Trying to copy and paste tuplets could cause an end user to end up in a mental health facility.

• Nov 7, 2017 - 17:51

Mark Sabatella, the author of Mastering Music Score suggested that I start a thread on issues related to Musescore's ability to copy and paste. Well here it is. Once again I'm entering into the masochistic world of trying to copy the notes in a triplet and paste them into the rests of a triplet of the same value. End result = "Can not paste into a tuplet" However apparently it is possible to paste into an empty measure where no tuplet is specified. This is just one of many issues of unexpected or unwanted behavior related to copying and pasting in Musescore.


Comments

:-) What I actually suggested was that you attach a sample score and precise steps to reproduce the particular problem you are seeing.

There are indeed some known limitations with copy and paste with respect to tuplets, in particular, due to how the rules of music notation work, you can paste a tuplet across a barline. MuseScore also does not let you paste partial tuplets, for similar reasons (the expected behavior with respect to the rest of the tuplet would be unclear). So these are known limitations. if you are seeing a problem other than these, then again, please post the sample score and precise steps to reproduce the problem. Otherwise, there is no way we can investigate further.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Easy:
Create a triplet in one measure, like selecting the whole measure rest, Ctrl+3, entering notes
Paste it into an empty measure: works just fine.
Now paste this (or another same size triplet) into the 1st or 2nd measure (i.e. into a measure that already contains a same sized tuplet): voila, fails! "Cannot insert tuplet"

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

Correct - you cannot currently paste into a triplet or across a barline, just as the error message says. You can only paste tuplets to locations where there are no tuplets or barlines that would be crossed. Neither of these are bugs - they are just known limitations of the facility. The workaround for the casedescribed here is very simple - just delete the contents of the destination first.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

The fact that the code currently doesn't allow this is not at all what I'd consider a technical reason. While there are indeed valid technical reasons to not allow a tuplet to cross a barline, there is none to disallow pasting a tuplet onto a tuplet of the same total duration, just like there is no reason to not allow pasting e.g. 2 8th notes onto a quarter note(which in fact does work).

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

What.I mean is, there are complications with the data structures that make implementing this difficult without causing corruption. So there was a conscious decision to not support it. Call it what you will, but the normal definition of a bug is somethIng the programmer intended to have work but that inadvertently does not.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

<< there are complications with the data structures that make implementing this difficult without causing corruption >>

When the tuplet is not on the first beat of the place where you paste, MuseScore just happily remove the tuplet and accept the paste.
When you paste on the first note of the triplet, MuseScore could just as happily remove the tuplet and accept the paste instead of the current error message.
There is no difficulty into that.
(On the other hand, pasting in the middle of a triplet is, indeed, technically more challenging to handle correctly in all cases)

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

It's been obvious to me for a long time that many of the inconsistencies are hard to solve mostly due in my opinion to MIDI playback. But what has always bugged me is how you may make a change and then much more is changed that you don't want. for example you have accidentally placed a sharp or a flat on a note and you would like to correct it. You remove it and then sharps, flats, or naturals are added to following notes of the same pitch in the same measure, so now instead of having just one thing to correct, you may have several, and more mistakes are introduced into the score through automation. How about working on a version that is just for publishing without MIDI play that is far less automated. I do think the positioning of notes is for the most part valuable, but I would like a palette of musical symbols which could be dragged to the score and then locked in position to a given note. What I envision is a program more like Inkscape where items can be grouped together and then locked to each other. I keep thinking of Cecil Effinger's music writer which was one of the first typewriters for music score production. I'm sure it was limited. but perhaps less frustrating.

https://www.colorado.edu/amrc/sites/default/files/attached-files/0506-1…

The fact is Musecore is at the present time very tedious and often frustrating to use. Nothing is ever quick and simple. Given that fact, being able to easily copy and past sections an figures should be of primary importance. I do a lot of graphic design with both Inkscape and GIMP, and edit music with Audacity, but none of these drive me as nuts as Musescore.

In reply to by gBouchard

<< more mistakes are introduced into the score through automation. How about working on a version that is just for publishing without MIDI play that is far less automated >>
Remove such feature from MuseScore doesn't make sense for me, that means that any transposition would just be impossible which is a non sense in a score editor.

In reply to by gBouchard

It's not MIDI that is responsible for the behavior you describe. It would be perfectly simple to implement a command that changed all F#'s to F's III n a measure when you remove the sharp on the first. The reason we don't already do that by default is that more often than not you wouldn't want that. Just because you change one note in a measure doesn't mean you want to chanHe others. The principle MuseScore follows is, change only the thing the user asked to change. The measure has several F#'s and the user changes only one to F, so we don't just go ahead and change them all to F. Granted, there are times when that is useful so a separate command to do this would be nice, and I think someone even started work on it. Not sure of the status of that.

