This is what MuseScore 3 could do. What about Musescore 4?

• Jul 4, 2023 - 21:05

I am a Linux user who was very happy with Vestion 3.6.2. I hope the attached will help you understand why.

I have attached a zip file containing two files:


If you don't have FluidR3_GM.sf2, here's a link:

Put the score somewhere, add stefans.sf2 and, if needed, FluidR3_GM.sf2 to your soundfonts folder. Open the score and view/synthesizer. In Synthesizer, "load from score" and make sure FluidR3 is first and stefans is second. You don't need any more fonts.

Here are the issues I have with Version 4 as regards my work:

  • No piano roll (I have notes with modified lengths.)
  • Reverb is inadequate
  • Can't select individual sounds.

In case you can't get it working, here's a pointer to Youtube:

I'm not splitting soundfonts, I shouldn't have to, and I don't even know if there's a way to do it on Linux anyway.

Attachment Size 1.31 MB


Please use the reverb settings from the score. They were intended to emulate St. Mary's Church (Marienkirk) where Buxtehude was the organist. I believe Lubeck. Also, note there are a number of places where I changed organ stops, and they will show up in the Mixer as additional sounds.

In reply to by Chuck Bermingham

I think we all get that there are things that MU3 can do that MU4 can't. Especially in your case. Linux.

I am intrigued by two statements.

Your reverb settings are supposed to reflect the reverb of the Lorentz organ in St Mary's. How did you arrive at those settings. Especially since Stafan's font is based on a completely different organ with it's own reverb. Although when I opened it in MU4, it was completely and un-naturally dry. As well as very thin sounding. Adding reverb helped, but I think I might have preferred whatever the original sound was. Or maybe not. Recorded sounds don't always mix well. So maybe a dry sound is better to start with. Just depends. As you know, Buxtehude played an organ that was pitched differently and was powered by manual bellows. I wonder how much of the organ is still tracker action after the complete overhaul in the 1990's. All of which changes how the sound reverberates in the building.

You say you shouldn't have to split fonts. Well I suppose it depends on how important using the font is.

I get that MU3 is better for you. I could care less about the score improvements in MU4. I use it for playback. Which still has a ways to go' It's better for me than MU3. Which I don't even have on this new computer.

In reply to by bobjp

Version 4 won't allow you to choose the individual sounds yet. That's why it sounds thin (which it does to me also.)

As for authenticity; I don't think I can get a perfect rendition of that organ, but I do what I can with what I have.

when I posted this, I never meant for it to play on MU4; it sounds awful there.

In reply to by bobjp

Also, I'm not a traveler. I base my decisions about sound using recordings, and I have the complete Buxtehude organ works performed by Walter Kraft in DMB's church.

I started out with an 8-second reverb in the lows, and went to a 6-second reverb in the midrange. I adjusted the damping until I felt comfortable with it.

As for the stops, again, I work with what I have. One of the pedal stops is actually from the Fluid soundfont, because I couldn't get the effect I wanted from Stefan's.

My first effort was years ago, one of J.P.Sweelinck's chromatic fantasy, as I heard it on an organ recording I can no longer find.

I don't know if stefans.sf2 is based on samples from the actual organ, or if he built it up from other sounds. The Sweelinck piece was originally done on a fairly cheap Roland workstation, but, at the time, I didn't have any digital recoring equipment to save it. The Echo Fantasy was done on an Ensoniq workstation where I constructed the sounds out of basic oscillators and such.

I seem to get myself into situations where I'm pulled away for domestic reasons when I would rather work on these things, so any of this happens over periods of years, without much output to show for it. That's why was disturbed about the "no this, no that, maybe on Windows but probably not on Linux" stuff. If I come back to this, say, 2 years from now, what will be available from Musescore for Linux? And will the 3.6.2 appimage still work? We'll see.

Few things about MS4:

  • Muse Sounds doesn't have but 1 organ, and it's a "wurly".
  • Muse Sounds uses immense amount of storage. I'm going to uninstall them, and "Muse Hub" as well.
  • 4.1 beta still doesn't have the ability to select individual sounds from soundfonts, although, ironically, Muse Sounds does. If nothing else, I need at least the ability to select individual sounds from soundfonts. One of the commenters on this thread says that my score sounds "thin" on Musescore 4. Of course, because the MS4 software will only select what it thinks is a pipe organ, and on the stefans font, it's a very thin sound at that spot.

By the way, this issue shows up if I try to use one of my Bach harpsichord pieces, which switches from one harpsichord stop to another about halfway through, and back to the original later.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.