread on topic and discussion a single feature/idea can go a long way.

  1. > As you may see from my answer, professionalism means also building rigorous and well-argumented answers, not just to throw low-value one-line answers like Mr. Jojo does, like an “air bomber” (maybe he’ll change his MS Forum nickname to this one)! I expect more rigor, correctness and broadness from you: it is obviously clear that my expectations are too high for the moment! Maybe the future will teach you the GREAT lessons named “RIGOUR” and “ETHICS” (so that to NOT intentionally omit giving replies on relevant reported bugs)!

I have to disagree there. Yes, Jojo's answers can be (too) short, but they're always to the point. Being rigorous or well-argumented isn't the same as being elaborate.
You wish to call me out on my correctness? Go ahead. I'll even do you the honor of admitting where I was incorrect if you can so point it out.

  1. > You may put this message to your saved messages collection: I’m sure no one on this forum (in the history of MS) dedicated you so much of his/her time and patience with such (undeserved!) generosity as I did.

There is no such thing as a saved messages collection. This is a forum on the internet, and as long as it lives all messages remain public for all to see. You also overestimate your own time and patience compared to other users.

> As years will pass, you’ll surely (I hope!) remember some of my lessons received in this last message of mine to you. You may consider yourself as one of my “adult intellectual patients”. You’re however lucky because I write text on the keyboard at the same speed as I speak it and didn’t take too long to write you this last message.

It must be my narrow mind, but I have not yet experienced your response as a valuable lesson. Or perhaps I have; the lesson being that staying on topic is rather hard.

  1. > PS. See my site: www.dragoii.com/pms (I’ve just created this site today; you don’t want to know how many teaks I had to do so that to surpass the flagrant chronic problem/bug of MS to NOT correctly numbering staff-lines!

I'm not surprised that using a non-standard notation system requires some tweaks at all. I'm more surprised that you needed "many" of them as from the resulting images I'd expect there to be rather few involved.
Then again, I am quite proficient in how MuseScore does things.

> See and wonder: https://musescore.org/en/node/281144; I’m quite sick of that thread and I’m now sorry for the time spent there with NO result! Mr. Sabatella SURELY didn’t deserve my valuable time then, but also the valuable time of the others who agreed with me NOT with him at that time!)

To be sick and tired of that thread you do sure like to point it out in a non-related topic. I'm also surprised that you found your time there wasted looking at the facts again:
You raised 4 main points. 3 of them were acknowledged as bugs in the first reply, of which 2 have been fixed. We've gone over the line number already in this thread, but as you can read there, obviously your time did have an effect as Marc agreed that it can make sense to change the numbering. For the last item you were given a two click workaround.

In conclusion

I don't know you, nor will I claim to have figured you out at all. But so far (perhaps due to the language barrier as well) you've given the impression of feeling superior to justify your requests as the only correct way to handle something with a complete lack of trying to understand the product you're attempting to change.

Open mindedness goes both ways.

1) I believe those are translation dependent. But yes, getting normal mnemonics would be nice.
Note that for me, there is no mouse dependence whatsoever as I use the Ctrl-S shortcut for saving directly. Or use arrow keys to flip through menu's.

2) This would indeed be good. Or get Ctrl-E to work on those elements rather than throw an error message.

3) Meh. I don't care either way about those defaults. Feel free in the meantime to change them in your shortcut preferences.

4) If you go back in note entry mode, you can just overwrite that note directly. Or if you want to alter the duration after entering; use those commands: (Shift+)Q/W to half/double duration (shift to add/remove dot).

5) Yes, along with other system elements. This is a long time standing feature request.
Note that you can Ctrl-Shift-Drag a spacer to copy it (but for some reason not its length).
Then again I would argue that if you're in need of a lot of spacers you're likely abusing them to circumvent less than optimal style settings.

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

I wish you good luck then: I've already offered you too much of my patience; my time as an MD is too valuable to still try to explain to you how much time it may gain using F2 (instead of double click), the advantages of using the CTRL+SHIFT+up/down arrows to move a note between adjacent (but distinct) instruments in an orchestral score (so that to experiment various sonorities/timbre changes), to correctly number/index the staff-lines from bottom-to-up AND to can change the duration of a note without exiting the N-mode and without deleting a note. Maybe my son (who is now 2 years old) will see those updates in MuseScore 10!
I shall keep this dialogue (saved on my hard drive) however, to can prove to anyone that "AT LEAST I TRIED, BUT DIDN'T KNOCKED DOWN THE PRIDE"! However, I'm afraid there isn't just pride, but ALSO narrowness of views in music and programming (and that is sad also). My advice is to hire a professional which has at least 10 years of experience in both programming and composing: HOWEVER, it seems that you are too proud to appreciate my 25 years of experience in each of the two (programming AND musical composing) which can give anyone a unique view on both, thus a unique view on perfecting a music editing notation software.

Regards!

@andrushkkutza: Totally agree with you on 1, 2 , 3 and 4. Haven't used spacers much so no opinion on 5. In my work I mainly use Microsoft products and I just take 1 and 2 for granted so maybe these 'standards' are not the same outside of Microsoft's world.

  1. really can be a pain, especially in multi-voice editing but I've just got used to it.

In reply to by jeetee

I'll have a think how it could work but here's an example of the problem:

  • Create a new score for guitar, tablature only
  • Start Note entry mode
  • Click on string 1 to enter fret 0 which will default to a crotchet
  • Realise that you meant to enter a quaver so press "Q" to half the duration.

Failure: The quaver button in the toolbar becomes active but the wrong note duration remains, it's still a crotchet

In reply to by yonah_ag

If it doesn't work in tablature then that's a plain bug; Q and W do work in standard staff afaik.

But that still doesn't answer the question on how you envision using duration buttons in note entry mode to change the duration of already entered music should work without endangering other existing use cases.

In reply to by jeetee

I'm really only interested in TAB and it is a pain having to exit note entry mode and click a toolbar button to fix a duration. Q and W would be a good start but numbers cannot be used as they would, rightly, get interpreted as fret numbers. Maybe other letters could be used. I am not well enough informed on how this could impact other use cases but I would like to achieve mouse-free note entry if possible and stay in note entry mode for simple corrections. I understand that the majority use case/s need to take priority and it's not a major gripe, just a "would be nice to have".

In notation I have no idea as I never enter any but the OP seems to indicate this same issue but with notation.

In reply to by yonah_ag

Yes we can have both (on topic 1, topic 2 needs more work I think, although you could add F2 to the existing shortcut Alt+Shift+E for "Edit element" now already). And for en_US, en_GB, de and, hold it, ro (!), we have that already, via the translations (just pull a translations update if you don't see it yet, then restart MuseScore)
And once my PR https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/6536 got accepted (maybe in 3.6, surely not sooner though), all languages may have it (as soon as their translators do their work)

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

I don't think it is worth wasting any more time on this guy. It is obvious from the way he writes that he believes he is right and everyone else is too proud to believe him. It is obvious from the way he writes that he believes that, in the interest of free thought, he can write anything he wants and not have to worry about having facts checked or peer review or citations, or references (other than his own). It is obvious from the way he writes that he needs an actual English speaking copy editor.
He needs to log issues properly and/or write code to do what he wants. He's had plenty of time in spite of what he claims.

Good Grief.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.