almost every note was extended by ms

• Aug 14, 2012 - 15:25

As a bloody newbie at musescore I have a question, that I am sure the experienced masters can answer easily. I can assure you that I have neither in the manual nor in the German forum (sorry, I can not speak English well – using google-translator) found help. I have two problems. The first is really critical to cope with, and the second is nothing but annoying. I'm not sure if it's a bug, a feature, my own stupidity or just excessive claim.
I use Windows 7 and the Korg Triton Extreme.

Problem 1: I created at the sequencer of Korg Triton several 16-track MIDI files (two of which I attached below). In this midi-files, the program Musescore extended almost every note to open a short value (1/16 or 1/32). As a result, there are countless (unintentional) ties, confusion and wrong music. To document this I attach two screenshots: liber-MS.jpg and recordare-MS.jpg.
Perhaps Triton also stores the midi-file wrong. However: Using another note-writing-program (PrintMusic), the music is right on my terms (see liber01.jpg; liber02.jpg; recordare01.jpg; recordare02.jpg). Would love to move to MuseScore - but it is not possible in that way. As I said, I have so far neither in the program nor in the manual found a way to avoid this error.

Problem2: Both pieces were composed in A minor. MuseScore gives the tracks out in different keys. This can be edited individually, which I've discovered. But is there a way to fix the key already loading MIDI files? In PrintMusic the tracks have the right key, A minor.

Additional question: Is it actually possible to open with multi-track MIDI files correctly with MuseScore? Somebody doing that?

Again, sorry for my bad English and my stupidity. And thanks for your help.

Attachment Size
LIBER.MID 15.17 KB
liber-ms.jpg 223.16 KB
liber01.jpg 76.49 KB
liber02.jpg 211.46 KB
RECODARE.MID 33.84 KB
recordare-ms.jpg 224.67 KB
recordare01.jpg 77.61 KB
recordare02.jpg 189.26 KB

Comments

First, you have to realize MIDI is not a notation format. It stores information about the precise starting and stopping point of notes, but a notation program then has to somehow figure out from there - usually with some educated guesswork and a lot of "approximating" or "rounding off" (quantization, in MIDI terms) with respect to how to best represent that using notation. There is a tradeoff being making the transcription *accurate* (in which case, you will likely see a lot of 1/64th notes and so forth) versus making it *readable* (in which cases, note will will be approximated using the 1/8 note). It's a very subjective art, not a science at all. So the basic answer to your final question is, no, neither MuseScore nor any other notation program can always give you exactly what you might want when opening a MIDI file. That's just a fact of life you have to live with if you are forced for whatever reason to use a MIDI file as a starting point for your score.

Now, of course, if you do have to use MIDI, MuseScore should and does try to make reasonably intelligent guesses about how you want your music notated. But it needs your help. That's why the first thing it asks you upon import is what you want the smallest note value to be. If you want everything rounded off to the nearest eighth - which is what PrintMusic appears to have done - then say so in that dialog that comes up when you import the file. If you do that, the result will already look a lot more like the much less accurate but much more readable approximation that PrintMusic produced.

But if the MIDI file includes overlapping notes (from an attempt to play legato, for instance), or containing any rhythmic inaccuracies, or otherwise does not map perfectly onto standard notation, then there is still going to be guesswork involved, and you have to resign yourself to fixing some things up after the fact. Again, that's just the nature of MIDI files - they just doesn't contain enough information to be truly useful as a way of creating scores.

It looks like PrintMusic does some further approximations in the name of readability in terms of eliminating overlaps between notes, whereas MuseScore does not. And that's pretty typical - MuseScore does not does as much of this sort of automatic changing to your score in the name of readability as some programs might. Someday perhaps its capabilities in this area might be extended. Meanwhile, your best bet in cases where you are forced to use MIDI files for whatever reason is to quantize them in a sequencer before importing them into MuseScore.

As for keys, I'm not sure exactly what is going on there, but apparently some of the instruments used are transposing instruments that require music to be transposed and written in different keys. If you hit the button labelled "Klingende Notation" in your screen shot, it will display the music without the transposition or key modifications. But from what I can tell, it still doesn't look right. Unfortunately, again, MIDI is not really the right format to be using for transmitting score information.

In reply to by [DELETED] 5

Thank you very much for your help. Yes, you have created the exact score i wanna work with. Congrats!
But i can´t reproduce it. I´ve installed newest version of musescore, loaded a midi-file, saved as an Music.xml, loaded this again and saved as mscz-file. And have same problems as before.
When your changes will be published? With version 1.3 oder 2.0? I can hardly wait. Thank you again.

In reply to by muesli

You can't reproduce? The issue or the lasconis's procedure ti fix it?
There is no and will be no 1.3 version. The fix is in the nightly builds, which will become version 2.0.
Lasconic's procedure requires you to download and install (well, just unpack realy) the lastest nighly build (MuseScoreNightly-2012-08-16-fd9f5bb.7z or newer)

In reply to by [DELETED] 5

Thank you again, lasconic. You make me happy at least a week. Just a hint, not a problem - because i can handle this. Only if you wanna to perfectionize your changes...
I took another midi-file and i transformed it in your proposed way. There still small mistakes, which in other notation software will be recognized properly. So i will add the midi-file and 4 screenshots von NightlyMS, MuseScore1.2; Printmusic und Sibelius7 - each from measure 42.
Please take care on tracks 1 and 3 (sopran, tenor): The irregularities start in Track 3 at measure 46 and continue to...
Perhabs that are playing-mistakes. But other programms notes exactly.
Sure, that don´t will be high priority...

Another question: How can i donate to Musescore except joining paybal or flattr? Is there a conventionel way to pay?

Attachment Size
LACRIMOS.MID 17.1 KB
nightly-lacrimosa.jpg 231.89 KB
MS-lacrimosa.jpg 233.65 KB
PM-lacrimosa.jpg 213.59 KB
Sib7-lacrimosa.jpg 254.72 KB

In reply to by [DELETED] 5

Okay, i think it´s not so easy for all notation-programms. Or my music is too complicated. :-)
I see on the same midi-file "lacrimos" further irregularities:

1st - in track 5 (called "geige", means violine) the programms found different ways to write down. All of them wrote the notes in the right position, but different values. I think, i played the track like in "printmusic" listed. Maybe, it´s not so exactly. But: "nightly" lost a note (measure 3). I think, this is low-level-priority.

2nd - in track 6 (called "bratscher", means viola) "nightly" is loosing almost the whole track - it starts playing in measure 40. I think, this is a high-level-problem. At least musescore 1.2 find (in the old way) the notes in right positions and the right value.

3rd - in track 9 ("flöte"/flute) the same irregularities i wrote in my last posting. Low-Level-Problem.

At all: i can handle the low-level-problems. But "nightly" shouldnt loosing notes.

I add screenshots from first part of "lacrimosa":
- MS-oldway
- Nightly
- Printmusic
- Sibelius7

Thank You

Attachment Size
lac-MS-oldway.jpg 221.15 KB
lac-nightly.jpg 210.15 KB
lac-PM.jpg 200.48 KB
lac-sib7.jpg 253.95 KB

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