[Guitar Pro 6] " ring," "B.V." (barre) and "P.M." (palm mute) markings should be spanners

• Aug 21, 2014 - 15:52
Reported version
S4 - Minor

Making this issue just so that it's tracked somewhere. Guitar Pro represents the "let ring" marking as what we call a spanner but Musescore does not and generates text. This means for files with "let ring" markings on consecutive chords, rather a lot of text can be generated.


This is really annoying when you are opening a tab with lots of "let ring" notes. You get a let ring text for each note and also get multiple let ring texts in the same chord. It would be better to just ignore "let ring"s and do not import them while they are not properly handled.

Title [Guitar Pro] "Let ring" marking should be a spanner Some test files to aid in troubleshooting this functionality

For your convenience I attach 2 very simple GuitarPro files containing test files for troubleshooting. A very simple file with a let ring that in one case is limited to the measure and in the other spans over 2 measures.

I include the pdfs showing how the score looks like ( and how musecore should also more or less look like after importing the guitarpro file)

Feel free to ask for more test files


Attachment Size
test_let_ring_1.gpx 14.3 KB
test_let_ring_1.pdf 32.67 KB
test_let_ring_2.gpx 14.42 KB
test_let_ring_2.pdf 33.14 KB

He was changing the title of the issue to reflect what really needs to happen internally to achieve the desired result. "Spanner" is our term for markings that span multiple notes, like crescendos, slurs, etc. Right now we don't have a "let ring" indicator that works this way. We probably should.

Although realistically, isn't that really the same as a (piano) pedal marking, then? Could it be as simple as converting these into pedal markings with appropriate text and positioning adjustments?

Hi Marc !

yes, I believe it is the same as the piano pedal.

The barré , the palm mute, could also be that type of spanners.

I think so.

Well, I would think those are better treated as ordinary text lines, because they shouldn't affect playback in the same way that pedal markings do.

I meant the barre & palm mute mentioned in #9. Of course, we could invent a new playback behavior for palm mute. Right now you could do palm mute using a staff text if the channels were set up that way. At some point we could go ahead and set it up that way, but then add the ability for text lines to also trigger the same channel changes that staff texts do now. Something to consider for some day.

Hello !

Let me try to summarize and ask a couple of questions.

Let ring: it seems we all agree it is a spanner with a similar functionality to the piano pedal. So it looks like ready for implementation. Who wants to do it ?

Barre: it has no effect on sound reproduction so it is just pure graphics that do not affect the midi performance. It belongs to the family of spanners. So I think here we are also ready for implementation. Who will do it ? I ask so that I can eventually provide GuitarPro files for test/debugging)

Palm Mute: as I see it we have two aspects. We can implement the graphic thing first, with no effect on the sound, just like a one more type of spanner. And then , in the future, we can do a design of how to implement that in playback. The midi standard does not have built-in support for pizzicato so here we need custom design/proprietary solution.

Would it makes sense to implement Palm mute now as a mere graphic thing and move step 2 (it effect on audio) for the future? In this manner we could implement quickly support for this 3 things quite quickly.

I am curious about how the team of developers work: do you put these 3 features in a backlog that someone prioritizes ?


Guitar's (palm) mute is possible in the same manner as pizzicato for violin, just needs some additions to the guitar entries in instruments.xml, check attached score, in which I experimented with the various guitar sounds GM has to offer

Attachment Size
Guitars.mscx 85.58 KB

There is no really formal process. Simply having this issue open is a good start. If you wish to start a new issue specifically for the other element types, so the features can be implemented and the issues closed independently, that's not a bad idea.

Generally, unless someone is ready to work on this today, people wouldn't worry about assigning themselves. It's best to simply attach files that demonstrate the issue directly to the issue, so that whomever ends up implementing it - whether next week, next month, or next year - all the necessary information is right there.

How does "let ring" (to start with) work regarding to voices? For what I can see in GP6, a "let ring" is attached to a Note, not even beat. Is it possible to have a "let ring" for only one voice? Or starting on a given voice and then moving to another one? Is it possible to have a let ring for only one note in a chord?

There is an assistant/tool to create "let ring" in Guitar Pro 6.
Maybe this will help, see this video (from 1:40'): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwWpDOZ8B-A
(and then, from 2:40', other tool for Palm Mute: P.M.)
And a test file: let ring systems.gpx
And image:
let ring .jpg

Second image, for the result in GP:
And the current result in MuseScore :( let ring systems.mscz
So, for "span several systems", not sure what you mean exactly "technically", but see the image above.

