MuseScore 2.0.1 is released

A month after the release of MuseScore 2.0, we are pleased to announce the availability of MuseScore 2.0.1 which comes with 100+ bug fixes.

When we released 2.0, it had been more than two years since the release of 1.3. This was deliberate, as we knew 2.0 was a major undertaking and we wanted to get it right, but we also knew we wanted to have more frequent releases going forward. Today we are taking that first step with MuseScore 2.0.1. This release fixes more than 100 bugs. We focused on addressing all the crashes and score corruption issues that we could, and also a number of problems where the results of certain commands could be lost upon save and reload. Quite a few other less serious but still annoying bugs were fixed as well.

While the MuseScore 2.0.1 release was all about increasing stability, we are also working on new features and other improvements and hope to have another release to present before the end of the year

The response to MuseScore 2.0 has been overwhelmingly positive so far, and we hope this 2.0.1 update demonstrates our commitment to justifying that excitement and making sure MuseScore remains the choice of so many musicians around the world.



I think Musescore is one of the most, if not the best, notation software out there.
Thanks guys, your work rocks! Hope the new release will come very soon this year.


Is there a list of the bugs that were fixed? Just wondering what was hit

Yeah, I was trying to edit my comment after I saw that, but it wouldn't let me XD
Thanks anyways

Great job! I'm on Fedora 21 and I built and installed MuseScore from source, how can I update it?

Does the sight reading plugin still works in the new versions?
Would like to see some youtube video on this :) somebody?

I downloaded the update, but when I tried it, I didn't have any sound when I tried to play back a song. It still plays the metronome sound, but not the instruments. Does anyone know why?

We wanted to help you with this a few weeks ago:

How about we continue the conversation there and figure out what's wrong.

AntonioBL, please 64 bit version of Musescore 2.0.1 ...

This is one of the things that makes Musescore better than proprietary software. We don't have to pay out the nose for upgrades when the developers finally get around to updating and adding new stuff. Instead, we get frequent updates and fixes based on feedback from the community. Thanks for everything you guys do! Musescore has definitely helped me "find my wings" as a musician, and I'm looking forward to using it for a long time, even hopefully in a future career.

What is happening with the official PPA for Ubuntu? I think we need more Linux maintainers

@Daniel All Linux maintainers have been notified via email regarding the 2.0.1 release. We can't do much more than this I'm afraid. Feel free to repost a 2.0.1 request directly in the issue tracker at to raise awareness.

I sent a mail to Toby Smithe.

I don't know a great deal about packaging for Linux, but the MuseScore team might be able to save the package maintainers a bit of work. I think there are some things (e.g. mimetype handling) that are common to many Linux distros and could potentially be done by MuseScore rather than by the package maintainers. This might reduce the turnaround time at each release.

In the meantime, you can try compiling from source. The compilation guide takes you through it step-by-step.

When you reach "Get the source code":

git clone git://
cd MuseScore

Add these lines immediately after `cd MuseScore` to get the 2.0.1 release:

git checkout tags/v2.0.1
git reset --hard tags/v2.0.1

Without git, you can get the release version source here:

Feel free to make a pull request with the things we could integrate in MuseScore source code to make it easier to build for Linux distros. Also a static build would be great.

I might take a look at this. If anyone (especially the package maintainers) has any ideas about what can be done by MuseScore vs. what is best left to the maintainers then please list them here: Packaging for Linux (generic). If anyone more knowledgeable than myself wants to have a go at actually implementing them then feel free ;)

I also hope there will be a Ubuntu version soon :-)

Have you fixed the annoying problems like everytime dialog box "Do you want to save this file" when we open and close any score, even without any change and without even playing it? It is annoying.

Second, the window of Play Panel should be detached and so big; it should be small and attached towards right side, just by the side of Snapshot camera icon. The levers of volume and speed should be horizontal.

Plz add the option of scanning any PDF files and converting them into music score. That would be awesome addition to musescore!!! The import conversion option for pdf doesn't work at all. Musescore should have its own scanning plugins.

