I found a serious bug - when playing a jazz lead sheet for a transposing instrument (saxophone) the chords were played in the written pitch rather than in concert pitch. So the chords and the melody were played back in different keys. I have gone back to MuseScore 3 for now.

 

FYI: This issue has been fixed in the current version (v. 4.0.1).

 

I used Sibelius for literally decades, and just decided to switch to musescore and I’m glad I did. I had never really used play back with Sibelius but I am using it now. It’s most useful I think for figuring out rhythms. It’s actually been easier than I thought to switch over – and I should’ve done it a long time ago I guess. I am a huge open-source fan also – so I think Musescore is great!

 

Let me be clear, following up. I will continue to use MuseScore. I stopped using Encore when it stopped being supported, I knew that program like the back of my hand. It worked the same way, press this for quarter notes, that for halfs, etc. Select a tool, click on a notehead, yada yada yada. All the programs work this way. I’ve used Finale, and played with Sibelius. Have not yet tried Dorico, probably won’t.

For a while I used Logic to do notation. You know what the easiest and fastest way to get notation into Logic is? Use the piano roll editor. Make sure you have full quantization turned on, and that pencil inserted notes (or played notes) are filled to their full values. Yes you have to play precisely, so go slow and concentrate. You may have to select and drag a bunch of notes to fill out the time if you really want quarter notes instead of eighth note-eighth rest. But you can dothat to a lot of notes at the same time, and Logic lets you quantize endings of notes too. End result - good solid notation.

What if you want an accent on the first beat of every bar? Go back to the pian roll, select the first note in each measure, go back tothe piano roll and use the accent tool. Once. Selecting by note, or by position, or by volume (velocity) - all can be done in the piano roll editor. Not in thenotation editor.

Be prepared to dust off some of your favorite cuss words.

What I am saying is there must be a better way to deal with notation in computers. I just haven’t seen it yet. I’m thinking about it…

 

Tried to download, but it wouldn’t open. Will have to try reinstalling (on Mac 12.6)

 

I had trouble with this, and ended up putting a comment on GitHub, and also on the MuseHub support forum. It’s not really a problem with MuseScore, it’s MuseHub.

If you install the one WITHOUT MuseHub, it will work fine. MuseHub are having server scaling issues, and the various bits and pieces of MuseScore that are obtained through that platform (including the app itself!) just won’t install. MuseHub also provides support/updates/etc. for Audacity and StaffPad (a mobile notation program).

The bad news is that the only way to get the new, updated sounds is through MuseHub. Haven’t tried to use VST’s yet, was really looking forward to the new woodwind sounds in MuseScore. Maybe tomorrow, or next week, once they get their server issues straightened out.

The other bad news is that the organization of the interface has changed a lot, for the better IMO, but the documentation is not finished. So for example when trying to figure out how to fill measures with slash marks (for a chord chart), I was directed to the version 3 manual. Which didn’t help because that function moved somewhere else. I eventually found it, but still…. Welcome to the bleeding edge.

 

The new MuseSounds seem like a big improvement but all of the demo videos I have seen so far for them seem to be for Classical or at least non-Jazz music. The one that I heard which included a saxophone quartet wasn't convincing:

Hoping that MuseScore will continue to improve. And it would be great if the sounds would work in my old Sibelius 7.

Rhys

 

Great program but I think I'll wait bit before downloading ver4

 

I work with a lot of open source software and they really appreciate feedback with bugs or glitches -- so please report any issues to their support team. Also, help support the open source community with donations -- doesn't need to big. Buy them a cup of coffee. They program this stuff on their own time.

 

Also, help support the open source community with donations -- doesn't need to big. Buy them a cup of coffee. They program this stuff on their own time.

Is that actually the business model now for MuseScore ? They have put together a development team but I am not clear about where the funding comes from.

Looking forward to what the same organisation does with Audacity.

Rhys

 

One thing I like about MuseScore is I can create a chord sheet after I've entered the chords, select them all and hit "Realize Chord Symbols" and it generates the chord tones for each entered chord. A little bit of editing (remove low bass notes, transpose generated tones below the root up an octave) and you have your lead sheet with chord tones.

