the strangest thing just keeps happening!
When arranging, I number each measure of the source music and also each measure of the score--pretty normal stuff. This time, I realized I needed to insert a second ending after measure 20 to make the arrangement work properly. Instead of re-numbering by hand all the source measures, I inserted a measure, told MS to NOT include that one in the numbering, and I will come back when I am through to correct the sequence. OK? That always works for me and saves me time.
This time, it worked great, showing measure 21 as the one after my {inserted} second ending. As I started to write in the next few measures, I kept getting confused as to which measure I am writing to: I finally realized that the numbering changes when I am not looking, from 21 to 22 and back and forth for no good reason at all! I clicked the added measure [the un-numbered one], again told it to exclude that one in the number sequence, in case it forgot. The problem continues. Very strange and annoying. I know I can just re-number everything, but why is this happening? I can't duplicate this as it keeps changing when it feels like it!
Any ideas?
Thanks! Scott
Comments
Can you share the score showing this behavior?
Just to make sure, the displayed measure numbers are the ones that take offset and exclusion into account. The number you see in the status bar is the internal "real" measure number and not affected by such things.
In reply to Can you share the score… by jeetee
No, I cannot duplicate this, as the numbers kept changing for no apparent reason at all. I finally just re-numbered everything in the source and kept going.
The numbers I referred to are those atop the actual measures in question. At one point, in a 13 line score, the top 3 read 21 and the rest read 22--talk about weird! Moments later, those numbers changed, too.
This has never happened before in my 6 years using MS.
In reply to No, I cannot duplicate this,… by scottwest46
Normally there should hardly be any effort involved with showing measure numbers, so I don't really understand the "finally re-numbered everything" comment.
Does it refer to anything else than adjusting a measure number by changing its offset or excluding it from the counting?
I'm confused as to what you mean when you say you "number each measure" - don't you mean, you let MuseScore number every measure for you? Or are you literally adding numbering manually? But then, I would have no idea what you mean by "re-numbering by hand all the source measures" - or what it would mean to "come back ... to correct the sequence". Excluding the new measure from the count is all you should ever need to do, if you wanted the original numbering to preserved.
So definitely, in order to understand and assist, we'd need you to attach the score and describe in more detail what you are actually doing, or not doing here.
In reply to I'm confused as to what you… by Marc Sabatella
Marc,
I may not have been clear enough: By numbering each measure, I meant that I go through my original music, number each measure on the paper page so that it is easy to correlate my original paper copy and the MS score. I use the MS automatic measure marking every day and have never had this happen before, where the numbering changes willy nilly. I understand the system [finally!] of excluding measures and this time it failed. I finally went the hard way and adjusted my original paper copy so I didn't go crazy. Everything came out well, but it is puzzling. I cannot duplicate this for you to check out, unfortunately.
In reply to Marc, I may not have been… by scottwest46
Ah, I get it, I thought you meant numbering the measures in MuseScore.
So when you say you cannot duplicate this, you mean the problem has stopped happening? It could still be worth attaching the score, there might be some clue we can see even if the problem no longer occurs.
In reply to Ah, I get it, I thought you… by Marc Sabatella
The problem occurred when I inserted a 2nd ending after measure 20, as the pickups were different going back and going forward. Rather than re-number my paper source copy, I set it up so that the second ending would not be counted in MS and the subsequent measures would still match up with my paper source. I can then re-number in MS when I am done and all is well. Until it wasn't. Probably the oddest of all were the couple times I spotted the first few lines of the score read 21 and those below it read 22. Mostly, all lines read the same, but kept changing at will. I could find no reason or cause for why they kept changing, nothing I did that would cause it to change.
It's been a long road for me learning what I know today about MS [with a lot of community support over the years! Thanks!], and I make fewer mistakes, by far, but this seems to be away from user error.
Scott Union Grand March.mscz
In reply to The problem occurred when I… by scottwest46
Thanks for posting the score! I'm still confused as to what you mean about "the first few lines of the score read 21 and those below it read 22". As far as I see, the measure numbers only appear on the top line of the score. Do you mean the parts? The "exclude from measure count* property is not currently linked between score and parts, so for now it's "normal" that the parts would not reflect the change until you go in and make the same change there. Apparently it works when you first generate the parts but the link information somehow gets lost when you save/reload the score. I don't think the issue is well understood. See #257581: Changes to Measure properties are not propagated between score and existing linked parts after save/reload
In reply to Thanks for posting the score… by Marc Sabatella
No, the parts I generate after the score is completed. The fist 3-4 lines[ picc, Eb cornet, 1st Bb Cornet, maybe 2nd Bb cornet, I forget] at one time displayed measure 21 while the rest displayed 22. That, as I said, was the weirdest thing of all.
When I write, I display measure numbers on all lines of the score, just to easily keep track of what I am entering; when I am through, I remove the measure numbers from all but the 1st line of score--looks better that way.