Score hangs Musescore at bar 29

• Nov 5, 2020 - 02:41

This score hangs MS 3.4.2 on bar 29 on the second repeat. I didn't realise this until it failed to upload to .com as per https://musescore.com/groups/improving-musescore-com/discuss/5079846

The ms.com team are checking the score but I'm guessing it's related to this bar. The score is not quite finished but this shouldn't cause a problem.

Any idea what's gone wrong?

Attachment Size
Canon Fantasia.mscz 23.94 KB

Comments

• Nov 5, 2020 - 07:03

Not sure exactly what you wanted to do (and how), but there are a number of orphan ties (hidden in your score) - see image below - at the end, from measure 38 and followings. This is what causes the problem. Remove these orphan ties and everything goes back to normal: Canon Fantasia (2).mscz

orphan ties.jpg

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 14:08

You used the PRE and created some empty events in the score as well. They do not appear in the places I had freezes so I think that bug was fixed. I can't help but to think the PRE has something to with the freezing though. Are the orphan ties edited with the PRE? @cadiz1?

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 16:44

I used PRE to change some note Offtime values from 1000 to 2000 but I don't know what events are or how to make empty ones so this was by accident. It must be something to do with deleting the tied crotchets on beats 2 and 3 then making a tie from the remaining crotchets on beats 1 and 4. I will be more careful in future, probably just delete all 4 crotchets and start again.

Why would it only freeze on the second time around the repeat?

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 19:52

That was my question.
So, I got the score to play correctly by focusing on the repeats (and then that 6/4 measure)...

  1. Select the start repeat and press the delete key.
  2. Delete the end repeat by selecting it and then clicking the single barline in the palette (the delete key does not work here).
  3. Select the 6/4 time signature and change it to 4/4. (For readability, put a line break to separate the intro )
  4. Plut back the start repeat by dragging it from the palette. (Clicking in the palette places it on the wrong measure!)
  5. Add end repeat using any method.
    Playback now works.

To restore the intro as in your original...
Put the 6/4 time signature back and ctrl+del the extra measure. (and separate the intro. with a line break.)

I also successfully used a fermata in a 4/4/ measure instead of using that 6/4 time signature change, but I don't know if using a fermata sign is acceptable in your personal style of TAB.

OS: Windows 10 (10.0), Arch.: x86_64, MuseScore version (64-bit): 3.5.2.311459983, revision: 465e7b6

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 21:22

Interesting. Was this without fixing the "orphan ties"?

I didn't fix any ties. The steps listed above do not mention ties at all. Do you get the same result following them? (Try it on your original attachment above.)
I was about to submit my fix when I saw cadiz' attachment, which is why I asked him about that stubborn end repeat which also exists on his 'fixed' score.

Does a fermata do for bars what a dot does for notes
A fermata is an articulation that holds a note longer than a note without a fermata. Its 'time stretch' is adjustable in the Inspector.
See:
https://musescore.org/en/handbook/tempo#fermata
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermata

A dot on a note adds half the duration and, as a consequence, expropriates time from the measure's duration.

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 21:33

No, you didn't mention ties but I just thought it might have been assumed after cadiz fixed the score by dealing with them.

I like the fermata idea as this will look cleaner on the score but I will have to wait until tomorrow to try out your steps. Are fermatas only applicable to the last note in a bar?

This score certainly seems to be having a bit of a tantrum but I'm very pleased that it's fixable.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 03:44

You wrote:
No, you didn't mention ties but I just thought it might have been assumed after cadiz fixed the score

When it comes to enumerating exact steps to fix a score, there is no room for "assumptions". I did not start from cadiz' "fix" at all.
I started from your original (problemaiic) attachment and enumerated the steps that I took.
Cadiz' score is not even relevant here.
If I messed around with ties, I would have mentioned it in the "exact" steps I enumerated.
So...
Starting from your original (broken) score, I hope others here follow my enumerated steps "exactly"" and without "assumptions".
Do they get the same results?

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 14:37

Sorry, it was just my initial thought. I did at least follow your steps exactly and did not try to include my assumption anywhere. You and cadiz have applied quite different fixes but they both work despite appearing to tackle different problems.

Either way it's a good result but quite hard to think what I could've done to break this score. I know that I tried to tidy up the ties, so the "orphan ties" are understandable. Your approach has clearly fixed things too, but without touching the ties.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 00:09

So, I got the score to play correctly by focusing on the repeats (and then that 6/4 measure)...

Followed your steps on the original and it has fixed the issues. Went for the fermata instead of 6/4 and this just feels much better that changing the time signature. :-)

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 16:46

For any TABbers performing your score... and if they actually pay attention to time signatures ;-)
...using a single 6/4 bar avoids having that final note of the G chord arpeggio appearing as an orphan (tied) note isolated in its own 2/4 measure.

Anyway, since your piece is for solo guitar, it doesn't matter much that you even use a 6/4 measure. A competent performer would realize that you have doubled up on the note durations of that G chord - to impart the feeling of 'slowing down' - and so would probably instinctively add a pause for dramatic effect at the intro's end.

On the other hand. in ensemble playing, greater attention to notation detail is required so that everyone stays in sync. with each other. For example, it is common practice to agree that a fermata should double the duration.

Your original posted score seemed to be playing one heck of a fermata at bar 29. ;-)
Something nefarious was happening within the software given the fact that the two "fixes" were different!

Reply

• Nov 5, 2020 - 12:19

@cadiz1: Brilliant! Will test it when I get home from work. Thanks for checking.

I originally had 4 crotchets in the bar each tied together. This looked quite messy with all the tie lines so I had the bright idea of deleting the middle 2 crotchets and just keep the 1st and 4th tied.

So I need crotchets for strings 3,4 and 5 here but I want string 6 to be a whole note. Should I really be showing 4 tied crotchets on string 6?

Strange how the repeat section plays ok first time but hangs on the second time around.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 02:20

Sorry for the delay, to the different questions, my answer: I have done absolutely nothing else than remove these orphan ties. Simply because I've already seen this from time to time, in version 2 included, and so with these glitches on playback. But it is rare enough for that I didn't have the courage and time to try to reproduce it. If @yonah_ag could try to do it again, it would be a good thing.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 14:43

Maybe I somehow caused two issues, since your fix and jm6stringer's seem to be unrelated but both work! I expect that I can reproduce orphan ties but not the other issue.

Anyway, I do appreciate that you have both enabled me to get this score back on track.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 19:22

No matter. I think we're wasting each other's time. Your score has suffered somewhere. For example, not being able to delete the end repeat is strange to say the least (which you can do, however, after exporting to XMLMusic format, then reopening in MuseScore)
So let's take a rest instead.

Reply

• Nov 6, 2020 - 20:31

Last observation, and probably the explanation. At least for me, this score continues to crash at the end of step 5 (measure 29, playback second time) Because orphan ties are always here: Canon 2.mscz

It is only when the 6/4 is changed to 4/4 that the cards are redistributed, and this fixes the problem: the ties are no more orphans, and become connected again. See the GIF below.
And so, I still think that the root of the problem lies in those ties that, at some point in time and how (?), become orphaned.
In a nutshell: whether one deletes these orphan ties, or at least in this score, a time signature change, that somehow "changes" the score and restores the ties, leads to the same crash avoidance.
And so, it is not two different problems, it is the same, with two different scenarios for fixing the crash.

Video_2020-11-06_211540.gif

Reply

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.