Cross-staff beaming ignores ottava
I don't know if this counts as a bug, but when switching a note within an ottava to a different staff, the note is placed in the wrong octave (without regard to the ottava).
Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.
Comments
It doesn't seem to ignore it when I try it. Which version MS and can you post the score, please and state the exact order you created those bars in?
In reply to It doesn't seem to ignore it by underquark
I'm using version 2.0.2. Order of the bars: entered the notes for the top staff at an octave lower, then added the ottava. Then added the clefs for the bottom staff, then added the notes.
In reply to I'm using version 2.0.2. by Doomcat55
Am I missing something because it also looks right to me. The middle C has shifted from treble to bass clef, but also has a treble clef applying to it, so appearing at middle C again (and still having the ottava applying to it as it is a member of the group from the treble) seems correct.
I haven't played it, does it sound correct?
In reply to Am I missing something by schepers
I fixed it manually in the score I posted by moving the note up an octave. It should be an octave above middle C. There's no ottava on the lower staff, so it appearing as middle C (in the pic above) is a mistake.
It actually doesn't sound properly on playback; since it's still treated as within the ottava, and I moved it up an octave to make it look right, it sounds two octaves above middle C.
In reply to I fixed it manually in the by Doomcat55
"There's no ottava on the lower staff"
The note in question is part of the treble group, and to me the ottava applies to it as well. If the first measure above is how things are supposed to sound, then the C note shift in the second seems right as it's in the same position in treble or bass. It certainly plays back properly for me when I entered the first measure above, and shifted the C note down.
So neither myself or underquark see what's wrong.
You also said "I entered the notes an octave lower and added the ottava". Does this mean the notes are supposed to be written a full octave higher in the original score?
In reply to "There's no ottava on the by schepers
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that an ottava only applies to the staff it's on, regardless of note grouping. So once the note is shifted to the lower staff, it should no longer be affected and should be shown as the C above middle C. Yes, the second picture sounds right, but looks wrong IMO. I meant that the adjusted score (attached in my last post) sounds wrong, because I changed it to look the way I wanted it to.
I entered the notes an octave lower so that the ottava would restore them to the intended pitch. Here's how the measure would look without the ottava or clef change:
![sheetimgnoottava.png]( "sheetimgnoottava.png")
In reply to Correct me if I'm wrong, but by Doomcat55
I don't know what Gould or other sources say about this particular case, but I always thought that cross-staff notes are moved as a convenience, and hence don't really belong to the staff they are temporarily occupying. In this case especially because the note is still beamed into the treble.
Note also that the treble clef in the bass should be set back to a bass clef right after the dotted quarter, but I doubt that is possible in MS (having a bass clef _immediately_ after the dotted quarter), and so the cross-staff note is being affected by the treble clef.
How about using ottava for both, instead of a clef change?
In reply to I don't know what Gould or by schepers
Well, I'm not an expert on music notation, so I don't really know what the proper method is. Each staff represents a hand, though, and since the beaming indicates that the note should be played with the other hand, I'd say that makes it sound like it belongs entirely to the other staff.
Also, if I was sight-reading the example you gave, I would probably think that the note should be played as middle C, when it should really be an octave higher.
Ottava on the bottom would be cleaner then changing the clef every measure, thanks.
In reply to Well, I'm not an expert on by Doomcat55
"Each staff represents a hand, though"
This was a misconception I had until corrected by the good folks in these here forums. Each staff does not represent a hand, that is a major over-simplification. If that was the case, how would you handle true;cross staff where a bass theme intermingles into treble... play it all on the right hand, because "treble belongs to the right hand"? How would you handle music >2 staff, even 4-staff piano which exists?
"beaming indicates that the note should be played with the other hand"
When you cross-staff, most times the cross-notes are still played by the same hand.
In reply to "Each staff represents a by schepers
I suppose you are right. Thank you very much!
If there's no need to indicate that the note should be played with a specific hand, then there's honestly not much of a reason to use the cross-staff beaming at all.
In reply to I suppose you are right. by Doomcat55
The reasons to use cross-staff or (clef changes like your first example, bass clef) are actually very simple: to reduce the usage of ledger lines for notes above/below a staff. I don't see a reason in your example above to use a cross-staff for the single middle C note, but it would be apropos if the arpeggio went lower.
In reply to I suppose you are right. by Doomcat55
There are actually still good reasons to use cross staff beaming even when not using it to indicate which hands plays what. Once is just to avoid clef changes. If a passage is mostly high notes that are best written in treble clef, but one note is low and is best notated in bass clef. You can do a quick clef change and back and keep it all in the top staff, but that's more cluttered.
But I'd say that while you can't totally rely on the two staves indicating which hand is which, they *are* used as a hint to that effect reaosnably often, so at least *some times*, a staff change would imply at least a "suggestion" of what hand might be used.
All that said, I don't really have an opinion onnthe issue at hand. I mean, I could say it sort of makes intuitive sense to me that an ottava marking only applies to the staff it appears on, so a cross staff note should *not* be assumed to still be under the ottava. Which is to say, my gut tells me MuseScore is not playing back properly; it should be ignoring the ottava on the moved note. But that's just a guess.