Planning for a MuseScore 2.3 release

• Apr 4, 2018 - 12:32

On April 3rd we released MuseScore 2.2.1. As stated in the announcement, the next major version of MuseScore, version 3.0, is still in the works. It’s big endeavor to make MuseScore smarter, faster and easier to use.

In the meantime, we are continuing to further develop the new MuseScore_General SoundFont and quality of playback based on the input and insights of the community.

One area of playback where there has been considerable feedback has been percussion (especially marching percussion). Thanks to the support of Ultimate Guitar and in particular Chris Collins and Daniel Ray we have the opportunity to significantly improve playback capabilities for percussion, based on a new library of percussion samples recorded exclusively for MuseScore.

This new sample library allows us to improve the quality of sound in percussion playback. Taking advantage of the capabilities of Zerberus, we introduce articulations and expressions not previously available. This new development creates a unique opportunity to focus on improving and expanding percussion notation capabilities to support a wider-range of percussion instruments, articulations, and techniques. A number of new noteheads and mappings will be introduced to better align MuseScore with the industry standards (including VDL) while improving the overall workflow for composing for percussion instruments.

We have created a 2.3 branch and going to make a public release within few months. As we move forward with 2.3 we will also keep on working on master/3.0, cherry-picking bug fixes and new features in 2.3 branch to make sure 2.3 becomes our most stable release ever.


Without having really skills in coding, how realistic an easy would it be to use another Qt version beyond 5.4.x for the portable version/AppImages inside the next releases before 3.x? Especially for the AppImage there are known bugs with 5.4 (input by using the numpad, maybe resolution problems with HiDpi monitors too...)

In reply to by kuwitt

As far as I'm aware we are stuck with Qt 5-4 for Windows/mingw, due to the lack of webview, needed for the start center. but it is only this platform and toolchain having this problem, the only reason to stay on the same Qt version for Mac and Linux is consistency, so we could move to a newer Qt for the AppImages.

In reply to by marczellm

Getting it to work...
Try it, get it to work, share (description in developers' handbook, possible also a PR for some needed code or build changes) and become famous ;-)
On top of enabling us to move to a newer Qt version, we than also could put out fully supported 64-bit version of MuseScore for Windows

Thanks for taking the time to improve percussion in Musescore! Will pitched percussion (specifically marimbas and vibraphones, etc.) also be updated in 2.3?

Very cool. I like that you'd rather take the time to do it right to release a thoroughly complete version rather than you throwing together a rushed version that's half assed done with bugs (coughs Windows 10). You guys have done an awesome job considering how much you can do with Musescore with very few bugs/problems that need to be fixed. Thanks for the great thorough work you've done : )

Hmm, I once read somewhere on these forums that every 2.x release means that 3.0 is pushed back a bit, so I'm rather conflicted about news of a 2.3 release. 3.0 was first announced back in May 2016 and promised great features which the good developers have been working on ever since.

3.0's smart layout is a necessity for me as having to make manual adjustments is really irritating. I was hoping the developers would focus solely on 3.0 since before news of 2.2, but I guess I just don't understand how software development works. 2.2 also fixed some of 2.1's regressions, which I guess was important.

Sorry for being a bit negative, and feel free to prove me wrong. In the meantime, I guess I'll take to playing around with the master branch and reporting any bugs I find, if I stumble across any. I hope this message isn't rude.

In reply to by FugalOmen

These releases might mean they come because 3.0 is pushed a bit back (it’s a massive task, after all, and still very buggy), not causing it to be pushed back.

MuseScore releases are rare enough… I’d prefer getting small bugfix-only releases like 2.2.1 every now and then, but the big ones like 2.1, 2.2 (currently about once a year) merging most fixes and a number of stable-enough features are useful to the average person trying to get MuseScore, and Free Software in music, and Free Music, more accepted.

Gradual changes also help both packagers and users to adjust better.

In reply to by FugalOmen

I'd say it is unavoidably true that any 2.x release will take resources away from 3.0 and thus potentially delay it (or cause it to be released with fewer features, or other compromise it). Thus, interim releases are not undertaken lightly. But indeed, the reality is that, based on the current state of things, a 3.0 release is still a long ways off, and it can still be the right decision to get some improvements out there before 3.0 is ready even if that does push 3.0 out a bit. It's a delicate balance to be sure.

You are developers, so you just do what developers do, that is -- you develop pieces of software. That's good.
I would like to offer you my two cents, though: I have been using 2.1 for a long while, and I loved it all the time; I'm now using 2.2.1, and I love it as well. What I mean, is that when a piece of software is as good as MuseScore has been since a few years ago, it really doesn't matter if it is updated or not. What it really matters is that it remains a good piece of software. Oh, and (very important) that each new version maintains backward compatibility with not-so-new systems (how many people are still using XP these days, or have to rely on not-so-fast machines to achieve their tasks?).

In reply to by Aldo

If a future version of MuseScore is released that will not work on xp (that I believe Microsoft even stopped supporting) the version you are using will continue to work, but there will be features you will not be able to upgrade to and bugs that will never go away. You will have to decide if this is acceptable or if it's time to upgrade your system. This is true of all software.

In reply to by mike320

Microsoft stopped supporting Windows XP 4 years ago already (almost exactly; 8th April 2014), for Windows 8 2 years ago (12th Januray 2016), for Windows Vista one years ago (11th April 2017), Windows 7 (and 8.1) support is planed to end in 2 years (14th January 2020).

Please add a capability for Gregorian Chant notation. If that is not possible, consider allowing music to be input without measures, as chant is free flowing rather than rhythmic-metered, and allow square as well as round notes.

In reply to by DavidJustinLynch

  1. Use a large time signature (for example 22/1); disable the display of it in staff properties. If desired, also disable the display of barlines and/or hide system barline.
  2. Make use of the measure join and split commands to be able to create 'measures' for each line. When you're using them often, consider assigning a shortcut to those actions.
  3. After entering all notes, select them all and using the Inspector change the head group to 'diamond'. Using the inspector you can make the notes stemless as well.

Since posting about the future of series 2 I encountered some crashes in the recent version (not sure if one of those is filed), so I certainly welcome more releases; perhaps even quarterly ones?

In reply to by nicolyon1005

Yep. And also supports multiple samples for each with alternations (round robin).

For example, a single snare hit previously had one sample, but now has 4 samples - 2 L and 2 R.
If there is a series of say 4 sixteenth note hits, rather than triggering a single sample for each, it would alternate between 4 samples.

It is important to note that this doesn't mean that sticking will trigger sticking specific samples.

Will there be improvements in the display of video scores on YouTube? I often see octave signs and symbols that get misaligned during the scrolling video. The notes play in correct octave range but get distorted during video playback. Also, any options for color display and the title, composer part of the score to display?

In reply to by Timothy Stapay

If you have a specific problem with a specific score regarding octave markings, best to start a new thread in the Support forum. Attach the score and tell us the precise steps to reproduce the problem.

But FWIW, this thread is about a planned update to the MuseScore notation software itself, not about anything having to do with websites (MuseScore's or YouTube's).

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