Default beam slants
I have recommended that Musescore should adopt the default beam angles in Dorico. This is because the default beam angles in Dorico are more slanted than in Musescore, as I have seen. The reason for this suggestion is that it is more consistent with the experience in Finale, and also looks better that way.
Dorico’s description of beam angles: https://www.steinberg.help/r/dorico-se/5.1/en/dorico/topics/notation_re…
Thus I believe Musescore's default beam angles should match those of Dorico and I request that it shall happen soon.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| canon in d violin 1 (dorico).pdf | 62.13 KB |
| canon in d violin 1 (musescore).pdf | 68.8 KB |
Comments
"Looks better"? Poppycock! There is not enough difference between them--at least in the example you attached--to say that either of them "looks better" than the other. It would be the equivalent of saying that Finale (if it still existed) and Dorico should change their default beam angles because MuseScore's looks better. Either opinion is nonsense.
Consistency with the user experience in Finale should not be a primary goal for MuseScore. Nice if it happens but making huge changes to reach it would be silly. The goal should be functionality: that is, if you could do something in Finale, you ought to be able to do the same thing (if not necessarily in the same manner) in MuseScore.
MuseScore, of necessity, has a different user experience than Finale and Dorico. Having the same user experience would lead to lawsuits for copyright infringement. Part of the pain of having to leave Finale. Sorry.
In reply to "Looks better"? Poppycock!… by TheHutch
Hi.
It doesn’t matter which example has a better look, but I clearly meant functionality and definitely NOT experience (sorry for using the incorrect words!), and default settings for beams like angles and positions are clearly functionality, not experience. The reason why I want MuseScore to make its default beaming more slanted to match that of Dorico is because Dorico has been adopting more of the functionalities in Finale (which used to be the gold standard for musical notation), including default beam angles/positions, and I want MuseScore to also do the same thing. And with all that said, I hope this eliminates any confusion this may have caused.
The examples I provide clearly show enough of a difference between the default beam slants and positions for Dorico and MuseScore. If not, can you please provide examples between the two scorewriters that show enough of a difference?
In reply to Hi. It doesn’t matter which… by jquesadilla70
The example you provided shows no difference in overwhelmingly most of the notes and only a tiny difference in a very few notes. I spent nearly 30 minutes looking at them to find only two or three notes with very small different angles to their beams.
Beam positioning is an art, not a science, and it's a complex one. MuseScore and Dorico are following similar, but not identical principles. Which you think looks better is a matter of taste.
I won't argue that MuseScore's results are perfect, but I think they are a good start; what I will readily admit is that they are not configurable enough yet. The algorithm for beam placement, as overhauled for 4.0, is designed to be quite parameterisable, but there wasn't time back then to design and expose all those options (which are very intricate), and there still hasn't been, as it would be a lot of work. When they are, it will be possible to configure the system to your liking, and you could get something much closer to Dorico's output if you wanted. In the grand scheme of things I'm afraid it remains not a high priority.
I have to push back on the idea of Finale being "the gold standard for musical notation". I've seen beautiful scores made in Finale, Dorico, Sibelius and MuseScore, and absolute trash made in each of them too. The software is only as good as the user, in the end.