And for the voices, yes, you can for all voices.

Attachment Size
let ring systems.gpx 15.24 KB
let ring .jpg 62.13 KB
system.jpg 15.16 KB
let ring systems.mscz 5.84 KB

"Or starting on a given voice and then moving to another one"

Yes, you can (always via the tool, select eg 3 measures which are in Voice 1, then ditto for next measures in Voice 2 and so on)
The test file: voices change.gpx

" Is it possible to have a let ring for only one note in a chord?"

From what I see, the behaviour is: you select a note (whatever which) in a chord, and you can add a "let ring", available for all this chord.
Eg in this test file: chord let ring.gpx , I begin to select the low C in the first chord, adds "let ring", continues by select the E in second chord, "let ring", and so on, the G third chord, and top C fourth chord.
I hope the explanation is sufficient?

If need other specific test files, let me know.

Attachment Size
voices change.gpx 15.09 KB
chord let ring.gpx 14.97 KB

Short questions, but not simple to answer briefly! I'm going to try.

  • I do not think these points of "string" or "voice" are relevant to determining what should be let ring or not. For guitar, this is indicated by the term “let ring” (l.v., “laissez vibrer”) or/and by open ties, to reinforce the intention of the composer (in contemporary music essentially). No matter the voice, or the strings.
    See « Behind Bars » p.383.384

  • What it is disturbing (maybe?), it’s the way the tool GP "let ring" is organized, as can that be seen on the YT video or the image in previous comment. Especially the ability to tick, or not, a particular string or a few strings (and also to tick “all voices”).

I assume this is come closer, in the spirit, of our "Selection → More", in order to save time to select some strings.

  • In my understanding, this tool essentially concerns the playback, like this can be heard on the YT video, as a pedal line (MuseScore does not support, for guitar, this playback of “let ring”, so no real issue)

EDIT: oops ... I discover that I can use a pedal line (with playback) in a guitar score :) But since this is never used in the guitar repertoire, never the utility!

According to what I see, the average user of GP (or rather in some music styles, let’s say rock music), so, this user employes essentially the voice 1 (simpler, faster, probably,)
And then, he “cheats” by using abundantly this tool “let ring”, in order to obtain in the playback the sustained effect of an arpeggio.
But this could also be done in voice 2, or other. So, no matter either again here.

  • From this GP file: green_day_wake_me_up_when_september_ends.gp5 (see first measures, and measure 7 in particular)
    I did a little test: arpeggio.mscz
    .1st system: as the user of GP writes these measures (all in voice 1)
    .2nd system: as it does then, for the playback, by adding “let ring” on some melodic notes, or/and for the bass line (and sometime, with some inconsistencies!)
    .3rd system: as it should be written! In two or three voices, and so, in order to get the right notes duration of this arpeggio without going through this "solution of ease" of “let ring”

  • To conclude, I do not think we should worry about these questions of voices and strings (in the real life, not a problem, and for GP, a tool for the playback, for "internal use", in my comprehension still).

The main point is to no longer have all these texts of “let ring” at each measure when we import the GP files.
But to get something in the spirit of our ottava lines (“let ring” at first, then a dotted line) And the same thing for the Palm Mute (P.M.)

Again, focusing on "let ring". My idea was indeed to replace all the texts by a Pedal line (to get playback for free?), styling it with dotted line and the right text.
Something like this (unfortunately we cannot make a hook at the end that goes up and down, at least in 2.2

Capture d'écran 2017-08-23 10.40.11.png

See the mscz for a line spanning two systems.

Attachment Size
letring.mscz 4.45 KB
Capture d'écran 2017-08-23 10.40.11.png 42.41 KB

Btw, something for another issue but I know there is an mpal file floating around for Barre. Do you think it would make sense to add a new palette "Guitar" in the advanced workspace featuring the barre palette, and some other premade lines (PM, let ring etc...), and potentially the fingerings too (even if they are a duplicate). If yes, let's open a new feature request to discuss it.

"My idea was indeed to replace all the texts by a Pedal line (to get playback for free?), styling it with dotted line and the right text."
Good idea. Approved here.
"(unfortunately we cannot make a hook at the end that goes up and down, at least in 2.2"
Minor inconvenient for now.
"another issue but I know there is an mpal file floating around for Barre"
Issue, mpal file floating?

