unexpected rehearsal mark positioning in 2.0.3
I've just upgraded to 2.0.3 and found that some of my rehearsal marks have mysteriously shifted right. This seems to occur where the marked bar has a key or time change. All my marks were aligned with left bar line of the marked bar.
Is this behaviour down to some new style option? If so, I can't see where it's specified.
Richard
Comments
That would probably be #63856: Rehearsal mark at beginning of system should stay within margins. Any rehearsal marks that you adjusted the position of in 2.0.2 would be protected from this change, but the default layout is indeed different, and hopefully better.
In reply to That would probably be by Isaac Weiss
yes you are correct this is the problem I'm subjected to and it's a massive problem for me having to go back and re-edit files that I have previously deemed completed. Any change like that should have been subject to a global control. It's clear from the discussion that there's no consensus on this and for my part I try to adhere to the finest examples of traditional engraving practice found in publishers such as Henle and Bärenreiter where this new practice isn't followed.
In reply to yes you are correct this is by richardm999
I'm sorry for the disappointment. Indeed, the change was not exactly the way I thought it should be, but it was a solution to a problem—and, as stated, any rehearsal marks you did specifically position should still be in exactly the same place.
In reply to yes you are correct this is by richardm999
Can you attach examples of the scores that look different from you expect, and examples from published literature to demonstrate why you expect this? The change made should be consistent with the guidelines in Elaine Gould's "Behind Bars" and much published music, but indeed, no doubt some number of editors might use different conventions and maybe that's what has set your expectations. I don't know that it is an "old" versus "new" practice, just differences between editors. The compromise we came up with was accepted by everyone involved in the discussion as far as I could tell. Unfortunately no one who specifically was trying to copy the specific editors you are was present, I guess.
In reply to Can you attach examples of by Marc Sabatella
Two screen shots show the before and after effects.
I have attempted to maintain complete consistency with the positioning of rehearsal marks. The problem is the the variable positioning than operates in 2.0.3 mean than wherever a rehearsal mark and tempo marking apply to the same bar, they collide. And where they don't we have a very noticeably displaced rehearsal mark. Consistency in appearance along is what I've aimed to achieve. I've also tried to minimise cluttering at much as possible. You can see that one way of achieving that is not to use any boarder around the rehearsal mark. Hope that makes sense.
Richard
In reply to Two screen shots show the by richardm999
Correct me if I'm wrong - it's hard to be sure form just a screenshot (an actual score is better) - but with your current settings, won't there already be collisions when rehearsal marks coincide with tempo markings if there *isn't* a clef, key, or time signature change?
The displacement is, as mentioned, quite deliberate - it's exactly as shown in Elaine Gould's "Behind Bars" and many published scores. Probably we should add a flag to the text style / properties to control the attachment point for elements like this, though, to make it easier to get either behavior.
In reply to Correct me if I'm wrong - by Marc Sabatella
there's no collision, the rehearsal mark sit centred above the bar line at at vertical spacing of -1.
the minor tempo markings (as per style settings for system text) are at -4.00 sp and 13pt while the major tempo makings are individually altered to -2.50 sp and 15pt. In either case both forms of tempo marking sit above the rehearsal mark a over to the right horizontally aligned to any time signature or the 1st not of the bar.
Richard
also to be accurate, Elaine Gould is not rigid in her recommendations and acknowledges there will be stylistic variations, one of which is mine not to use a box around rehearsal marks but instead to print them in red as was often done when conductors marked up their scores with pencil.
Regardless of recommended type-setting practice my concern is that a changed behaviour was introduced that forced re-editing of old material that had been successfully set. Far from fixing a problem for me, the change introduced one. You could argue that the change was in error anyway because I had changed the default settings for all rehearsal marks by specifying colour and position above the stave through my own template. I think you stated that any changes I had made should not have been overridden, which they were.
Richard
In reply to also to be accurate, Elaine by richardm999
I agree the compatibility was not as good as it should have been. As it is, most scores were improved by this change, but the few that were depending on the particualr style you prefer were not, and it would have been better to somehow allow that to be preserved. Not sure what can be done about this now, though. I am certainly open to a feature request for a way to specify the anchor point so that future versions of MsueScore would allow this, but also, since most users have been accustomed to manually adjusting these rehearsal marks anyhow, it would not be the end of the world if those few users who prefer the previous alignment now need to do the manual adjustment. There is no getting aroudn the fact that sometimes manual adjustment will be necessary; we just want to minimize how many people need it and how often, and I think this change *does* accomplish that.
In reply to I agree the compatibility was by Marc Sabatella
ok, done:
https://musescore.org/en/node/123126