Musescore 2.3.2 compatibility

• Dec 10, 2018 - 21:02

Ok I reverted back to 2.3.2.
(I rarely try beta software anyway. I just wait until at least 3 months after its release. I am still on High Sierra for iMac. But I love Musescore so much I couldn't resist!)
But anyway, what is the final verdict on compatibility with 2.3.2 for version 3?
Will it be 100% compatible when it is finalized?
Apparently, the museJazz font is not, I have to uninstall it?

When 3 is out of beta is it going to be 100% compatible with 2.3.2?


Scores created in 3.x cannot be opened in prior versions; you could try exporting via MusicXML and then importing back.

Scores created in 2.x (and even 1.x) open in 3.x; due to improvements and auto-layout there will be visual changes when "upgrading" a score. The more manual layouting you did in a previous version, the bigger the chance it won't automatically look good in a newer version.

You can keep 2.x and 3.x installed side by side though; so I'd advise you to keep using 2.x for scores already created there and that only need minor modifications.
Use 3.x for your new scores or if you absolutely need one of the new features badly enough.

You also should not install any of the fonts shipped with MuseScore system-wide, as that can cause trouble. They are embedded in the binary, and will be embedded into the generated PDFs as well.

Furthermore, musical fonts are even more tricky than text fonts, as they consist of not only the font itself but also metadata about it, which is version-specific, but has to be known to the application. So using an older or newer version of Bravura, MScore (Emmentaler) or Gootville (Gonville) with an unsuspecting MuseScore application or PDF score can cause bad looks.

Now MuseJazz is special: in 2.x it’s a text font, renamed to MuseJazz Text in 3.x (and changed, pretty sure in an incompatible way, too), and there’s a new MuseJazz font which is a musical font. (It’s also excluded from the Debian packages of 3.x until the outstanding source code availability issue is fixed, so Bravura and FreeSans (I think) are substituting it in old scores for now.)

Nopt sure what you mean about MuseJazz, but scores created using MuseJazz in 2.3.2 should look fine in 3.0 as well. As mentioned, scores created in 3.0 won't open in 2.3.2, period, no chance of that at all.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

First off, thank you so much for all your help over the years. Love this software!

I cant use the MuseJazz font in 3.0 to export PDF's if I have the 2.3.2 version installed (which makes perfect sense)

Yeah, I am going to stick with 2.3.2.
I might not even bother with 3.0, I fear it is going to get too bloated now, as a larger company sinks its teeth into the code.
Musescore 2.3.2 is absolutely perfect for me. I don't need anything else,. I want to focus on making music not using the software (sorry LOL)

But anyway, best of luck composing!!

In reply to by Unknown Prodigy

Are you on Linux? I guess if you so and your installation put MuseJazz in your regular system fonts, then compatibiltiy could be a problem there. That's an issue to raise with the packager of your 2.3.2 version, I think. Better to just use the AppImage, maybe?

Not sure why you'd be concerned about 3.0 becoming bloated, it's not that much different overall from 2.x except to add some really important and highly useful stuff like automatic placement that will help you focus on the music and not fighting collisions. These features were added by Werner and others long before Ultimate Guitar entered the picture.

Anyhow, feel free to stick with 2.3.2 as long we it continues to make you happy, eventually though as you see discussions here and find yourself unable to open other people's score I'm pretty sure you'll start realizing how much you're missing. But 3.0 hasn't been released yet, the beta is really for testing purpsoes primarily and we don't expect anyone to "switch" to it yet.

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