Beats not listed correctly in status bar for cut time

• Feb 13, 2019 - 14:37
Reported version
3.0
Priority
P1 - High
Type
Graphical (UI)
Frequency
Many
Severity
S3 - Major
Reproducibility
Always
Status
active
Regression
No
Workaround
No
Project
Tags

Pls see attached bug file. There are three bugs in the file:
1. Click the beat 3 in any measure, the status bar shows Beat 2, not beat 3. Also beat 4 is shown as beat 3.
2. note of beat 4 in measure 17 in the full score is not shown correct in all the part scores. This issue happend when I change this note in the full score. 'Part 3 in F' part is created before the change. It shows the old note without change. The other part scores are created after the change. While they show a very strange note with is in the wrong place between the staff line as you can see.
3. Tie in measure 9 in the full socre is not shown in all part scores. This issue can be reproduced by copying the two tied notes in measure 7 to any other measure in the full score. The tie will not shown in part score.

Attachment Size
Parts_Bug.mscz 15.51 KB

Comments

1) confirmed
2) that note/chord has an offset applied, 1,2sp down in 3 of the parts (0 in the 4th), 1,41sp in main score -> not a bug, but an error between keyboads and chair ;-)
3) confirmed

Title Bug Report - Full score and part score are not synchronized and beat number are not correct Beats not listed correctly in status bar for cut time
Severity S2 - Critical S3 - Major
Priority P0 - Critical

The tie issue should already be fixed for the next update - see #280917: Ties fail to be copied-pasted in a score with parts. That leaves only the first as an actual bug, which I can reproduce easily from scratch - the beats in cut time are always labeled badly it seems, and this is the case in 2.3.2 as well. That is:

1) any score in cut time
2) enter four quarter notes in a measure
3) observe status bar

Result: the beats are labeled 1, 2, 2, 3

It might seem not that critical, but it's going to confuse blind users relying on screenreader output for sure...

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Hi all,

I’ve come across this one too in the context of extracting information from the scores.

To resolve this, I would suggest that beat numbering follow the conventions for the given metre, (e.g. so 4/4 has 4 beats in total, while 6/8 and 2/2 have two). That being the case, a succession of eighth notes will be assigned different beat information depending on that context:
- in 4/4, that succession begins with beats 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5;
- in 2/2, it is 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75; while
- in 6/8, it will be 1, 1.33, 1.66, 2.

I suspect this will be an easy code fix when you have the offending line – I can have a look for it if you like.