"Do you think it would make sense to add a new palette "Guitar" in the advanced workspace featuring the barre palette, and some other premade lines (PM, let ring etc...), and potentially the fingerings too (even if they are a duplicate)"

The barre palette? What do you mean. This one? Barrés.mpal ( If so, it's one of the possibilities among others, and I only participated in its creation)
Indeed, there is no really a standard for display the barre. Sometimes, depending the publishers, it's shown eg: CII or C2, and BII or B2, and sometimes, even only brackets, or only lines with the fret position (ie without C or B). I have my preference (and this is not that of the attached .mpal file !), someone else will have another preference.

In my opinion, preferable to add "P.M" and "Let Ring" in the lines palette, and leave fingerings where they are.
So, this idea of creating a Guitar Palette leaves me somewhat indifferent by now since you can create a custom palette as you wish and depending your habit and taste. But my personal feeling.
Maybe you can open a thread on the forum to gather the opinions of other guitarists.

Attachment Size
Barrés.mpal 872 bytes

OK Barre and PM are now spanners too in 11a58efcfb

Except barre, let ring and PM, is there anything else in GP that is represented as a spanner? From the code only, I would say "tapped note" maybe? Can anyone confirm?

> is there anything else in GP that is represented as a spanner? From the code only, I would say "tapped note" maybe? Can anyone confirm?

Hello !

I have GuitarPro 7 but I am not an expert.

"8va" and "8vb" is also a spanner in GuitarPro and it affects by raising or lowering an octave the notes..

As you might see in the attached GP7 picture, Tapped notes appear as many letters "T" ove the notes, not as a spanner. The same for pop'd notes and slapped.

However it would be a great contribution to MuseScore to have spanners for:

  • passages played with the same finger ( very common in flamenco)
  • passages where all notes as tapped popped, slapped (T,P,S)

There is a potential conflict to resolve: a passage played with the thumb "p" (pulgar) and a passage with popped notes need different spanners ( not just "p-----------" )

Let me know if you want me to generate test files in GP to import into musescore and verify the functionality of spanners


Attachment Size
spanners.jpg 41.21 KB
Title [Guitar Pro] "Let ring," "B.V." (barre) and "P.M." (palm mute) markings should be spanners [Guitar Pro 6] " ring," "B.V." (barre) and "P.M." (palm mute) markings should be spanners

For the record, the current fixes concern GP6 (.gpx format), at least essentially (seems too "let ring" for gp4 and gp5)
GP7 is released only a few months ago. I talk under the control of Lasconic, but probably: everything in its time!
(so: .gp, new format of GP 7 is not supported currently. But maybe we get some good results anyway, except for some new features? I absolutely do not know what can happen in this case.)

Indeed, the tapping effect is not a spanner. It's indicated by a "+" on each note in standard staff, and by a T (tap) in the Tab.
A test file: hammer extende tap.gpx
The T is imported twice, in the two staves (and so, not the +). Really a problem? (eg you can delete the T in top
staff, and then add, in a range selection, the "+" of Articulations palette) ?

Attachment Size
plus.jpg 24.94 KB
hammer extende tap.gpx 15.84 KB

Just one thing to note: I downloaded this file: Tapping Licks - Tapping Exercise On One String.gp3

I get this by opening it with GP6 (first measure here)

I observe that that the slur or Hammer / Pull-Off are not imported with 11a58ef.
I do not understand what happens (maybe because created with GP3 and so, with extended hammers/pull-off, not slur?) Anyway, I can not reproduce from scratch, so probably, no worry.

I will take a look to the slur in GP3. For the multiple text, can you file another issue with a link to your test file? Same for *gp support (let's see how different it is)?
A different representation of tapping in tab and standard notation is currently not possible in MuseScore and would require quite some work.

If I understand correctly, passages played with the same finger and passage where all notes as tapped popped, slapped are both not supported by GP and so do not belong to this issue. If it's about supporting them in MuseScore, it's already possible to edit a simple line and change the "beginning text" to read p, t etc... and then put this line in a custom workspace.

And I think we are good for this issue. It can be marked as fixed. Please create specific issues with short example if possible for any issue with PM, let ring or barre import from GP.