A picture with part of a measure in isolation really doesn't give enough information to tell if there is a better way to lessen the space between the notes. There may be other things that could be done.
The minimal spacing between notes and notes (notes and bar-lines, notes and clefs, etc) can be modified in Format→Style→Measure, here is a example I am currently making with denser notes:
As mentioned, in order to even begin to consider what can be done, we need a score, not a picture.
But also, it's not clear what you mean - are you saying 0 is not a sufficiently low minimum note distance to set in Format / Style / Measure, you want to set negative numbers so the notes can physically overlap?
If you enter the 20 note tuplet in the example, select all of the notes and start lowering the leading space to a negative number the notes move closer together. At a certain point, usually around -.70sp, the notes actually moving farther apart rather than closer together. I didn't test this specific example but that's what he's referring to.
Is that really what the original post was about? It doesn't mention leading space at all until a response later, saying "and...", clearly suggesting the original post was about something else. Certainly the 20-tuplet in the original example doesn't need to be so stretched, and it would be trivially easy to get close spacing, depending on the surrounding context and one's style settings. Leading space adjustments wouldn't normally be needed at all, although it is true that excessive adjustments can cause odd side effects.
In this particular example, it's the fact that none of the notes actually line up between staves - 20 vs 19 - that introduces the problem. Right now we don't allow notes to overlap - a note that starts after another note is forced to have its left edge begin after the right edge of the earlier note. I have a trial PR I made some time ago that would allow the noteheads to overlap - see https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/6312. In limited testing it seems to basically work well enough and does improve spacing. But more testing would be required, and there are other cases not fully covered by this.
If that's not the specific issue you mean, please, attach an actual score and describe the problem in more detail.
This file contains the measure I have problems with. I tried my best to minimize the distances by setting leading spaces to negative values, but it still isn't satisfying. It does seem to be the cause that notes are not allowed to overlap horizontally if they aren't on the same tick, I wish we had a way to overcome that.
And please also notice how the second measure is stretched, even though there's no notes on it. That seems weird and is definitely a bug, but is most likely a separate one though.
Comments
This is the best I can get from setting leading spaces, but I would still like the distances to be smaller.
A picture with part of a measure in isolation really doesn't give enough information to tell if there is a better way to lessen the space between the notes. There may be other things that could be done.
And if I level down the leading space past a threshold, the distance actually widens!
I realize that, but there is more on the system than that part of a measure and there is probably an easy way to get the notes closer together.
The minimal spacing between notes and notes (notes and bar-lines, notes and clefs, etc) can be modified in Format→Style→Measure, here is a example I am currently making with denser notes:
才发现题主懂中文，那就再用中文说一遍吧 ;-)
音符与音符之间（还有音符-小节线间距、音符-谱号间距等等）的最小间距是可以在格式→样式→小节里修改的，我现在就在做一个音符更密集的谱子：
As mentioned, in order to even begin to consider what can be done, we need a score, not a picture.
But also, it's not clear what you mean - are you saying 0 is not a sufficiently low minimum note distance to set in Format / Style / Measure, you want to set negative numbers so the notes can physically overlap?
If you enter the 20 note tuplet in the example, select all of the notes and start lowering the leading space to a negative number the notes move closer together. At a certain point, usually around -.70sp, the notes actually moving farther apart rather than closer together. I didn't test this specific example but that's what he's referring to.
Is that really what the original post was about? It doesn't mention leading space at all until a response later, saying "and...", clearly suggesting the original post was about something else. Certainly the 20-tuplet in the original example doesn't need to be so stretched, and it would be trivially easy to get close spacing, depending on the surrounding context and one's style settings. Leading space adjustments wouldn't normally be needed at all, although it is true that excessive adjustments can cause odd side effects.
In this particular example, it's the fact that none of the notes actually line up between staves - 20 vs 19 - that introduces the problem. Right now we don't allow notes to overlap - a note that starts after another note is forced to have its left edge begin after the right edge of the earlier note. I have a trial PR I made some time ago that would allow the noteheads to overlap - see https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/6312. In limited testing it seems to basically work well enough and does improve spacing. But more testing would be required, and there are other cases not fully covered by this.
If that's not the specific issue you mean, please, attach an actual score and describe the problem in more detail.
This file contains the measure I have problems with. I tried my best to minimize the distances by setting leading spaces to negative values, but it still isn't satisfying. It does seem to be the cause that notes are not allowed to overlap horizontally if they aren't on the same tick, I wish we had a way to overcome that.
And please also notice how the second measure is stretched, even though there's no notes on it. That seems weird and is definitely a bug, but is most likely a separate one though.