Horizontal positioning of accidental incorrect if in chord with adjacent notes
1. Open attached score (produced in 1.3).
Expected result: The accidental for the bottom C♯ is next to the notehead.
Actual result: The accidental for the bottom C♯ is aligned in accordance with accidentals of other adjacent notes in the chord.
Using MuseScore 2.0 Nightly Build (0b96ea5) - Mac 10.7.5.
Comments
see http://musescore.org/en/node/3325#comment-97139
fixed in 6d1da20ec129c
See discussion here #3325: Seconds between voices overlap
Automatically closed -- issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.
It's happening now.
Using MuseScore 2.0 Nightly Build (601b10b) - Mac 10.7.5.
This is actually correct behavior; the "expected" result in the original report was incorrect - or at least, not according to the standards MuseScore adheres to. MuseScore now implements the engraving convention that says accidentals for notes an octave apart should align. In the above example, change the bottom note to a Bb or A# below the C and you'll see it *does* tuck in.
I would usually agree with Behind Bars, but in this case, I'm a little skeptical.
Page 88 states: "Pairs of accidentals an octave or more apart vertically align."
However, in the previous page: "Place all accidentals as close as possible to the notes they precede,"
The latter quote is potentially misinterpreted/out-of-context, but I think there has been oversight for such instances. My perspective: In some other circumstances, they probably should align, but the presence of adjacent notes means the top accidental is naturally pushed out and a question arises as to whether it's actually necessary for the bottom one to (needlessly?) move as well.
I've found another published example (Sonata Pathétique - Op. 13. - 2nd Movement) - in comparison, it features multiple voices. The mscz was produced in 1.3.
Using MuseScore 2.0 Nightly Build (601b10b) - Mac 10.7.5.
I too was surprised by this at first because it isn't how I originally learned things, but it isn't just Behind Bars. An examination of the literature shows at least some of the major publishers are consistent about this. Regarding the Beethoven example, it's possible the rule they were following was, it's OK to break the octave rule for notes in different voices. Or just that this publisher was one of the exceptions that doesn't follow this rule at all.
See the following (rather heated) discussion:
#1464: Faulty vertical alignment of accidentals at chords
You might be interested in this as well, from the one of the main Sibelius developers now working for Steinberg:
//blog.steinberg.net/2014/03/development-diary-part-six/
There is admittedly not hard and fast right and wrong, but for better or worse, this si the choice I have made, and it seems rather well supported. People who wish to follow different rules can make manual adjustments.
EDIT: FWIW, I remember worrying about this specific case when I was working on accidental stacking. What finally convinced me to adhere to the octave alignment here was that there is nothing to be gained in *not* doing so - it wouldn't result in a more compact arrangement. Whereas if there is any advantage to the octave rule, this case should benefit too. And it's easier to manually tuck in the bottom accidental if it starts aligned than to manually align it if it starts tucked in. And I realized then as I do now that there is pleasing everyone :-)