Measure Number Disorder
PROBLEM:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am arranging some sheet music for personal use, but something caught my attention while I was proofreading. I was adding rehearsal marks when noticed that at measure 49, everything was normal until measure 50 came in. Measure 50 would have started a new stave, so it would have the measure number '50' inscripted above the measure. But instead of '50', '49' was written in instead of it. I tried restarting Musescore and loading the file again, but the problem remained. Any help would be appreciated, thanks.
STEP-BY-STEP:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. I opened Musescore and made a new score. I arranged a song, but didn't finish so I saved it.
2. I reopened it later, a few days after creating it, and played around with it more.
3. Today, I opened the file and added rehearsal marks until I noticed the measure numbers were wrong.
4. I deleted the rehearsal marks and restarted Musescore and reloaded the file to see if it could fix itself.
5. That happened to no avail, and I took notice to see the 124 measures I had created were apparently 123. Upon clicking the last measure, it said I only had 123 measures.
5. I exited out of Musescore and came here.
FULL SPECS:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OS Platform: Windows 10
Musescore Version: MS 2.0.2
Instruments used: Piano, Soprano (Voice), Alto (Voice). I also had the score in individual parts and noticed the problem in the 'Piano' part.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| The_Girl.mscz | 51.8 KB |
Comments
When asking for help, it is normally important to attach the actual score you are having problems with (see link right below where you type your post), and precise step by step instructions to reproduce the problem.
In reply to When asking for help, it is by Marc Sabatella
I have edited my submission. That should be better.
My plan of action in the meanwhile is to copy/paste everything into a new score and start fresh from there. I just thought I would leave the bug report here.
In reply to I have edited my submission. by AdevoMusic
You mean like this:
In reply to You mean like this: by rwmol
That's a duplicate of the original score. I downloaded it and opened it and yes, the problem exists there, on measure 50. It is the start of a new stave, so by default it gets a measure number. The problem is that the measure number is the wrong one, it misprinted it as 49.
Now that I have copy/pasted everything into a new score, the problem is fixed. The error was corrected and now measure 50 is labelled as such. However, the bug is something you guys might want to look into.
In reply to That's a duplicate of the by AdevoMusic
When I opened your score, the stave that starts at 44 has 5 measures. This means the next stave started at 49. Maybe I don't understand or I'm missing your point. It looks fine to me.
In reply to When I opened your score, the by rwmol
I just realized that the problem actually starts at 34/35. I f you check the score again on the 'Piano' part tab, 34 repeats itself on the next page. from there, everything is off by one, so 44 is actually 45, and the five measures after that add up to 49.
In reply to That's a duplicate of the by AdevoMusic
Any clue how the score got into this state? Any unusual sequence of operations that might have led to this?
In reply to Any clue how the score got by Marc Sabatella
Yes, I think I have a clue.
Measure '29' marks a new stave, so the number automatically is printed above it. I was entering in rehearsal marks and wished to put one on measure '29', so I did and then deleted the measure number because it interfered with the rehearsal mark. I did this by selecting the measure and right-clicked to select 'measure properties' from the drop-down. I proceeded to go down to the 'other' section and clicked 'exclude from measure count' to make it disappear.
But I believe that it already was labelled '49', and that was how I found out that the measure counting was off.
In reply to Yes, I think I have a by AdevoMusic
instead just select the measure number and hit v, to make it invisble
Ort use exclude from measure count and use an offset to correct it gain
In reply to Yes, I think I have a by AdevoMusic
I ran into the same issue with the rehearsal mark interfering with the measure number, I found the measure number placed at the bottom corner of the measure a better fit for all my scores. I simply repositioned it Style>Text>Measure Number. Horizontal: -2.00 Vertical: 5.25
In reply to I ran into the same issue by rwmol
@rwmol, @Marc Satabella,
I was going to reposition the number, but decided against it because it would look weird with every other number being on top.
As far as specific steps, I'm afraid that's as specific as I can get. I don't recall much else. This is a relatively minor bug that can be bypassed by creating a duplicate score via copy/paste.
In reply to Yes, I think I have a by AdevoMusic
For the record, the "correct" way to suppress a measure number is to set the "Measure number mode" in Measure Properties to "Always Hide".
It definitely seems that somehow, in the experimentation with excluding measures from the count, somehow the numbering in the part became out of sync. Precise steps to reproduce this would be helpful.
In reply to For the record, the "correct" by Marc Sabatella
That hides them all, not just the ones colliding with rehearsal marks...
In reply to That hides them all, not just by Jojo-Schmitz
No, it doesn't - it hides only the one in the measure you called "Measurew Properties" on. I believe you might be thinking of the similarly named Style option.
In reply to No, it doesn't - it hides by Marc Sabatella
Ah, yes, of course
Damn, this doesn't propagate between score and (existing) part
In reply to Ah, yes, of course Damn, this by Jojo-Schmitz
Not sure it should. Depending on your reason for wanting to suppress the number, it might apply to both.
In reply to Not sure it should. by Marc Sabatella
well, to me 'Always' is 'Always and Everywhere'. In Score and Parts
In reply to well, to me 'Always' is by Jojo-Schmitz
The opp's original problem was the measure number was hidden by the rehearsal mark. "In my opinion" the mark at the top left is a poor location. Not only does it interfere with the rehearsal mark but coda signs and others. relocating the rehearsal mark and moving one measure from the second system to the first seems to put thing in their place. Now, this is just my opinion. His attached score with these modifications may be what he wanted,
In reply to The opp's original problem by rwmol
For the record, the default positions of measure numbers, rehearsal marks, codas, and other symbols are taken from the the most common standards uysed by most major publishers worlwide. And in particualr, almost all publishers place measure numbers the same way MuseScore does, which is also the way the major references on music engraving suggest. However, it is true that when multiple such symbols are used in the same measure, something probably has to move to make room, but each publisher handles this differently.