Add string quartet template

• Nov 29, 2014 - 11:18
Type
Functional
Severity
S5 - Suggestion
Status
closed
Project

Musescore 2.0 beta um has a problem on creating parts names for scores with 2 or more instruments of same type.

Steps:

1) Create a score with at leasts 2 instruments of same type. i.e. a stings quartet (2 violins, viola and violoncello) (Is there an issue right at this point. The score should show Violin I and Violin II[or using arabic numbers]. However it shows only Violin on each staff).
2) Generate parts. The created parts are: Violin, Violin-1, Viola and Violoncello.
Even if you change staff names for correcting violins before creating parts, their names still will be wrong. You have to change them manually. The worst thing is: Once you have created parts you can´t change their names anymore.

GIT commit: 1efc609


Comments

Just change staff properties for the 2 violin staves, Long instrument name, Short instrument name and Part name.
Result attached. And if you use this as a template, you'd never have to do these modifications again.

Such a template might be worth getting added to the standard distribution, maybe?
Probably in the orchestral group?
And the existing Classic Orchestra template could do with some adjustments too, to get parts generated with correct names.

Attachment Size
String Quartet.mscz 13.99 KB

It has been suggested before that we could perhaps automatically generate numbers for staves. Although then we'd need a way of specifying the format for the numbers - Trumpet 1 versus Trumpet I versus 1st Trumpet etc. In the end, it's likely to be just as easy to rename staves yourself, and as mentioned, use templates where possible. But I would say it's worth leaving this open as a feature request to consider autonumbering some day.

But there is no bug here I am aware of. The internal "part name" might not be editable after generation, but the names that actually display on the score should be.

We can however fix the Classic Orchestra template and add a String Quartet template, so that this at least won't happen when using these templates.

To me, it's a bug that an existing template has inappropriate part names.

It's a feature request to add a brand new template.

Whether we repurpose this issue to be the former or the latter seems irrelevant. Whether we decide to *implement* both the bug fix and feature request together is another matter. But theoretically, we might decide to fix the bug but not honor the feature request, so it makes sense to me to be able to track them separately unless someone is planning on dealing with them both right away.