THe dialog you refer to only happens for imported scores - scores that came from other programs, or older versions of MuseScore. It is there to tell you tht you have not saved the file in the current MuseScore format, so you should simply answer yes rather than constantly having to re-import the score every time. Then you won't see the dialog any more.

As for playback, do realize that is not the primary purpose of MsueScore - it is a *notation* program. So the interface is optimzied for that purpose. The mobile apps, on the other hand, are more optimized for playback, so check those out.

Anyhow, if you see problems, you should report them to the issue tracker, including sample scores and precise step by step instructions to reproduce the problem. We can't fix problems that aren't reported.

in particular? What specific problem are you having with the import of PDF? It's very experimental technology and a much harder to solve than most people realize, which is why it doens't work perfectly, but it is not true that it does not work at all. It works about as well as voice recogniition did when that technology wasd in *its* infancy. But since that technology is provided by Audiveris, you should report any specific problems you encounter to them.

Correction in prev comment (The Play Panel should NOT be so big and detached)--- It takes excessive cover in front of the score and we have to keep moving it out of sight).

Regarding Audiveris. I have tried uploading many pdf files but it only works when the pdf file is produced from a notation software. Otherwise it doesn't work on any scanned pdf file; We rarely find a pdf that is produced from software; moreover we already have easy access to midi files of all such software produced pdf files. I am thinking if you could add some feature like that of in other (paid) softwares which aren't so huge in size and working as Audiveris then it will be awesome.

I might add that half the controls in the Play Panel are in the toolbar already, to the left of the Concert Pitch button.

Actually, I haven't been able to get the PDF converter to work recently. Every attempt comes back "Unsuccessful."

@Zack, No, the volume, tempo, and scroll bar none of them are in shortcuts. They all could have been easily fitted in the toolbar section. there is no need for a new hanging window for them; the tempo and volume bars could fit horizontally.

and yes, all my attempts are unsuccessfull. Except one or two when the pdf file was produced from software (example Vitali Chaconne). Audiveris would destroy an ordinary computer. I had installed it to scan pdf files, but it takes huge load of processing. I guess it is better to try it online through this experimental tie up on musescore. Musescore should do something for scanning pdf files.

I have another suggestion which is very important. There should be a plugin or option for creating Etudes like we find in violin books. There could be Etude practice files given with Musescores by default; or there should be an option for creating random Etudes easily ; or there should be a collection of hundreds or thousands of Etudes built in within Musescore. Such an feature seems quite essential for a software which is meant for music students. It will radically reduce our need to scan pdf etude files.

Well, yes, attempting to scan handwritten music is pretty much guaranteed to fail. Like I said, this is highly experimental technology. I think perhaps you are greatly underestimating the complixty of the problem. Realistically, what you describe is not going to be happenng soon - it's just beyond current technology.

As for automatically creating etudes, that sounds useful, but again, not the job of notatiob software. Let people who specialize in artificial intellifgence and so forth solve that problem with their own program, and then MuseScore can handle the notation.

Marc. You already have a plugin named "random" which automatically creates a very small random (useless) score!! The same technology could easily produce long Patterned score each time (imitating the patterns of Etudes found in violin books). Perhaps it would be easy and better if Musescore simply provides a number of Etude scores inbuilt for practice. It is most essential for program like Musescore.

@Jacob please add your wish to see an Etude generator plugin in the plugin forum at In this thread, your request will get lost I'm afraid.

I'm just trying to set reasonable expectations. MuseScore is *music notation* program - it tries to excell at helping people create notated scores. So *that* is what "most essential for a program like MuseScore". Everything else is secondary. Playback features, automatic generations of exercises based on whatever parameters - these are fine things, but they just aren't the main job of a notation program. Playback is a ncie thing to have in conjunction with notation - so you can here the score you are creating to check your work - but that's what that feature is intended for, not as a practice / playalong aid. That's the job of different software, as is automatically generating exercises. Not saying some enterprising volunteer couldn't add something like that as an optional plugin - if you're a programmer, have a ball! - but that just isn't what MuseScore is intended for.

