Conversion of scores is now incomprehensible.
Hi,
Converting a pdf score to Musescore used to be a comprehensible process. Yes, it even allowed me to open the conversion in MS3.
Today I tried to convert a score. The 'development' of the process has undergone radical change. Have you embraced too far the awfulness of AI? For I now find MS conversion to have so many bells and whistles, labyrinthine, clever stuff which I cannot comprehend - much less use. MS has become virtually, (perhaps in the latest lamentable sense of the word), useless to me.
I submit that Musescore has forgotten that many users do not need the confusing complexity of the overwhelming raft of possibilities, and cannot cope with them. Are you now developing a software for the use of software nerds only? I regret this leap into incomprehensibility.
No doubt I will be told that I am wrong, and must adjust. That is, if these missives are still read by a human being - which becomes ever more doubtful. Sad and sorry that this software, so long a joy to me, is so very unrecognisable and unfriendly. Clive Roberts.
Comments
"No doubt I will be told that I am wrong, and must adjust."
Indeed, you/we definitely have to adjust. Just like you've done with every version change, from version 1 (perhaps, since you say, "this software, so long a joy to me"), to version 2, then version 3, then version 4, and now with version 5 on the horizon. Each time, you have to learn something new or different. We can complain, why not, but who here wants to go back to version 2, for example? Not me.
About PDF conversion: See: https://musescore.org/en/node/381644#comment-1302329
In reply to "No doubt I will be told… by cadiz1
I would like to add that for the past two or three weeks, you have had the explicit option to classify your score as "Private" at the beginning of the process (page "Add details to publish your score") - image below. This was not the case before, which led to complaints from users (those who did not want to publish the converted score, even though it was easy to delete the score on our musescore.com page). In short, if you want, no one but you will see your score.
In reply to I would like to add that for… by cadiz1
Cadiz1. Why not use your real name?
You dash off a reply which rides roughshod over a genuine plea for Musescore to acknowledge the difficulties which increasingly labyrinthine software pose to the non-expert. I had hoped for something helpful. Not your style, it seems.
If you are one of the inner circle of those who drive the 'improvements', then it is little wonder that Musescore has become so over-engineered, incomprehensible and unwieldy. Perhaps I am not alone - maybe others don't dare to puncture the balloon of ever increasing and unnecessary 'progress'.
In reply to Cadiz1. Why not use your… by Clive68
"Cadiz1. Why not use you real name"?
?? No one here on this forum is forcing anyone (as far as I know, it's not a requirement for registering on this forum) to use their real name. Besides, you too are using a pseudonym, Clive68. So I don't see what your point is.
Furthermore, I have no problem stating it. I'm here on this list: https://musescore.org/fr/handbook/developers-handbook/meet-musescore-co…
And more specifically here: https://musescore.org/fr/handbook/developers-handbook/meet-musescore-co…
As you can see, I am simply a tester of the program (mainly active for versions 2 and 3), and certainly not "one of the inner circle of those who drive the 'improvements,' then it is little wonder that Musescore has become so over-engineered, incomprehensible, and unwieldy."
Furthermore, your tone is unpleasant and incorrect, I quote: "I had hoped for something helpful. Not your style, it seems." I have been helping on the forums for over 10 years. I'm sure I've missed things, but the definitive way you say things is most certainly due to frustration with the new process for converting a PDF.
I understand, no problem.
I'm not particularly a geek, really not. But I know how to adapt/adjust (I think!), and I actually quite like it. The status quo bores me... I prefer to move forward, even if it means encountering certain difficulties that I know I can overcome with the help of others.
Quite frankly, I didn't find this new process to be an insurmountable obstacle, and certainly not "incomprehensible". Just understand that it now ends on our personal Musescore.com page. To that end, I've created a tutorial (for you and other users) to help you learn the new process more quickly.
Finally, I would say that if you really don't like the new method, there's nothing stopping you from installing Audiveris locally on your computer (not necessarily easy, from what I've read) or by using a proprietary and therefore paid OCR.
In reply to Cadiz1. Why not use your… by Clive68
I have to seriously disagree with that. The claim that Musescore has become overly complex, incomprehensible, and unwieldy is definitely a subjective opinion.
I am a relatively new user (about 10 months) and find Musescore 4 (the latest version) extremely easy to understand, logical, and, above all, tidy. A few years ago, I tried to make the switch to Musescore (I actually come from Capella, another paid software program), but I found it so difficult to switch to Musescore that I didn't take the plunge at the time.
Music notation programs are complicated, which seems to be inherent to the subject matter itself, and it's always difficult to learn new things. But I'm particularly excited about the development of Musescore and the result in Musescore 4. I don't find the software over-engineered or incomprehensible at all. On the contrary, I think many things have become very intuitive and the software has been greatly “decluttered.”
So I am thrilled about the development, no ifs, ands, or buts. Ultimately, it is up to the user to decide whether to accept the new features and go along with them. Of course, you can also freeze your software version and be satisfied with what you have.
In reply to I have to seriously disagree… by rhalstenbach
Some 15 years ago I tried Capella, found it way to complicated, then found MuseScore and stayed ever since 😉
I'm still largely using 3.6.2
In reply to Some 15 years ago I tried… by Jojo-Schmitz
Most (almost all) people have a favorit score editor and find it extremely hard to change. I also tried Sibelius, did not succeed at all, tried Primus, so la la, and always returned Capella. Capella has a very logical keyboard input mode and it was already very powerfull in 1998, when i started with computer based editing.
In 1998 there was no Musescore at all... 15 years ago (2010) i already was extremely fast and used to Capella. As always, it's a matter of practice. I had already edited thousands of pages. Very man choir notes i.e. Masses especially (Palestrina, Monteverdi, Bach, Bruckner, Kodaly, Vierne, Vidor, Williams) and many Kings Singers Transciptions, also Take Six Transcriptions.
Fortunately, the scores can be exchanged between Capella and Musescore via MusicXML Musescore can read Capella files directly, but the export/import via MusicXML works better with less errors.