New (simple ?) tool proposition : just fusion tied notes
The "regroup rythms" tool does usually not work for me, but the main I try to use it is that I use Musescore as a composer so I copy and paste often a sequence one (or one half) beat earlier or later. So after each such operation tied notes appear and never disappear until I fusion them manually, so I have often three or four tied notes in a same measure, and sometimes bugs occur : a note is not or no more tied to another one, or not tied to the good one etc...
So, I would prefer a tool that only fusion (all) tied notes in the same measure when the duration matches with one common symbol like a quarter or quaver note or a dotted one. Only that, nothing more, would be a great gift.
Maybe it would be easier to programm than the current "regroup rythms" tool and I think I'm not the only one who has more big problems with ties than with beams...
What about you ?
Comments
I try with a little piece, just 1 measure, with a tie, and I move for 1/2 time , severals times. On the upper stave , what Musescore gives to me , and just under the correction I do. Sure, ther is corrections necessary, but, the big part of the work is done
![Tie.png]()
In reply to I try with a little piece,… by Raymond Wicquart
Well, on the upper staff you have 4 ties "useless" including two which ties the begin and the end of the same beat. So, to me, you did do the big part of the work.
Could you attach a specific example where regroup rhythms isn't doing what you think it should?
In reply to Could you attach a specific… by Marc Sabatella
Raymond Wicquart has done it
In reply to Raymond Wicquart has done it by pernox341
Except for the part where he… you know… didn't. But I took his picture and moved it into a score.
Went one step further. Added a third instrument copied the first on there. Then executed "regroup rhythm" on that instrument. First on a selected measure (and only that one was affected), then on the whole instrument.
The end result of that single command is exactly the same as the steps Raymond did by hand.
So this looks to still do exactly what you're asking for. Which again beg a repeat of the question Marc put in: please provide us with a sample score showing regroup rhythms doing something different than what you'd expect. Then we can assess whether there is an actual bug within the command, or if it is just because you'd like a different style than standard music notation convention strives for.
Open the attached file, select the first instrument, copy it to the third, then perform regroup rhythms as you wish, be it on the full instrument or on just a selected range of measures. So you can confirm you get the same results as I do (using 3.4.2 here)
(Hey, I'll even go through the trouble of taking a screenshot to place in here as well):
![301221_regroup.png]( "301221_regroup.png")
In reply to Except for the part where he… by jeetee
Exactly. In all the standard cases, the "regroup rhythms" should already do the right thing. Notice how it correctly combined the tied notes in measures 2 and 4, and in measure 6, but also broke the existing quarter note in measure 6. This is all exactly correct. A simplistic "combined tied notes" command would have gotten these cases wrong. It would have incorrectly combined the ties in bar 1 and would not have fixed the incorrect quarter note in bar 6.
So, while no doubt there are some cases where regroup rhythms fails, it would be best to post specific examples of this so we can fix them. Much better than having a new command that we know would do the wrong thing in many cases.
In reply to Exactly. In all the… by Marc Sabatella
If you want a bug, I've got one
If you want a very beautiful "correct" case, I've got one too.
In reply to If you want a bug, I've got… by pernox341
Unfortunately, we cannot tell much from just a picture. It appear to show a score that is corrupt, but it is impossible to tell if that corruption was caused by the regroup rhythms command or not. We would need you to attach the score in its state before running the command, then tell us exactly which measures to run the command on in order to reproduce the bug.
In reply to If you want a bug, I've got… by pernox341
Again Please provide the actual score; the mscz file.
Your first screenshot either shows a corruption, or a visually moved note or simply a slur rather than a tie.
Your second example doesn't show the time signature, but a quick count results in 5/8. Which by default is beamed as 3+2/8. So what you're showing is already the most correct simple form according to standard notation.
In reply to Again Please provide the… by jeetee
Maybe if you ask it a third time, I will provide the mscz., but if I will, you will know I'm a liar sooo...
Seriouslier, I don't really care about the regroup rythms tool today, I would just like to remove ties inside measures, not only the non-idiomatics ones. In many cases I prefer a dotted quarter note instead of a quarter and a quarver one, even if the dotted quarter note is on the beat and the next note is a quarter or half one. It's often not hard to read and shorter, but another reason is that bugs often occur when copy/pasting ties. If you and Marc S. consider that it's a non-sens request, I have nothing more to say.
But if you want some examples of bugs : I have one bug after copy/pasting ties (which is, logically, not fixed by the regroup rythms tool) And I found a (weird) example where the using of the rr tool makes musescore crash.
In reply to Maybe if you ask it a third… by pernox341
MuseScore is unlikely to implement a command to automatically create nonstandard notation, that would be something you'd have to do yourself. And it's easy enough to eliminate ties by selecting the note and pressing the new desired duration. I suppose perhaps someone could be convinced to write a plugin that would create the nonstandard notation you say you prefer.
As for bugs though, we definitely want to know about them. I have loaded your file. Now, what is it I need to copy and where do I need to paste it in order to see the bug you refer to? I tried selecting from the first G to the low F, Ctrl+C to copy, then pasting onto beat two of an otherwise empty measure, and it worked as expected. It also worked to simply paste it right over the messed-up-looking passage starting in bar three - it fixed the problem I see in your file.
The passage you say crashes on regroup does not for me. Although it's pretty messed up to start with, regroup rhythms doesn't seem bothered by it at all. But it would be good to understand how it got so messed up in the first place.
In reply to MuseScore is unlikely to… by Marc Sabatella
I've replied of the two last paragraphs under jeetee's post, as you saw. But you would be nicer if you said "old" and "modern" notation instead of "nonstandard" and "standard" :p
In reply to I've replied of the two last… by pernox341
It’s not a question being nice but being accurate. These rules of music notation have been followed for centuries, so it really isn’t a question of just being a “modern” invention.