 

Just a heads up, there's three different, but more or less related entities:

1) musescore the app (ok)
2) musescore.org the website (ok I guess)
3) musescore.com (commercial company, with allegedly shady business practices).

I believe musescore.com is, or has been partly sponsoring/funding musescore.org/the app development. I don't really know what the connection is, but seeing how the .org folks are being vague about their connection and skirting around the topic, it certainly seems like they have some kind of ongoing weird "silent endorsement" deal with the .com folks. Let's just say, of course there wouldn't be any problem being fully transparent, if all the parties had all around good reputation & customer satisfaction, GDPR compliance etc.

So, enjoy the nice software, just be very mindfull what you sign up for, who you give your personal info or do actual business with, google around for reviews, have a paper trail of everything, firewall up, lawyer up as needed, the usual stuffs

 

Just a heads up, there's three different, but more or less related entities:

1) musescore the app (ok)
2) musescore.org the website (ok I guess)
3) musescore.com (shady commercial scam company, basically allegedly).

I believe musescore.com is, or has been partly sponsoring/funding musescore.org/the app development. I don't really know what the connection is, but seeing how the .org folks are being vague about their connection and skirting around the topic, it certainly seems like they have some kind of ongoing weird "silent endorsement" deal with the .com folks. Let's just say, of course there wouldn't be any problem being fully transparent, if all the parties had all around good reputation & customer satisfaction, GDPR compliance etc.

What's with the vague insinuations? FYI: there are actually only two related entities:

• musescore.org, which hosts the musescore software
• musescore.com, which is a music score sharing site

Musescore.com is in fact completely open about the relationship between the two (which is clearly explained on this page, for example).

I don't understand what you're doing here. If you have had a bad experience with either site or with the software, just describe your experience directly, with details of what happened. Lobbing these vague, unsupported smears against the organization doesn't help anyone.

 

It appears to me they are the same company. They make money with the file sharing site, and they make the software to create the files. Maybe they have a separate board for the software itself, lots of software companies that have decided to put some of their assets into open source do that. So what?

An update on MuseHub - after the glitches yesterday, today it worked fine and I got all the sounds downloaded in a few minutes.

Regarding the lead sheet bug - is it really a bug? As a saxophone player, someone hands me a sheet of paper with notes and chord symbols, I would expect them both to be transposed. In other words, on an alto sx chart, I would expect to see G7 and have it sound as a Bb7. If that’s not the issue, then I guess I don’t understand.

If you want a transposed melody and concert key chords on the same page, a) why on earth would you and b) just put them on separate staves.

 

Regarding the lead sheet bug - is it really a bug? As a saxophone player, someone hands me a sheet of paper with notes and chord symbols, I would expect them both to be transposed. In other words, on an alto sx chart, I would expect to see G7 and have it sound as a Bb7. If that’s not the issue, then I guess I don’t understand.

Yes, it's a bug.

The current behavior is that a written G7 on the alto chart sounds as a concert G7, which is not correct. Moreover, this behavior differs from what happens in MuseScore 3 (i.e., written G7 sounds as concert Bb7). Which means that if you open up a leadsheet created in MuseScore 3, the behavior will be different in MuseScore 4. So, definitely a bug.

All of this discussion is moot anyway because, as I mentioned above, it's already been flagged as a critical priority bug on the project's Github page.

 

OK. I misunderstood then. Thanks. FWIW, I like MuseScore 4 so far. I expect a 4.0.1 revision soon .

 

...and I just bought Dorico Pro 4 on Black Friday special (retail I couldn't come at but $200 seemed fair to me as a long-time Sibelius user). Dorico is nice and Martin, the lead for Musescore4, was clearly influenced by its look. I suspect that these two will dominate the score writer market for some time to come, but neither is really very good for jazz playback (NotePerformer helps a little in expression but the sax sound is really not good). The big however is that the use-case for these programs, in my opinion, is generating music for real musicians to play so, in a way, I don't really care too much about the sound

 

I suspect that these two will dominate the score writer market for some time to come, but neither is really very good for jazz playback (NotePerformer helps a little in expression but the sax sound is really not good). The big however is that the use-case for these programs, in my opinion, is generating music for real musicians to play so, in a way, I don't really care too much about the sound

Yeah, it's important to keep in mind that these are designed as music notation programs, not as MIDI music production tools.