So I wouldn't be holding your breath thinking tht the next release of MuseScore will be adding features that take it in a different direction. What you should instead count on primarily is improvement in the ability to create notated scores.

I did say half the controls are in the toolbar.

By the way, the Play Panel can also be resized, and there's a keyboard shortcut to show/hide it in an instant. It's not like it's a terrible, insurmountable interface problem. You just have to get used to working with it.

When MuseScore 2.0.1 version for linux will releases?

Depends on the maintainers for the various distributions

I just today transferred from Musescore 1.3, and I have to say, contrary to everyone else's opinions here, I don't really like it. Don't get wrong here, I love Musescore 2.0.1, and the interface is much more user-friendly and modernized. The instruments also seem more clean, but this is wherein my biggest problem lies with Musescore 2.0.1. The instruments are very much different from 1.3, and while this doesn't seem that much of a problem, the instruments hardly sound like their real life counterparts. Clarinets sound like distortion guitars, saxophones lost their crisp sound and now their tone is somewhere between nasal trumpet and muddy oboe. Every brass instrument sounds way too blasty; it's pretty disorienting considering that I make concert band pieces for my friends. I still appreciate all the work that was poured into this newest version, but the voices just kill me. Is there any way to import the voices from 1.3 into 2.0.1?

Sure! Preference in sounds is very personal, and while I and most others find the new soundfont vastly superior to the old, if you don't, you can always download a different soundfont via I recommend you try a few before settling on just reinstalling the old 1.3 soundfont - every single one of the other options on this should be a very noticeable improvement.

In particular I would recommend you try the GeneralUser SoundFont (it's in the list Marc linked to). I suspect it may be exactly what you're looking for in terms of sound.

And, of course you are not tied to one soundfont any more, so you can mix and match sounds from different soundfonts in your scores.

So if you prefer the trombone from General User GS but the Clarinet from TimGM6mb you load both soundfonts and then assign the sounds you want in the mixer.

This is intended for all the people who commented, not just to ChurchOrganist. Thank you guys so much for recommending these sound fonts and how to in a sense, mix and match them. I got the GeneralUser and the original font, and personally, I like these voices much better than the preset font that comes with the download(and still on the lookout for anything else I like on other sites). Thanks for being genteel with the comments and recommendations. I hope you all have a nice day.

You're welcome. One more thing: ChurchOrganist has been working on a new clarinet sound for the default SoundFont. You might like to test it and perhaps give feedback:

I have spent many hours searching the net for GM soundfonts to try out. To me, the best overall is Timbres of Heaven, so that's worth checking out if you haven't yet. I find it somewhat better than FluidR3 for the most part (the default with MuseScore 2.0 / 2.0.1), but the two of them are, to me, pretty close in overall quality / realism. The next tier down after that for me is GeneralUserGS & Arachno, both of which have some very good qualities. GeneralUserGS in particular is perhaps the most well-balanced, well-matched soundfont around. TimGM6mb (the default with MuseScore 1.3) is several notches below any of these to me, but it's not bad for as small as it manages to be.

Pretty much all other GM-compatible soundfonts I have tried - and I have tried dozens over the years - fall somewhere below GeneralUserGS and any of the others I mentioned, although most manage to at least equal TimGM6mb. I never found any others I liked enough to not delete shortly after experimenting with them. Well, the one that comes with Finale Notepad is, to me, comparable to GeneralUser GS & Arachno, so if you happen to have access to that program (thanks to Zach for pointing out that this is in fact compatible with MuseScore), you can give it a shot.

