D.S. al Fine, sort of.

• Oct 10, 2019 - 03:57

Given the measures: [1]; [2, 3, 4]; [5]; [6]; [7, 8, 9]. Can MuseScore be told to play them in this order: [1], [2, 3, 4], [5], skip [6], [7, 8, 9], jump to [2, 3, 4], skip [5], [6], stop. This is how the original score for the piece I am transcribing is laid out. This is sort of "D.S. al Fine", except that the Fine is not at the end of the piece.

I realize that this could be accomplished by rearranging/duplicating the measures into repeats, but on this piece that would make for a very long part 1, and a one-measure part 2. This is probably why the original authors scored it the way they did.

Thanks for your help. Feel free to point me to where I can read about the answer if such is documented.


That's actually a d.s. al coda with 6 being the coda (move it to the end since it serves no purpose in the middle of the song), 2 being the segno and the to coda being placed in "measure" 4.

Without changing measure order, you could abuse volta's to that end; but the result isn't very readable musically:
1 |: 2 3 4 [5 under volta 1] [6 under volta 2] [7 8 9 :| under volta 1]

Or indeed use the suggestion from mike which is more standard notation and thus better readable:
1 (2 segno) 3 (4 To Coda) 5 7 8 (9 D.S. al Coda) (6 Coda)

As a side note, the original piece was scored as I show above; and, although non-standard, it does seem to work "visually": You play the whole piece through, except you skip over one measure somewhere in the middle ("measure 6"), then play the piece a second time, but somewhere in the middle you skip "measure 5", play "measure 6", and stop (without needing to jump "far away" to the coda).

Perhaps this is something we could teach MuseScore how to do. Just a thought, if you all consider it worthwhile.

In reply to by wagill

Well, you can do that using the volta approach. If you want different visuals, just make them invisible (select and press 'V' or untick the visible checkbox in the Inspector).
Then you'll likely need to add some staff text to clarify the playback order for the humans reading your score.

Is it possible to get a picture of the original? I'm curious as to how the intended playback order was conveyed there.

In reply to by jeetee

Yes, there is some staff text to clarify that basically the "coda" was stuck soon after the "to coda" in the score. Attached is the piano piece; the measures in question are on page 2, notated as volta 1 and 2; the staff text is in Spanish: 1) "To continue"; 2) "To Fine". Notice that there is no final barline at the end of the piece, nor at the end of the "coda".

Attachment Size
Alfonsina y el mar - Piano.pdf 263.7 KB

In reply to by wagill

Those instructions are confusing in every way possible. Some are above the top staff, some below. I don't understand the finer points of Spanish, but it would be my understanding that you would skip volta 1 and play volta 2 instead and go to the fine (para fine), but there is no actual fine marked on the score. The open volta 2 increases the confusion. I didn't count words and notes, but it seems the fine belongs at the end of the measure with the volta 2, and that is the reason for the double barline. The absence of the end barline is not too unusual when the score ends in the middle. Some publishers use double barlines some use end barlines.

In reply to by mike320

Yes, the Fine is at the end of the single-measure volta 2. And I agree, this layout can be confusing. It took me a while to figure it out (and I do speak Spanish fluently). But, once I figured it out, I liked it better than having that lone coda measure way at the end of the piece. Regardless, in my transcription using MuseScore, I will use the more standard "to coda" method.

In reply to by wagill

I see why a human can understand it, the volta's do help there as well.
The reason why MuseScore can't use that jump instruction, is that jumps don't influence the repeat count. So after the jump, MuseScore is unable to determine this as "the second repeat", but rather jumped backwards and replays the first (and only!) repeat of that sections. The 2nd volta is never honored, because there isn't a repeat.

So to get your notation as close as it was, I'd go for the volta option as mentioned above, and only make the 3rd volta (7-9) invisible. Do use the repeat bars instead of the jump instruction. Perhaps change the barline at the end of 6 to be of the end type. That way you can leave out the Fine text and still be equally clear about the intention.

In reply to by jeetee

See my last reply to mike. While I am tempted to honor the way the original is written (and thank you for showing me how to do it), I might keep it simple and use the "to coda" method. But, it's nice to know that I might have a choice (if I can figure out the "doctored" volta).

Thanks for the insights; I'm learning.

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