Anyhow, the point is that MIDI has nothing to do with any of this. And again, if you have other specific questions or concerns, it is better to start new threads for them, with some descriptive titles like "request for feature regarding accidentals" or whatever.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

I don't want more commands that are based on more rules. just follow the rule: only change what the user wants changed. If a sharp, flat, or natural is deleted by the user, just leave it at that. Right now Musescore make a guess or assumption of what the end user wants and then goes about making changes to other notes on it's own. That's what I don't want. The only place that makes actual sense is with tied notes.

In reply to by gBouchard

As mentioned, MuseScore already does try to follow the rule of only changing what the user wants changed. You say MuseScore should delete the accidental and leave it at that, but this does change the rest of the measure. It's not just about MIDI playback, it's about how a real musicians playing the music would play it. Removing that accidental changes the actual meaning of every other notes of that pitch in the entire measure. Sometimes you want MuseScore to automatically do that for you, but sometimes you don't. That's why this needs to be two separate commands - one that says, "remove the accidental and keep the other pitches the same (which requires adding another accidental later)", and another that says "remove the accidental and change the pitch of all other notes in the measure accordingly". Both can be seen as attempting to change only what the user wants - one is changing only the appearance of the score in that one place, the other is changing only the meaning in that one place. MuseScore does indeed generally prioritize meaning over appearance because most musicians think in terms of music, not just symbols. But for the cases where thinking just in terms of symbols makes sense, I absolutely agree it would be nice to have a way to achieve that result.

Again, though, if you have specific thoughts about theis topic - which has nothing to do with tuplets - please start a new thread with a simple descriptive title. Otherwise it becomes almost impossible to follow the discussion or to find it later and thus there is almost no chance that anything will come of it. if you want to see changes made - and I agree there is room for improvement - then the way to do that is to make suggestions in separate threads with simple descriptive titles.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Interesting, but how do you move the anchor point, and also the figures don't seem to be scalable. It seems hard to position them where you might like them to be. Inkscape has handles on the objects that are created with it. Various objects can be selected and grouped into one. With Musescore the symbols from symbol pallet seem difficult to control and position. While Musescore has features, they always seem confusing to implement.

In reply to by gBouchard

Not sure what you mean by "move the anchor point". Do you mean if you attach the symbol to one note, then you change your mind and wish to attach it to a different note instead? Cut and paste does that. if you simply mean you want to manually adjust the position of the symbol relative to the note, then the usual methods work: drag, cursor keys, Inspector.

As for scaling, the symbols are all sized according to the established standards for musical symbols - these come from the internationally standardized Bravura font as designed by the SMuFL standardization committee. So they should usually be correctly already. If you are creating some sort of experimental notation and thus need a non-standard size for one of the symbols, you can also use these with a text element via the "Special Characters" palette (press F2 to display while entering text, or use the control in the text toolbar).

Synbols can be grouped also by attaching them to each other rather than attaching them separately to different notes.

Again, if you have further thoughts about this unrelated topic, please start a new thread with a simple descriptive title.

In reply to by gBouchard

Ever since I started using it for the first time, I have found everything intuitively and done it.
I just needed to ask a few things I did not know about settings. (Example: What is the version number in the xyz.drm file? Example2: Can not thicken the bracket line of the tuplets? etc.)

Two different users, two different views :)

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

I knew that was coming up. That's why it's better that I limit my postings. I mentioned before, the reason I use it is because I'm a die hard Linux user, and it is perhaps the best choice albeit with technical imitations. I was thinking of "going pro" and may still as I feel I have a few scores that others might find valuable. Is there a music notation program which works on Linux that allows for the copying and pasting of triplets into the same exact space?

In reply to by gBouchard

Don't get me wrong, I'm mot trying to chase you away.
But also I can't really understand how and why that copy and paste of tuplets into same size existing ones really is a major problem for you. It doesn't work, which is annoying, but better get used to it and avoid this, while patiently waiting on some programmer to be annoyed by it enough to feel like fixing this, or try fixing it yourself.

In reply to by gBouchard

There are essentially no other WYSIWYG notation programs for Linux period that I am aware of, certainly none that even come close to the capabilities of MsueScore. Next best thing would be one of the graphical front ends to LilyPond, such as Denemo or Frescobaldi. I suspect you will find these far more limiting and frustrating to work with, but feel free to check them out - maybe they will suit your style better.

