Opeing More Than 1 Score at a Time
I use MuseScore-4.0.1.230121751-x86_64.AppImage on Linux.
I am struggling to play classical guitar, so the scores I have are quite short.
When I open Musescore, I usually open the last score I played from the home menu.
After playing this, i will open another score either using 'Open' or 'Open Recent'
When I do this I get another instance of Musescore opening with that score.
What I was expecting was the original instance of Musescore with 2 scores, as with most software that opens files for editing / viewing.
Is this normal behaviour?
Regards
Alex
Comments
Yes, it is by design in Musescore 4.
In reply to Yes, it is by design in… by HildeK
I don,t like it. It is very inconvenient having to switch back and forth rather than from tab to tab. Change it back, and while you are at it reinstate the Synthesizer I really liked the sfz files.
In reply to I don,t like it. It is very… by TAndrewF
Since MuseScore 4 supports VST3, you can install Plogue Sforzando (or something similar), then use the Mixer to set that as the sound.
But I agree about the tabs.
In reply to Since MuseScore 4 supports… by ThePython10110
Does it?
In reply to Yes, it is by design in… by HildeK
What exactly do you mean 'by design'?
Why would you want to use up more machine resources by creating further instances?
Also, why confuse the user, because there is no way of telling (on my system - Ubuntu), which instance has which score?
In reply to What exactly do you mean 'by… by Alex Hudghton
As far as I know, it is like this due to a technical limitations of the new sound engine.
Edit: fixed an autocorrect mistake.
In reply to As far as I know, it is like… by looptailG
"...due to a technical limitations of the new done engine."
Whaaat? Tabbed scores are no longer done in MS4??
Of course... the done engine! ;-)
@bebobebo... as you wrote:
the quality of replies really drops off after the dozenth post on the same issue.
LOL!
This has been discussed at greater length in many posts before yours. It's better to search for these before posting, as the quality of replies really drops off after the dozenth post on the same issue.
In reply to This has been discussed at… by memeweaver
The search function on this forum is really shitty.
In reply to The OP starts with telling… by graffesmusic
Internal site search is often the bane of the internet.
Here are ways to produce focused searches of MuseScore.org's forums and handbooks
In reply to https://musescore.org/en… by scorster
One can easily implement a google search box with custom search
https://programmablesearchengine.google.com/about/
https://developers.google.com/custom-search/docs/tutorial/implementings…
It would dramatically decrease question about stuff that is documented.
In reply to One can easily implement a… by graffesmusic
I created a custom search box. Took me 5 minutes to create a local html page, which i have now in my bookmarks.
But of course, this is somehing the musescore.org site admin should do.
In reply to The OP starts with telling… by graffesmusic
Yeah, honestly, I would just like to voice too that not only is it shit, this issue should never have come up in the first place, and at this point, expressing anger about it repeatedly is fair game.
I should add that the previous posts were mostly for macOS so a Linux post is truly fair game!
In reply to Yeah, honestly, I would just… by luntastonemason
As discussed in much earlier posts, SDI has been the direction over MDI for the last 30 years.
"expressing anger about it repeatedly is fair game." but unproductive as it takes more resources to deal with the same issue repeatedly.
I've produced over a 1000 often complex scores in Musescore and this design change makes zero difference to me.
In reply to As discussed in much earlier… by memeweaver
At some point, since you keep mentioning other threads, this not how it works on a Mac and is apparently terrible for Linux users too.
As far as your lack of concern, great, but others are unhappy, and the way that this was defended as being by design was really insulting — it took quite a bit of effort for anyone to acknowledge that this basically breaks using it on a Mac; I would love to use some newer features of Ventura, but can’t, since I have multiple instances and no tabs. This is unlike in Musescore 3 or in other programs which are single instances with multiple windows (or tabs the way macOS does them) — I turn on Stage Manager and click without the swiping action that is activated switching to a new program.
In reply to At some point, since you… by luntastonemason
The multiplatform code they use breaks things on every platform AFAICT, but you're still better off focussing your issues, and making them as coherent and well-argued as possible onto the original posts. That is speaking as someone who has triaged bugs and issues on projects much larger and far longer-lived than Musescore. Also, having been on internet tech forums for over 25years, my observation is that if you can't search for prior instances of your issue before posting your near identical post, you just seem self-indulgent. The search on this site is obviously shit for something created in the 21st century but it's not impossible.
In reply to The multiplatform code they… by memeweaver
A) so what? This is new behavior that was avoidable if they just asked some Mac folks “is this a good idea?” which. It’s not just about the fact that they had to make this work with Ventura and did something which breaks a new feature that came with that OS. But it speaks to the arrogance of the defense mounted originally that has left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth. It is going to be months if not years before they fix this. That should be intolerable.
That’s not the only broken thing that that was broken or made more complex for no apparent reason other than a disconnect between developers, but it’s the one that has a direct relationship to the hardware and the OS… the others are inconvenient and annoying, but shouldn’t cause things to get screwy.
B) you surely also learned to scroll on by, right?
C) eh, so what? Even if you do use the Google tricks, the right combination of keywords is funky enough that either you ignore it or give them some slack.
In reply to A) so what? This is new… by luntastonemason
Anger is not an argument.
In reply to A) so what? This is new… by luntastonemason
My guess is that this will never be fixed. Rather than waste time accusing people you know nothing about, you might figure out ways to work with it. And there are ways. Oh, I know you think you shouldn't have to. We are all having to deal with the changes. Get on with it.
In reply to This has been discussed at… by memeweaver
Indeed it is better searching first - this is what I did
A plain search (using DuckDuckGo) of "[MuseScore] Opening More Than 1 Score at a Time" reveals 2 hits, on the front page (10 results all related to Musicscore.org ) one being my post and the other a similar post but for the Mac platform. Does it work the same on the Mac? I don't know.
Using the helpful hint as posted below, a search using "site:https://musescore.org/en/forum Opening more than 1 score at a time" reveals 0 hits
In reply to Indeed it is better… by Alex Hudghton
I think opeartors such as "site:" are google specific.
https://ahrefs.com/blog/google-advanced-search-operators/
In reply to I think things like "site:"… by graffesmusic
Well I won't be doing that then :-)
In reply to Indeed it is better… by Alex Hudghton
I hope you did the search from Google rather than from musescore. After all that is the point of using the site: operator
In reply to I hope you did the search… by memeweaver
Alex is using Duckduckgo, not Google.
Some care about privacy and security.
In reply to The guy uses Duckduckgo, not… by graffesmusic
Same syntax applies. You can look that up on either.
In reply to Same syntax applies. You can… by memeweaver
It is really limited.
https://help.duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/results/syntax/
But you are right, 'site:' should work.