Allow [Q] and [W] to work on a range selection

• Feb 8, 2021 - 19:01
Reported version
S5 - Suggestion

1) Copy a chord (several simultaneous notes in 1 voice) and paste it anywhere, then keep it selected and use [Q] or [W] to change the duration. It fails.
2) select a single notehead of the chord and try the same. It works, but for the whole chord.
This is not only contradivtive behaviour but it disturbs: When pasting a chord repeatedly into several rythmic spaces, we want to adjust the duration using Q and W which is very practical and efficient. Please enable Q and W.
3) pasting single notes, the duration automatically adapts to the elength of pause sign or previous note, this is good. Pasting a melody (several subsequent notes) ths length does not adapt, this is good. But pasting a chord the duration should adapt, because these notes are of a single temporal moment and should behave like a single note. Or at least enable Q and W.

Version Windows 8.1, 64 Bit

chord is still
Selecting a note and using [Q] and [W] changes its duration. This is very practical but fails to work on chords, (more than 1 simultaneous note in one voice). It works when selecting only one note of the chord, but after copying and pasting a chord, all chord-notes are seleted and it should then work.

2) SImilar: pasting single notes from the clipboard, the duration adapts to the duration of present pause sign or note. This is wanted. But pasting notes of a chord, they do not adapt. It should behave same. (pasting a group of subsequent notes, durations have to stay of course)..


Note that a chord is just one example of a range selection, there really ins't a straightforward way to allow this for some range selections but not others. That's the distinction. But even if it isn't straightforward, that isn't to say it isn't impossible, so something like that could definitely be considered someday. For that matter, someday we could consider implementing Q at least for any range selection (W is more awkward, as by definition it now creates overlaps).

Workaround No Yes

Meanwhile, it isn't clear what you are trying to do exactly, but instead of pasting then using Q or W, consider simply using there paste half/double duration commands, which accomplishes the same in one stroke.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Yes, pasting half and double duration is an option I use for sequences of several notes. But I found that most of the time, it is very quick to use [W] and [Q] directly for any note. Advantages:
1) half steps also directly possible ([Shift]+[Q]).
2) Double step (facotr 4) also possible by repeating it in one go.
3) repeating the key when fingers are already on it, is the fastest way possible.
4) doing and and undoing is all the same operation (means more relaxed).
I'm faster with it. Beginners might also be easier with it.
Thats why I dont use the numeric defined durations, except when many notes of same duration follow.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

Yes, I feel worth to consider [Q] for any selection. But this can not be done for half steps [Shift + Q].

I understand the principle of the distintion [allow Q and W or not]. But I wonder why it can't can be done in accordance with the result. Using [Q] and [W] for chords is already possible (I use it a lot) and it alters all notes simultaneously. Accordingly shoud be the criterion: "selections which are confined to temporally simultaneous notes (one note length) in one voice". And this should include half steps [Shift+W] and [Shift +Q] as well.

And about [W] for ANY selection: why would overlaps disturb? We already have overlaps, now created by inserting longer notes by note input, or by pasting longer chords from clipboard. (Chords don't adapt the duration, as single notes do). These cases can really disturb, and that's why in addition I want to suggest to treat chords like single notes.

I said that half steps [shift + Q] or [Shift+W] might not work for a selected note sequence. But actually why not? It might be worth considering this, too! THis is my first suggestion. (I see no problem with un-intended overwriting, because the undo function works there).

And mostly, I like ro repeat my suggestion to ALLOW EDIT THE DURATION AT LEAST FOR CHORDS. It can be well straightforward to differenciate between selections of chord notes and of greater selection ranges. This differentiation already exists, otherwise the duration of chords could not be altered by Q and W (using the trick to select only 1 note of it). So please allow this also during the whole chord is selected, not only one note is selected. Because this is the situation which occurs after pasting a chord, and the workflow wohld become very easy.

Third suggestion: Please let the chords behave same like single notes, when pasting from the clipboard: Adapt the duration fiting to the space. Now it does not, which means it can overwrite if a longer duration was copied. In this case, the undo-button can not help, unless I temporally shorten my source-chord before copying, then copy and paste it, and then re-increase the source chord again. This workaround is often still faster than repeatedly writing big chords from the scratch. (or maybe I should also ask hep how to do this more efficiently)

Title changing duration by [Q] and [W] fails with chords; contradictive behaviour Allow [Q] and [W] to work on a range selection
Status active PR created

This seems like a good idea to me, so I have implemented it. Shift+Q and Shift+W will work on a range selection as long as the selection does not contain a mixture of dotted and non-dotted durations. See

As for your third suggestion, that is still something to consider for the future.