Meanwhile, it takes all of an extra second or two to delete the contents of the destination before pasting when dealing with tuplets. Not sure how this situation even comes up that often, but feel free to describe your workflow in more detail so we can better understand the situations in which you have already entered tuplets into a measure but then change your mind and decide to replace them with other tuplets. If you could explain why this is something more than a minor nuisance that costs you a couple of extra second every 100 or so measures when it comes up, then putting the extra work into implementing the necessary code to remove this limitation might increase in priority.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

This was not trying paste across a bar line, I can sort of see why that might not be allowed, but on the other hand I can also see where Musescore might have the artificial intelligence to break up a tuplet being pasted across bar line. However your excuse is sort of like saying under the "rules" of English, it's improper to have two "the"(s) in a row, one followed by the next therefore if you try to past one "the" into the space of another three letter word, it cannot be accomplished if it is directly proceeded by another "the." The problem with Musescore is that it tries to be too intelligent and is very frustrating to use as a result. To me it is perfectly logical that if one wishes to copy a triplet into the space of a triplet of equal value, the program should be able to handle it, not give an error message. But that's not the case; therefore I have a certain amount of anxiety that I could land in the nut house as a result of hoping that Musescore might actually work as one might expect. By the way, I also think it's perfectly logical that if you wish to delete a triplet and select the three rests which are its place holders, the program would have the intelligence to delete them and replace them with a standard rest of equal value. Honestly I don't enjoy posting here although i have received very good help, because usually when I post it's because I'm already highly frustrated by the program's behavior. Therefore I find it difficult to remain civil. I figure in about 10 - 20 years many of these problems will be worked out without my input, and I will have joined "Ti" and "Do" of the Heaven's Gate musical community.

In reply to by gBouchard

I would just suggest you consider asking questions about how to do something before you have become so frustrated. You'd get help sooner, you'd avoid frustration, and when you discover actual bugs, you'd be able to communicate them clearly enough for us to fix them. Wins all around!

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Take a measure with a double dotted 1/8 followed by a triplet of 1/8.
Select several notes elsewhere for a total duration of 1/4 (e.g. 2 1/8 notes).
Paste on the double dotted 1/8: it is replaced by the pasted notes, and the triplet (which was only slightly in the way) disappears.
Ok.
Now if you paste the same group of notes (1/4 duration) on the first note of the triplet it is refused.
I know, I know, well know limitation, just delete the triplet first. But as MuseScore is perfectly able to remove the existing triplet in the first case, it is frustrating that this scenario isn't accepted.
Now paste a single 1/4 note on the first note of the triplet: now it is acepted but only the first note of the triplet is changed, no duration is modified ==> that's surprising! You paste a 1/4 duration but only a 1/12 duration is really pasted!
Finally, if you copy m notes of a n tuplet (which is currently refused) it should work and pasting on any note at least as far as m notes from the end of its n tuplet should work.
E.g. you copy 3 notes of a septuplet, you should be able to paste it on any of the note 1, 2, 3 or 4 of another septuplet.

Triplets.png

If i understand (I'm French) I enter 2 triplets with CTRL + 3 on the first and the second time. For the third and the fourth I enter rest of 1 time with clicking 5 (quarter note).

For the first triplet I enter 3 notes. For the second triplet I do nothing, so I have 3 "eight rests" in a triplet.

If i select ONE note of the first triplet (the D) , copy paste , I select the first "eight rest" of the second triplet, I copy the D easily to this second triplet.

If I select the whole first triplet (click the first note and Shift click the 3rd note , and copy past on the 3rd time of the measure ( a quater note), this whole first triplet is copying at the place of this quater rest.

When working with triplets, you must have the same lenght before and after the copy, So, if you start with ONE note only from the first triplet, the lenght is a 1/3 of 1 time so If you paste it , you must have also a 1/3 of a time , so your second triplet where you want to paste, must be written with the three 1/3 notes.

If you select the whole triplet , the lenght is 1 time so you must past on something during 1 time, so a quater note or a quater rest.

In reply to by Raymond Wicquart

I've been arguing that tuplets should be based on beats rather than note values. I think when you use of the word "time" or "1 time" you mean beats or counts. The thing is proper flagging of tuplets is another issue that is difficult to understand. Eventually I thought I had learned it, but I often still end up in a state of confusion. Not being able to easily copy and paste just makes it that much more difficult.

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