If you start with one staff and add others later, you can always ,anually add a name to the first staff. But in thr most basic case, scores of only a single staff shouldn't normally display staves. And I can't tell you how many scores for a single instrument ,ve seen - from MuseScore as well as other programs - where people don't bother deleting the names, perhaps because they don't know how. I definitely supported this change when the issue came up, and continue to do so.
True, but the case of someone creating a score for single instrument and thereby not wanting the name to appear has got to be 100 times more common than the case of someone creating a score for mutliple instruments but for some odd reaosn only telling hte new score wizard it was going to be one. If you lie to the wizard, it's kind of expected it might take extra steps to fix - as with changing the pickup, key signature, number of measures, etc.
Well, the number of measures is a very bad example, I almost always have to change that after score creation (and it is easy enough to do this). But I can agree with the rest.
Check box to display name is a great idea! Actually, I'm not sure if you mean in the new score wizard or n staff properties, byt it's actually a great idea either way!
And yes, I'm sure we all need to adjust number of measures after the fact pretty often!
agreed. 32 is better than 16, but still I have to delete or add measure on about 95% of the scores I transcribe.
Deleting measures is easy enough though and adding not too much of a hassle.
What I like about having an option in staff properties would allow the name to always be generated on score creation, but only displayed on command. Meaning it would be easier to change you mind and add the instrument name later - the name would be there for you already. Especially useful for names that might otherwise be difficult to enter, like if you want a flat sign in the name (Bb Trumpet, etc). This woukd require an additional option to be stored in the staff properties within the score file, too.
But independent of whether that change is made, a check box to controll display/generation of staff names within the wizard (and Add Instrument) could be useful. If we also had the above option within Staff Properties, then turning the staff name option off in the wizard would cause the staff name to be generated but turned off. Or, if we don't add the option to staff properties, then the option in the wizard would control whether the name was generated at all.
The trick would be getting the defaults right. I very much like the way it works now, where one instrument gets no name, multiple isntruments do get name, with no user intervention required in the vast majority of cases. With a checkbox, it becomes up to the user to flip the switch, unless it can somehow be made smart enough to default to being off, remain off after adding one instrument, but then automatically flip on upon adding more instruments. And then if the user turns it off, it should say off as the user adds even more instruments. That's kind of awkward, but probably the most desirable behavior.
I think we could reconciliate everyone with the following.
- A flag in staff property to control the visibility of short and long instrument name, deleting the instrument name on the score would put this flag on "invisible". The flag needs a better name than invisible, I suggest "do not display short/long instrument name".
- In the wizard, put this flag so the instrument name are not visibile if user choose one instrument, and visible if user choose more than one
- Hesitant users who add or remove instrument after the fact, will have to go to staff properties to choose their behavior.
Thank you for this advice this is exactly what I needed, as the layout with the instrument name is a lot nicer than without. What I then do is highlight the name select>select similar elements on same stave (this highlights all the instrument name and press 'V' which then hides the instrument but keeps the layout.
Comments
This is a feature... Since the name of the instrument is not very useful for a simple score with one staff, it has been removed.
For band scores:
What if you add instruments later, or it happens to be the only instrument in a book of songs, but you don't know what it is?
I think if the user doesn't want it, they should delete it.
I second that. I often start with one instriment only and add others later.
If you start with one staff and add others later, you can always ,anually add a name to the first staff. But in thr most basic case, scores of only a single staff shouldn't normally display staves. And I can't tell you how many scores for a single instrument ,ve seen - from MuseScore as well as other programs - where people don't bother deleting the names, perhaps because they don't know how. I definitely supported this change when the issue came up, and continue to do so.
It is much easier to delete an instrument name (klick, del) than to add one
True, but the case of someone creating a score for single instrument and thereby not wanting the name to appear has got to be 100 times more common than the case of someone creating a score for mutliple instruments but for some odd reaosn only telling hte new score wizard it was going to be one. If you lie to the wizard, it's kind of expected it might take extra steps to fix - as with changing the pickup, key signature, number of measures, etc.
Well, the number of measures is a very bad example, I almost always have to change that after score creation (and it is easy enough to do this). But I can agree with the rest.
I think a 'Show instrument name' tick box would be a good idea?
In both cases (one or more instruments) but with different defaults (off for one, on for more)
That would be a very reasonable idea IMHO
Check box to display name is a great idea! Actually, I'm not sure if you mean in the new score wizard or n staff properties, byt it's actually a great idea either way!
And yes, I'm sure we all need to adjust number of measures after the fact pretty often!
I meant in the Wizzard.
But additionally having them in the staff properties and/or in the add instrument dialog wouldn't harm
"And yes, I'm sure we all need to adjust number of measures after the fact pretty often!"
Just think, it used to be 16 (!), and I requested it be upped to 32. For the average hymn, it's fine.
agreed. 32 is better than 16, but still I have to delete or add measure on about 95% of the scores I transcribe.
Deleting measures is easy enough though and adding not too much of a hassle.
What I like about having an option in staff properties would allow the name to always be generated on score creation, but only displayed on command. Meaning it would be easier to change you mind and add the instrument name later - the name would be there for you already. Especially useful for names that might otherwise be difficult to enter, like if you want a flat sign in the name (Bb Trumpet, etc). This woukd require an additional option to be stored in the staff properties within the score file, too.
But independent of whether that change is made, a check box to controll display/generation of staff names within the wizard (and Add Instrument) could be useful. If we also had the above option within Staff Properties, then turning the staff name option off in the wizard would cause the staff name to be generated but turned off. Or, if we don't add the option to staff properties, then the option in the wizard would control whether the name was generated at all.
The trick would be getting the defaults right. I very much like the way it works now, where one instrument gets no name, multiple isntruments do get name, with no user intervention required in the vast majority of cases. With a checkbox, it becomes up to the user to flip the switch, unless it can somehow be made smart enough to default to being off, remain off after adding one instrument, but then automatically flip on upon adding more instruments. And then if the user turns it off, it should say off as the user adds even more instruments. That's kind of awkward, but probably the most desirable behavior.
I think we could reconciliate everyone with the following.
- A flag in staff property to control the visibility of short and long instrument name, deleting the instrument name on the score would put this flag on "invisible". The flag needs a better name than invisible, I suggest "do not display short/long instrument name".
- In the wizard, put this flag so the instrument name are not visibile if user choose one instrument, and visible if user choose more than one
- Hesitant users who add or remove instrument after the fact, will have to go to staff properties to choose their behavior.
I think this has now been resolved with the introduction of 'Hide instrument name is there is only 1 instrument' function in 'Style'>'General…'.
Using MuseScore 2.0 Nightly Build (7cd411a) - Mac 10.7.5.
Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.
Thank you for this advice this is exactly what I needed, as the layout with the instrument name is a lot nicer than without. What I then do is highlight the name select>select similar elements on same stave (this highlights all the instrument name and press 'V' which then hides the instrument but keeps the layout.
Thanks again for this I was going mad!!!!
Possibly a better way to get the layout effect you're looking for would be to use a horizontal frame instead.