Score – Parts Synchronisation Bug #2 - current status
Over the last two weeks, I’ve been proofreading a symphonic piece I engraved over the last few months. I’ve already reported serious problems with synchronization of beam, articulations, dynamics, etc. between the score and the parts; see, for example, https://musescore.org/en/node/361348, in which a reply is given that this is a known issue, i.e., https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/21286.
Now that I have finalized proofreading and made the necessary corrections, the problems are so serious that I’m not even sure I can present the parts and instruments for the full orchestra in the next few days. In fact, it’s utterly embarrassing.
Because I’ve now also finalized the formatting of the parts to get a good spread over the pages, rests at page breaks, etc. I can not just reset all parts (there are 38 of these) because the parts behavior vs. the score is not really predicable and you can never be sure what you get but to check if one of the suggestions (Page settings / Reset all page settings to default) still works (resetting if it works, I made a test on one part or instrument but nothing, absolutely nothing improved).
I’ve read through the GitHub ticket again, as well as further referred tickets. Some of the problems appear to be solved now, but does anybody know if this will be included in the upcoming version 4.3 and when?
Maybe I can wait for a few weeks, but as it is today, the output is embarrassing and useless, or I have to proofread the 38 parts as well and fill in the missing “markings” with a pencil.
Sorry for ranting, but just now my frustration level is at a very high level, as I promised something for the orchestra, which I cannot hold, and the primary goal of an engraving tool is to generate the correct score and parts without randomly leaving out key markings.
Comments
The test1.mscz file provided by user Cadiz1 in https://musescore.org/en/node/361348 has the same problem in the latest nightly builds (4.3 and 4.4) . Hairpin does not show up in piccolo part.
Maybe because of the linkedMain xml tag for the Hairpin is not present?
Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with the Musescore team.
Having spent hours and days reproducing and reporting Lost Item Issues, I completely understand your frustration.
Even though I'm a fan of Musescore, I have to admit that in its current state, Musescore 4 is barely suitable for complex orchestral scores.
However, if you want (and now you simply have to)
use Musescore 4 further, here are some tips that will allow you to minimize the number of lost elements in the future (relevant primarily for version 4.2.1)
1. Avoid copy/paste operations (especially lines, slurs, etc.)
2. Always keep all Parts open.
3. Some problems may not occur if Multi-measure rests (in parts) are turned off
Some issues were actually resolved in version 4.3.0. It would be irresponsible of me to recommend using Nightly build, but it may be acceptable in your case. You can download the portable version and be sure to back up your Scores before using it.
https://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/musescore-nightlies/windows/4x/nightly/MuseS…
Don't expect missing items to return if you simply open Scores in a new version.
In reply to Disclaimer: I have no… by mercuree
Thanks anyway. Although I like MuseScore, I regret I didn't engrave the piece in Lilypond. Lilyponds is not easy to master either, but extremely stable and you can be sure, what you set in the score, you will also see in the parts or vice versa.
In reply to Disclaimer: I have no… by mercuree
Maybe a few comments to your suggestions.
Avoid copy/paste operations (especially lines, slurs, etc.)
I don't think I've any C&P in this piece.
Always keep all Parts open.
This is new to me. Normally I've all parts closed until I "need" them for e.g. formatting. If I would keep all parts open, it would be almost 40 tabs then, and I had a fear this would make MS even slower. A an example, a change in page settings or style takes 15-30 seconds before I see the change. The same is valid for "save" which I frequently use.
Some problems may not occur if Multi-measure rests (in parts) are turned off
They are not turned off.
In addition, I make all changes in the score (single source), never in the parts. The only modifications made in parts are related to formatting, not the content.
I've no interest in playback, hence no Muse Sound loaded and no Muse Hub installed if this makes a difference.
I've set up my computer for automatic back ups ( both incremental and "1 to 1" copies) both locally on 3 external SSDs, a RAID server and an external secure server so I have at least 5 copies available of any file on my computer at any time. Still, if I want to "play" with something new, I make copies.
In reply to Maybe a few comments to your… by TomStrand
At least you need to open part once after you open score (you can close part immediately)
Although this case was fixed in 4.3.0, you can see it in this video https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/21286#issuecomment-197936…
0:07 - I'm opening part just to generate one (file is new)
0:19 - I'm opening file again (no parts are opened)
0:24 - hairpin is added, file saved (still no parts are opened and this is important fact)
0:30 - I'm opening file again, checking parts... hairpin disappeared
If you think that this is still not your case, try to describe your observations.
Re hairpins in your score.
Bar 67 hairpins in the top two staves do not show in parts because they overlap the dynamics on one or both ends. In the score, I selected the piccolo bar 67 hairpin and tired to move it. That shows the actual beginning and end points (purple lines). I deleted the hairpin. Then range selected the notes between the two dynamics (not including them). Entered a new hairpin. That hairpin shows up in the part. Though I did have to drag the left end a little closer to the dynamic. But not overlapping it. The same thing happened with some other hairpins.
Is this a bug? Or do we just need to be careful with element placement.
In reply to Re hairpins in your score… by bobjp
More likely scenario:
1. open this score
2. remove hairpin in bar 67
3. close all parts (this is important) and save file
4. open file again
5. add haripin in bar 67.
6. Don't open part.
7. Save score, close and open again.
8. Check parts.
This looks like quite normal behavior. You open the score, add hairpin, save the file, close it without opening parts. And in parts the hairpin is already lost.
In reply to More likely scenario: 1… by mercuree
mercuree,
On my system.
1. Open score and piccolo part. Hairpin not in part.
2. Remove hairpin from score and re-enter it properly. Part still open.
3. Go to part and see that hairpin is there.
4. As a test, save and close score.
5. Open score and part to find hairpin is still in part.
In reply to mercuree, On my system. 1… by bobjp
And this is how it works. You open part once, then it works. Something is happening when you open part first time, which prevents lines to disappear. If you don't open part during entire session (time between you opened file, saved and closed), then lines are lost.
In reply to And this is how it works… by mercuree
OK. I got it to misbehave. I haven't noticed this before because I don't work with parts. This is how I learn.
I've not checked all parts, but there are hairpins missing in there as well, but the first I first saw, was missing trill markings for Violins 1, 2 and Viola in measure 68 and onwards. I deleted the trills and reinserted them again in the score. I tested it with all parts closed and the relevant parts open with the same result, the trills are there again but I'm not sure it is a stable condition. The same was the case for one missing hairpin, I deleted it and inserted it again and now it's also in the parts.
What's so frustrating is that even if it looks like it's fixed, it appears to be only a temporary solution and it can randomly change at any time.
I've not had the time to check every one of the 30 parts, but I'm pretty sure there are more missing items. My score is attached. It's the version I just fixed by deleting item and reinserting them again.
In reply to I've not checked all parts,… by TomStrand
I was able to reproduce trill loss in Violins 1 part with 4.2.1, but not in 4.3.0. However there are some other bugs I have to investigate.