Various issues with hairpins
Hi wonderful people,
I've been having a couple of different issues with hairpins lately.
1) In the 1st pic you can see that in the 1st measure I have a dynamic with a little note added to it and an hairpin that should indicate a decrescendo on the first Bb, but because the dynamic is also attached to the first note, they "overlap" and the hairpin is reduced to that little tiny thing on the right of "doux".
The issue is that when I go to move it manually with the keyboard arrows, it starts glitching out and at best gives me the result in the 2nd pic, even though it should be bound only to the first Bb, and not the other notes in the bar.
Is there a better way to add little expression indications along with dynamics notation? Am I doing something wrong?
2) In the 2nd and 3rd bar you can see that the two hairpins are at different heights. I know that I can move them manually, but I was wondering if there was an automated way to fix this. Also, moving them by hand isn't as precise as doing it with like the inspector or something like that, but even doing that isn't viable because to the program they appear to be at the same height.
If someone were to help me I'd be very thankful! Have a nice day
Comments
Don't drag hairpins, select the handle and use shift+left/right
... the hairpin is reduced to that little tiny thing on the right of "doux"
There just isn't enough horizontal width available to fit in mf doux and the hairpin. In cases like this, I simply move the dynamic to the left, using a negative X-offset in the Inspector.
In the 2nd and 3rd bar you can see that the two hairpins are at different heights
You can get round this by placing an invisible dynamic at the notional change point between the two hairpins. This provides an anchor point for both hairpins.
... the hairpin is reduced to that little tiny thing on the right of "doux"
There just isn't enough horizontal width available to fit in mf doux and the hairpin. In cases like this, I simply move the dynamic to the left, using a negative X-offset in the Inspector.
In the 2nd and 3rd bar you can see that the two hairpins are at different heights
You can get round this by placing an invisible dynamic at the notional change point between the two hairpins. This provides an anchor point for both hairpins.
Some questions come to mind.
What does the instruction "doux" define in this case? Is it an instruction for the hairpin, or for how to play that part of the phrase? It just seems to me that it might not be necessary, or it's in the wrong place.
OTOH, this seems to be only for live players. MuseScore will ignore the hairpins unless there are dynamic markings. Sure, you want players to have the latitude to express the music as they see fit. But even they need an idea of what you want. How loud or soft do you want them to get? I'm not a fan of over marking scores, but there needs to be something.
I only ask because you asked for help.
In reply to Some questions come to mind… by bobjp
What does the instruction "doux" define in this case?
It's an instruction to the player: "doux" is French, and in a musical context would mean "softly", "delicately" or "gently".