There are plenty of non-GM soundfonts out there that provide just a handful of specific instruments, but they may or may not use GM mappings, and they generally won't mix and match well in terms of balance, so even though some of them might individually sound good, I haven't found any I found worth the trouble. Sonatina Symphonic Orchestra in particular has a really good reputation - fueled mostly by an impressive demo that I was assume was very highly tweaked in DAW software - and could be worth your time. But for me, just didn't sound enough better than the others in actual practice when simply listening to playback within MuseScore to be worth the considerable effort it takes to customize a score to use it, especially if you need instruments it does not provide.

Any word on when 2.0.1 will be available for Ubuntu? I have added the ppa but still no upgrades.

sería muy util tener acceso a Mscore desde ubuntu 15...!! por favor, hagan algo..!!

Installare da source code. Procedura.

Grazie @frirobi48. Questa è la funzione di spiegare il legame medio, compatibile con Ubuntu 15.04
This tutorial also applies to Ubuntu 15.04 and Ubuntu 14.04.

@Pierantozzi sigue ese enlace y cualquier cosa me consultas, paisano

Hermano..! muchisimas gracias. Ya estoy en eso... .!!

This looks very nice. But I am not using just windows, I want this on my Ubuntu computer too... Where (and how) can I get new Musescore 2 for Ubuntu? I am trying to install it (upgrade it) from software center, but it is still old Musescore... I tried from musescore website too, but I didn't manage to install new one...

Gracias a todos ustedes !! Logré instalar Musescore 2.0 en Ubuntu 15.4 sin problemas. @aprado @frirobi !!! Muchas gracias !!


I think there is a slight misunderstanding here. Apps in the Ubuntu Software Centre are never updated except to fix critical security flaws. This is to prevent incompatibilities from being introduced in an update (another case of "it's not a bug, it's a feature!").

MuseScore 2 will (hopefully) be available in the Ubuntu 15.10 Software Centre, but it will never be in the Software Centre for Ubuntu 15.04 or earlier. A separate PPA is used to host the latest stable release of MuseScore to make it available before the next release of Ubuntu. Once you add this PPA you will be able to install the latest version from Terminal (or even from the Software Centre once the PPA is added to your list of sources).

To add the PPA:

$ sudo add-apt-repository ppa:mscore-ubuntu/mscore-stable
$ sudo apt-get update
$ sudo apt-get upgrade

If you already had an older version of MuseScore (e.g. 1.3) it will now be updated to the latest version available from the PPA (currently 2.0.0). If you didn't already have it you can now get it from the Software Centre, or by using:

$ sudo apt-get install musescore

I've installed the PPA but version 2 doesn't install. I seem to have a bucket of unmet dependencies.Ubuntu 14.04

version 1.3 is still installed and working but it would be nice to get the latest.

Interesting. If you added the PPA correctly then simply doing

$ sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade

should overwrite 1.3 with 2.0.

Does it say what the unmet dependencies are? Can you copy them in here?

Thanks for your reply. All software upgrades had been normal until I tried to add the latest Musescore. This is what happened.

my sources list includes this line:

deb trusty main

$ sudo aptitude update
$ sudo aptitude upgrade
[sudo] password for david:
Resolving dependencies...
No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 20 not to upgrade.
Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.

I was puzzled by the "20 not to upgrade", which I have not previously seen, so I did

$ sudo aptitude full-upgrade
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libqt5clucene5{a} libqt5help5{a} libqt5xmlpatterns5{a}
qml-module-qtquick-localstorage{a} qml-module-qtquick-window2{a}
qml-module-qtquick2{a} qml-module-qtwebkit{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
libqt5core5a libqt5dbus5 libqt5gui5 libqt5network5 libqt5opengl5
libqt5printsupport5 libqt5qml5 libqt5quick5 libqt5sql5 libqt5sql5-sqlite
libqt5svg5 libqt5test5 libqt5webkit5 libqt5webkit5-qmlwebkitplugin
libqt5widgets5 libqt5xml5 musescore qtdeclarative5-localstorage-plugin
qtdeclarative5-qtquick2-plugin qtdeclarative5-window-plugin
20 packages upgraded, 7 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not to upgrade.
Need to get 27.8 MB of archives. After unpacking 26.7 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
webapp-container : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5organizer5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-dialogs-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
webbrowser-app : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-privatewidgets-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5multimedia5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5positioning5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
liboxideqtquick0 : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-toolkit-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5sensors5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
appmenu-qt5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.

