MuseScore 4.0 — Dynamic velocity
In MuseScore 3, upon selecting a dynamic mark, the Inspector showed a Dynamic section, which included a dynamic velocity property.
In MuseScore 4, upon selecting a dynamic mark, the Properties panel shows no such section or property. Perhaps those options are buried in properties>Playback section, but the Playback section is grayed out. So I'm at a loss.
scorster
Comments
As discussed in numerous other threads, this is by design - instead of having volume controlled in two different and potentially conflicting places (dynamics and notes), now it is in one place only (the notes).
In reply to As discussed in numerous… by Marc Sabatella
Marc wrote > * ... this is by design - instead of having volume controlled in two different and potentially conflicting places (dynamics and notes), now it is in one place only (the notes).*
I'm having trouble parsing your statement, Marc.
I'm using MuseScore 4.0 with MuseSounds Strings.
In contrast to your statement my attached test score shows that MuseScore 4 ignores note velocities ... and illustrates that the dynamic marks alone govern the sounded velocity of various notes. (Perhaps my test score is invalid. I wonder I ignored a setting that allows note velocities and dynamic velocities to work in tandem.But then it seems you're saying that there was too much conflict note velocity and dynamic velocity to allow them to work in tandem.
Dynamics tests in MuseScore 4 .mscz
So then, have we lost the freedom to vary note volume (governed by note velocity) within any section under dynamic control?
I can see how that restriction would eliminate the issue of "velocity clipping", but then we're no longer able to inflect individual note volumes within the span of a dynamic ... and to me that wrings important expression out of those sections. Of course, that's fine for a notation app with little concern for expressive performance ... but I thought the one of the main purposes in MuseScore 4 was improved playback.
In MuseScore 4 I'd hoped for some scenario—and I'm over my head here—where note velocity would operate in cooperation with dynamics, which would function via key switches (triggering playback of a louder or softer samples, aka velocity splits) and additionally attenuate MIDI channel volume as needed.
Back to this discussion's topic title:
It seems you're saying that by design MuseScore 4 ditched the option to set velocities for various dynamic markings. Previously, I could set a psymbol to "soft piano," medium "piano" and loud "piano." But I'm trying to see what problems are solved by this restriction. And then, if note velocity no longer have any impact throughout the course of a dynamic, why can't we set the velocity of a dynamic marking as we did in MuseScore 3?
scorster
P.S. Marc, I get confused because sometimes you state that a given issue is "by design" but later admit it is not a good design. If "by design" merely means that it was the team's conscious decision or consensus, I don't think it's worth mentioning unless you solidly understand the underlying reasoning and stand by it.
In reply to Marc wrote > * ... this is… by scorster
the boss says
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/10990
they should have made sure everyone read it
https://musescore.org/en/4.0#comment-1153155
In reply to the boss says https://github… by msfp
Thanks msfp!
This explains a lot ... including the lack of dynamic / note velocity interplay with Muse Sounds.
Had I known I wouldn't have wasted time creating a test score and posting on this matter.
scorster
In reply to the boss says https://github… by msfp
In that github thread there is a clear explanation by Marc of why a velocity offset is way better than a velocity absolute value.
Having both options available would be even better, but if only one is provided it must be offset for the reasons given by Marc. It isn't an personal choice, an offset is objectively better, read Marc's post if you need details.
However the answers of Tantacrul (answers with s because Marc tried several times to explain it) dismiss that offset option.
This is a pity from my point of view.
In reply to In that github thread there… by frfancha
Hi frfancha,
Thanks. I understand the difference between MuseScore's Offset velocities and Absolute velocities. Mainly that an Absolute velocity is unaffected by dynamic markings. And that Offset allows for note inflections within the scope of a dynamic.
I too prefer v3.0's option of choosing Offset or Absolute, but as mentioned in a previous post, I'd want some option for attenuating selections of note velocities, by x or x%.
Turns out that the problem here was that note velocities are simply not functioning with Muse Sounds. I found that out the hard way, by composing a very short orchestral piece in MuseScore 4.
In reply to Marc wrote > * ... this is… by scorster
Can you explain which part of my statement you found confusing?
The note velocities are, as I said, intended to be the place where you control volume henceforth. So you'd simply select the notes you want to change and then alter their velocity. This currently should work just fine for MS Basic and other soundfonts, so things you could do in MuseScore 3, you can continue to do. Support for velocity in Muse Sounds is expected to come later, as explained in numerous other threads on this topic. And then also will come a more sophisticated "volume lane" feature. What's currently in MuseScore 4 is just an intermediate step along that path.
So, yes, MuseScore 4 has changed from having two different places to set velocity - some set in part via dynamics, others set in part on the notes - in favor of keeping them all together.
As for which designs I happen to fully agree with and which I happen to think can still use refinements, I'm not sure what you're asking 0 that I shouldn't ever state my personal feelings about how a design could still be improved? Or that I shouldn't explain what the design is, if it happens to not be 100% in accord with how I personally might have designed it? I don't think either stance would be productive. My goal is to provide the best assistance I can, and that means both explaining the designs that currently exist and helping foster discussions of how the design could best be refined in the future.
In reply to As discussed in numerous… by Marc Sabatella
We do not know yet what user experience will be actually implemented for control of dynamics in MS4 (it might be very nice) but I suspect that it will be, in some aspects, downgrade compared to MS3.
I'm full with you Marc regarding usefulness of velocity offset.
Why not having both "velocity base" and "velocity offset" on each note and then MS4 can calculate
velocity = velocity base + velocity offset?
The reason for this complication is that if "velocity base" is affected by dynamic markings (p , mp, mf, f ...) then "velocity offset" is not i.e. it should be left as a layer for user customization of velocities.
In reply to We do not know yet what user… by hstanekovic
I would assume that the professional musicians and highly experienced music software designers who will be in charge of this effort will come up with something good. Don't be in a hurry to judge something you haven't seen yet,