That said, one advantage of the new VST capabilities of MuseScore4 is that you can plug in VST instruments that are meant to emulate "jazz/commercial" instruments, designed with the appropriate articulations, timbres, etc. (e.g., instruments like NI's Session Horns Pro).

 

I found MuseScore 3.6 useful but deplored its patchwork functionality, layout quirks, & clunky MIDI sounds. Been anticipating the new version but, having tried several iterations of 4.0, find it too buggy for reliable use -- & not very jazz-friendly. Am now eagerly awaiting v4.2.

 

I posted yesterday, in the thread about Notion, that I find most notation programs frustrating and difficult. I really think this is due to two factors - most software professionals don’t know much about music, and the business model for niche market software is at best difficult.

Speaking as one who has had two careers (musician and software developer), and achieved some level of success in each, notation is difficult. The underlying data model is key, and none of the current programs has it even close to right. I spent 3 or 4 years working on a notation program, Encore by Passport Designs. It is no longer available, and though I was just an inexperienced developer when I worked on it, I added some useful features to it. But the underlying representation had some issues and if I were starting over today (I’m not) I’d do things very differently.

More importantly, the user interface that most programs use makes it VERY difficult for musicians, who tend to be intuitive, focused and both simple- and single-minded. Consider the act of inputting a melody that contains only diatonic notes, and only quarter notes and eighth notes. And rests. In 4/4 time.

With a pencil or pen, I just put noteheads and stems on paper, and add flags or beams as needed. Rests I may insert in order, or I may go back and add them after I’ve done a few bars. If I know about notation, I will write a dotted quarter note differently depending on where it goes in the bar. On 1, or the and of 1, I will write a single dotted quarter. On the and of 2, I will instead write an eighth note tied to a quarter note. But it’s still just one note.

Note that I don’t have to change my pencil or pen, or do something special, to make these marks. I can do them in any order convenient to me, like adding beams after the fact. On a computer, I need a separate gesture and likely a separate “mode” for each mark I make. Higher power help me if I have to move that dotted quarter from the and of 1 to the and of 2. Easiest to erase and do over. Some programs will make that easy, and some won’t - if there are notes after the erased ones, then some programs will move them over automatically, screwing up what I’ve already done, and some will fill the empty area with rests. Which I now have to deal with to input the corrected notes.

A typewriter has a separate key for each letter. To type “a” I need only hit one key. To input a D quarter note, I need to first tell the program that I want to input a quarter note, and then tell it I want it to be a D. Two thoughts, and at least two gestures. If that quarter note happens to land on the and of 4, I will need to call on my deity again (and perhaps start addressing its dark side in an angry voice).

These are the kind of problems that a really good notation program should address. I don’t have answers, but I know me. I will be thinking about this for a while, I already spent an hour on it last night, after my bladder decided I needed to get up in the middle of the night. Sigh….

 

I posted yesterday, in the thread about Notion, that I find most notation programs frustrating and difficult. I really think this is due to two factors - most software professionals don’t know much about music, and the business model for niche market software is at best difficult.

Speaking as one who has had two careers (musician and software developer), and achieved some level of success in each, notation is difficult. The underlying data model is key, and none of the current programs has it even close to right. I spent 3 or 4 years working on a notation program, Encore by Passport Designs. It is no longer available, and though I was just an inexperienced developer when I worked on it, I added some useful features to it. But the underlying representation had some issues and if I were starting over today (I’m not) I’d do things very differently.

More importantly, the user interface that most programs use makes it VERY difficult for musicians, who tend to be intuitive, focused and both simple- and single-minded. Consider the act of inputting a melody that contains only diatonic notes, and only quarter notes and eighth notes. And rests. In 4/4 time.

With a pencil or pen, I just put noteheads and stems on paper, and add flags or beams as needed. Rests I may insert in order, or I may go back and add them after I’ve done a few bars. If I know about notation, I will write a dotted quarter note differently depending on where it goes in the bar. On 1, or the and of 1, I will write a single dotted quarter. On the and of 2, I will instead write an eighth note tied to a quarter note. But it’s still just one note.