I looked a bit further and found that musescore:I386 is available to be installed, but the dependencies for that are basically all 386 libraries plus the removal of some things, so I decided that's a bad idea. See following:

$ sudo aptitude install musescore:i386
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libatk1.0-0:i386{a} libcairo2:i386{a} libdatrie1:i386{a} libegl1-mesa:i386{ab} libegl1-mesa-drivers-lts-utopic:i386{a}
libegl1-mesa-lts-utopic:i386{ab} libgbm1:i386{a} libgbm1-lts-utopic:i386{a} libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0:i386{a} libgraphite2-3:i386{a}
libgtk2.0-0:i386{a} libharfbuzz0b:i386{a} libicu52:i386{a} libjasper1:i386{a} libopenvg1-mesa-lts-utopic:i386{a} libpango-1.0-0:i386{a}
libpangocairo-1.0-0:i386{a} libpangoft2-1.0-0:i386{a} libpixman-1-0:i386{a} libportaudio2:i386{a} libqt5clucene5:i386{a}
libqt5core5a:i386{a} libqt5dbus5:i386{a} libqt5gui5:i386{a} libqt5help5:i386{a} libqt5network5:i386{a} libqt5opengl5:i386{a}
libqt5printsupport5:i386{a} libqt5qml5:i386{a} libqt5quick5:i386{a} libqt5sql5:i386{a} libqt5sql5-sqlite:i386{a} libqt5svg5:i386{a}
libqt5webkit5:i386{a} libqt5widgets5:i386{a} libqt5xml5:i386{a} libqt5xmlpatterns5:i386{a} libthai0:i386{a} libvorbisfile3:i386{a}
libwayland-client0:i386{a} libwayland-egl1-mesa-lts-utopic:i386{a} libwayland-server0:i386{a} libxcb-icccm4:i386{a} libxcb-image0:i386{a}
libxcb-keysyms1:i386{a} libxcb-randr0:i386{a} libxcb-render-util0:i386{a} libxcb-render0:i386{a} libxcb-shape0:i386{a}
libxcb-shm0:i386{a} libxcb-util0:i386{a} libxcb-xfixes0:i386{a} libxcb-xkb1:i386{a} libxcomposite1:i386{a} libxcursor1:i386{a}
libxinerama1:i386{a} libxkbcommon-x11-0:i386{a} libxkbcommon0:i386{a} libxrandr2:i386{a} musescore:i386{b}
The following packages will be upgraded:
libqt5core5a libqt5dbus5 libqt5gui5 libqt5network5 libqt5opengl5 libqt5printsupport5 libqt5qml5 libqt5quick5 libqt5sql5 libqt5sql5-sqlite
libqt5svg5 libqt5webkit5 libqt5widgets5 libqt5xml5
14 packages upgraded, 60 newly installed, 0 to remove and 6 not to upgrade.
Need to get 60.9 MB of archives. After unpacking 159 MB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libegl1-mesa:i386 : Conflicts: libegl1-x11 which is a virtual package.
Conflicts: libegl1-x11:i386 which is a virtual package.
webapp-container : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5organizer5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-dialogs-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
webbrowser-app : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-privatewidgets-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
xserver-xorg-lts-utopic : Conflicts: libegl1-mesa:i386 (>= 0~) but 10.1.3-0ubuntu0.4 is to be installed.
libqt5multimedia5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-window-plugin : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-qtquick2-plugin : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5positioning5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-localstorage-plugin : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
liboxideqtquick0 : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-toolkit-plugin : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
musescore : Conflicts: musescore:i386 but 2.0.0+dfsg1-0ubuntu~trusty1 is to be installed.
musescore:i386 : Depends: musescore-common:i386 (>= 2.0) which is a virtual package.
Conflicts: musescore but 1.3+dfsg-1 is installed and it is kept back.
libegl1-mesa-lts-utopic : Conflicts: libegl1-mesa:i386 but 10.1.3-0ubuntu0.4 is to be installed.
Conflicts: libegl1-x11:i386 which is a virtual package.
libegl1-mesa-lts-utopic:i386 : Conflicts: libegl1-mesa:i386 but 10.1.3-0ubuntu0.4 is to be installed.
Conflicts: libegl1-x11:i386 which is a virtual package.
libqt5webkit5-qmlwebkitplugin : Depends: qtdeclarative-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
libqt5sensors5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
appmenu-qt5 : Depends: qtbase-abi-5-2-1 which is a virtual package.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