In reply to Maybe if you ask it a third… by pernox341
Maybe if you ask it a third time, I will provide the mscz., but if I will, you will know I'm a liar sooo…
I apologize if you somehow read my response as not believing you; this is not the case. The reason we've continued asking for scores is that the situation you've been describing didn't seems reproducible nor fully understood on my end.
If you read back the possibilities I deduced from the image you provided there, the first option I guessed at is a score corruption. That is caused plain and simple by a bug; in this case having the score itself could allow a developer more insight in the conditions that created it and thus leads to a quicker fix.
The other two scenarios could be attributed to user error or misunderstanding; nothing about that makes me consider you a liar; but there is a large number of users that confuse ties and slurs occasionally. Again in this situation, had you provided the score rather than a picture, this assumption wouldn't even have to have been made at all…
Fortunately, perhaps just to get rid of me asking, this time you did include a score; so we can work from there.
Seriouslier, I don't really care about the regroup rythms tool today,
Too bad, as up until now, each example brought to the conversation was handled perfectly according to the provided desired end result (or at least the picture of it) using that tool…
I would just like to remove ties inside measures, not only the non-idiomatics ones. In many cases I prefer a dotted quarter note instead of a quarter and a quarver one, even if the dotted quarter note is on the beat and the next note is a quarter or half one.
Aha, we're finally getting to the core of why you don't wish to use the existing tool; you wish to deviate from the standard musical convention of how to notate such rhythms.
It's often not hard to read and shorter, but another reason is that bugs often occur when copy/pasting ties. If you and Marc S. consider that it's a non-sens request, I have nothing more to say.
We're not saying it is a nonsense request. We've asked for examples as we obviously weren't understanding your request. We believe(d) the regroup tool was the answer to your request. Now for the first time (for me) it is clear it isn't, because of your desire to force combining notes even in situations where regroup wouldn't (or would split them) to make the natural beat division of the measure clear.
But yes, when someone asks for a new feature, we do try to understand the need for it and whether the situation can't be solved by extending/fixing existing tools first. And now that it is becoming clear that the (seemingly) main reason you're asking for this new feature is because you wish to deal with the fallout of bugs, I'd always prefer fixing the bug (thus possibly eliminating the need for the tool) over implementing a workaround tool.
But if you want some examples of bugs : I have one bug after copy/pasting ties (which is, logically, not fixed by the regroup rythms tool) And I found a (weird) example where the using of the rr tool makes musescore crash.
Thank you for finally providing the example file. However we're not quite there yet, as I for one can't reproduce the mentioned behavior.
As far as I can tell your score has been created using MuseScore 3.4.2 on MacOS?
The result of your copy-paste indeed seems to load as a corruption (the tie skipping a note) and I'm note surprised that any further action on that part of the notation would lead to undesired effects. However, I don't see the same thing happening when repeating the assumed workflow on 3.4.2 on my Windows x64 machine.
This is what happens for me instead:
Can you list a step-by-step instruction of the actions you took to create this corruption? I used the shortcuts for copy and paste in that recording. Perhaps you use a different method which triggers the corruption?
I also don't get a crash on the regroup command for the notation where you do. It regroups, maintaining the weird tie-corruption. I've again created a recording so you can see what region I selected and let us know whether it is the same for you or not. If not, then please also list exactly where and what to do in which order.
(Added bonus, see how the regroup command does change the two tied G's from beat 2 and 3 into a single half note for the notes previously pasted):
In reply to Maybe if you ask it a third… by jeetee
Indeed, I'm sorry, I have no more crashes too, but I had had yesterday several consecutive times a crash after trying to regroup such rythms, I think it was because I've tried to edit the file very very quickly.
About the corruption, I've simply used the cmd+c cmd+v shortcuts like you and I have those results.
In reply to Indeed, I'm sorry, I have no… by pernox341
Aha, thank you, I can now get the corruption. The trigger seems to be, the source has to contain a tie, and it has to be pasted into a location in which the first tied note spans a barline and thus requires an additional tie. So:
1) new score
2) measure 1 note input
3) 6 0 5 0 G + (creates G on beat 4, tied into next measure)
4) select and copy the two tied G's
5) measure 3 note input
6) 6 0 5 0 4 0 (creates half rest, quarter rest, two eighth rests)
7) select second eighth rest
8) paste
Result: as shown, the tie incorrectly skips a note:
I will submit a bug report on this, thanks again for the report!
In reply to Aha, thank you, I can now… by Marc Sabatella
See #301414: Corrupt tie created on paste of tied note that requires additional tie
In reply to Except for the part where he… by jeetee
One of us hasn't understand what Raymon means : I think his firts staff is after using the "regroup rythms" tool ...
In reply to One of us hasn't understand… by pernox341
No, it isn't. It's just the result of copying and pasting. if you enter that music into MuseScore and then run regroup rhythms, you will see it works perfectly in those cases, as shown in jeetee's example in the third line.
In reply to One of us hasn't understand… by pernox341
No, I"m on MS 2 and I don't know "regroup rythms" I simply write the first 2 measures and copy and paste after, in moving of 1/2 time at each time, and it seems to me that MS works well, without nothing more .
In reply to No, I"m on MS 2 and I don't… by Raymond Wicquart
For the record, Regroup Rhythms is present in MuseScore 2, it's in the Layout menu instead of Tools. It's also somewhat buggier. But the basic effect is the same - it saves you the trouble of having to manually make the changes you made in the second line of your example.