Note that I don’t have to change my pencil or pen, or do something special, to make these marks. I can do them in any order convenient to me, like adding beams after the fact. On a computer, I need a separate gesture and likely a separate “mode” for each mark I make. Higher power help me if I have to move that dotted quarter from the and of 1 to the and of 2. Easiest to erase and do over. Some programs will make that easy, and some won’t - if there are notes after the erased ones, then some programs will move them over automatically, screwing up what I’ve already done, and some will fill the empty area with rests. Which I now have to deal with to input the corrected notes.

A typewriter has a separate key for each letter. To type “a” I need only hit one key. To input a D quarter note, I need to first tell the program that I want to input a quarter note, and then tell it I want it to be a D. Two thoughts, and at least two gestures. If that quarter note happens to land on the and of 4, I will need to call on my deity again (and perhaps start addressing its dark side in an angry voice).

These are the kind of problems that a really good notation program should address. I don’t have answers, but I know me. I will be thinking about this for a while, I already spent an hour on it last night, after my bladder decided I needed to get up in the middle of the night. Sigh….

Musescore has a decent solution. Number keys select your note input (use period to make anything dotted) ie 4=quarter, 5= half. Deleting a note does fill space with rests. However, adjusting rests is just as easy. Number keys still represent the length of notes but right clicking applies that to a rest (or divides a rest).

If a measure has all rests, each at once count, and you need to add to the and of 2, selecting an Eight note (3) right click the second note splits into two eight rests, and allows a note to be inserted by clicking on the rest.

Hope that makes sense. I find it quite effective, except musescore 4 disables the numpad, which was my preferred selection

 

Dude, what you just said is the problem. I have and use MuseScore. I DO NOT WANT to select 4 for eighth notes and 5 for quarter notes. I want to click in a notehead, be able to IMMEDIATELY drag it up and down to change the pitch, and maybe later decide if I want it to be a quarter or half or eighth. Until I decide I don’t want it to move around. I don’t want to press “N” to start entering notes, and ESC to stop.

What really started this train of thought for me was a transcription that I’m putting in to MuseScore. I got the beat turned around - a phrase that I started on the and of 3 really starts on the and of 4. Got the notes and rhythms correct. Can I drag that prase to the right one beat?

Answer - no. My question, and my previous post, is why? Is the underlying representation of that phrase so flipping fragile that I have to select and cut the phrase, CHANGE THE FRICKING RHYTHMS OF THE RESULTING HALF REST so that I can then paste that phrase on the and of 4? Really stupid.

 

Dude, what you just said is the problem. I have and use MuseScore. I DO NOT WANT to select 4 for eighth notes and 5 for quarter notes. I want to click in a notehead, be able to IMMEDIATELY drag it up and down to change the pitch, and maybe later decide if I want it to be a quarter or half or eighth. Until I decide I don’t want it to move around. I don’t want to press “N” to start entering notes, and ESC to stop.

What really started this train of thought for me was a transcription that I’m putting in to MuseScore. I got the beat turned around - a phrase that I started on the and of 3 really starts on the and of 4. Got the notes and rhythms correct. Can I drag that prase to the right one beat?

Answer - no. My question, and my previous post, is why? Is the underlying representation of that phrase so flipping fragile that I have to select and cut the phrase, CHANGE THE FRICKING RHYTHMS OF THE RESULTING HALF REST so that I can then paste that phrase on the and of 4? Really stupid.

Well then, there's certainly no accounting for taste. In use, the system you described to me sounds slow and ineffective (for me anyways) Way too much drag and drop, not enough logical input. I'm pretty quick with the current system. To each their own

And copy pasting can work in the moving phrases, just one extra click and one extra keyboard press to get there and ensure the proper stating point.

 

The frustration surely does begin to add up when things aren't as simple as your like. But then again, you're a dev right? Always gotta add features (Im cyber so my goal is to remove all features, and connections, and input, so it's safe )

Hotkeys help to fix alot of those issues. Sure there isn't one for everything, but spending time to get fully acquainted with a tool used a lot is very beneficial.