Remove the following packages:
1) appmenu-qt5
2) checkbox-gui
3) liboxideqt-qmlplugin
4) liboxideqtcore0
5) liboxideqtquick0
6) libqt5feedback5
7) libqt5multimedia5
8) libqt5organizer5
9) libqt5positioning5
10) libqt5sensors5
11) libqt5webkit5-qmlwebkitplugin
12) libunity-webapps0
13) qtdeclarative5-accounts-plugin
14) qtdeclarative5-dialogs-plugin
15) qtdeclarative5-localstorage-plugin
16) qtdeclarative5-privatewidgets-plugin
17) qtdeclarative5-qtfeedback-plugin
18) qtdeclarative5-qtquick2-plugin
19) qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-extras-browser-plugin
20) qtdeclarative5-ubuntu-ui-toolkit-plugin
21) qtdeclarative5-window-plugin
22) ubuntu-desktop
23) unity-webapps-common
24) unity-webapps-launchpad
25) unity-webapps-qml
26) unity-webapps-service
27) unity-webapps-youtube
28) webapp-container
29) webbrowser-app
30) xul-ext-unity
31) xul-ext-websites-integration

Keep the following packages at their current version:
32) libegl1-mesa:i386 [Not Installed]
33) musescore:i386 [Not Installed]

Leave the following dependencies unresolved:
34) indicator-appmenu recommends appmenu-qt5

Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]

I didn't realise the list was going to be that long! It might be a good idea to save it as a text file and upload it as an attachment in future.

Have you tried using apt-get instead of aptitude? What happens if you use the exact commands I posted above?

thanks again for quick reply. I had always thought that aptitude and apt-get were interchangeable. Apparently I'm wrong. apt-get worked perfectly and musescore 2.0 is now installed. Thank you. Now I can have some fun playing with it.

Is there a way to edit my previous reply? I didn't realise myself how long it is!

Unfortunately you can't edit posts once someone has replied to them, but don't worry about it this time.

I thought apt-get and aptitude were equivalent too, but I did a bit a research and it seems aptitude went out of favour with Ubuntu a few years ago. It seems that aptitude is just a frontend and it is really just calling apt-get in the background, so calling apt-get yourself saves an extra step.

Maybe this should be a feature request for a way to change the balance of a particular sound font, when mixing them?

That's a good idea - could you actually create such a feature request, via the "Issue tracker" link in the menu at right?

Musescore is the best and simplest notation software I know.
The only feature not implemented is the realtime notation, I hope that in the future it will be added.

You mean real time MIDI input, don't you?

It's been a nice idea for the future for a long time:

But it may be a bigger deal than I thought—at least some random person on the Internet being abusive towards MuseScore seemed to regard it as the last straw:

Not that a random person, he posted here too, see ...

Real time MIDI interpretation is difficult, but there is a request for a similar feature that would overcome many of these difficulties.

Basically the user enters a "record mode" where they are given an audible metronome beat. The metronome beat is used to divide measures into quantised chunks. The the timing of the user's NoteOn and NoteOff event are rounded to the quantisation level (e.g. "1/8th note") and passed to the existing algorithm used for importing .mid and .kar files. The process is equivalent to selecting the "shortest note" on MIDI import in MuseScore 1.3

Lower down that page I expanded the request to include the use of a MIDI sustain pedal to control the jump to the next quantised unit. This allows the user to control the input tempo to make it easier to enter difficult passages accurately.

This still requires realtime processing MuseScore is simply not set up to do currently that I know of. I am not sure which difficulties you are thinking this circumvents?

Well, if MuseScore was set up for realtime processing there wouldn't need to be a feature request :D

You could simplify realtime processing by delaying MIDI voice/note interpretation to the end of each bar (see attached animation). Could the current MIDI algorithm (for .mid files) handle note and voice interpretation one bar at a time?

As for the issues this helps with...
Quantisation helps to solve note length issues which would arise if you were to use the raw timings of the NoteOn and NoteOff events. If a key is down when the metronome ticks then it counts as a note, otherwise it doesn't. This gets you 100% accuracy with all regular rhythms (i.e. not triplet/tuplets, but there are ways around this).

It also solves the issue of "is this a staccato crotchet or is it a quaver and a quaver-rest?". The user would be forced to enter "what you want to see" (a crotchet), not "what you want to hear" (a quaver), so any ornamentation or staccato would be added manually afterwards. (Again, there are ways around this, but the issue isn't that important.)

Using the sustain pedal to advance a quantisation step allows the user to control the pace at which they have to play the notes. In "Record mode" the user would "perform" the piece at a slow tempo to ensure accuracy, but could use the pedal to advance through an easy section very quickly, or use it to slow down while inputting a difficult section.

RealTimeMIDI.gif 213.97 KB

not always necessary, but if there was it would be a great time saver.

Nice Guitar TAB features finally, this is shaping up to be a good piece of software.

Will scores created in 2.1 for Yosemite still be openable, readable and editable by an earlier version of Musecore? I have an older Apple aptop with OS X 10.6.5 that will run an older version of Musecore but not the latest version. I need to use the portable to work on the score when travelling and can't afford to replace the computer just to upgrade this software.

No, scores created with 2.0.1 are not readable by MuseScore 1.x. But scores created with MuseScore 1.x are readable by MuseScore 2.0.1. You could try to work with MusicXML instead of native files to exchange scores from 2.0.1 to 1.3.

+1 from me, I still use 10.6 on at least one computer, wish I could still get an up to date musescore :|

Why not upgrade Mac OS X?

Some older hardware "isn't supported" for newer versions. I think mine could take 10.7 (at most) but there are other older hardware that can only take up to 10.6 at most, as well.

If you can get OS X 10.7, then you can get MuseScore 2.

Thanks you. The problem is solved. I checked and my computer has OS X 10.7, so I have downloaded MuseScore 2. The earlier advice to transfer files via MusicXMK is still useful when one has a computer unable to run recent operating systems.

Guys, I have an issue when opening the app. When I hit the Icon, it gives me an error screen right away.
Dyld Error Message:
Library not loaded: @executable_path/../Frameworks/libvorbisfile.3.dylib
Referenced from: /Applications/MuseScore
Reason: Incompatible library version: mscore requires version 7.0.0 or later, but libvorbisfile.3.dylib provides version 6.0.0

I run Maverics at the moment, so It should run. I have encountered this problem ever since version 1.3 came out, so I have run version 1.2 ever since, and it really starts to bugging me! What can I do?

@Nicolai Better open a new forum post for it. Your comment is buried away I'm afraid.

It appears that a Linux release of 2.0.1 is far, far down the priority list, and I have never been able to get the instructions for compiling from source to work. However the Windows release seems to work with Wine 1.6 with no problems. It's kind of a bummer that there is no native Linux release, but what can you do.

You might consider starting a new thread explainign the problems you are having compiling from source. It should actually be a snap on Linux - *much* simpler than on Windows.

Jim - it compiles and installs just fine, most errors you may get are due to missing dependencies.

If you need assistance, start a support thread. We need to know what distro and what error message you are getting.

Here is how it is done in Fedora -

Syndicate content