Import / load midi not loading 32nd notes
Hello,
When I loaded a midi file that has 32nd notes, the score shows them at 8th notes. I tried the Edit>Preferences>Midi to "shortest note: 32nd" and reloaded the midi file but with the same result. I also tried 64th as the shortest note and still no luck. Any tips?
Comments
Normally this should work fine, and in fact it's more common to have the opposite issue - notes you intended to play as eighths that were "off" by just enough that they still register as shorter values. Anyhow, impossible to guess what might be going on without seeing the MIDI file in question. if you attach it to a comment here, we can understand and assist better.
In reply to Normally this should work… by Marc Sabatella
Thanks for your interest. So here is an excerpt from the midi and an image of the score. The last three notes should be 32nd notes.
test erase.mid
In reply to Thanks for your interest. So… by VGF666
The sound like staccato eighths to me in the original - are you are they were meant to be thirty-second notes, thus taking up a total of only a half beat between the four of them instead of two beats as shown? Or maybe you mean, you want them notated as 32nd notes but with rests in between so they still are still half a beat apart and thus take up two beats between them? That would not be the recommended / standard way to notate this type of passage - staccato eighths are much clearer to read. But if you do wish to show the 32nd notes and rests for whatever reason - perhaps as prelude to adding more notes in the gaps? - uncheck "Simplify durations" in the import window, then Apply.
In reply to The sound like staccato… by Marc Sabatella
Thank you again. "Simplify durations" is already on, so... But your advice sounds good. If I use staccato 8ths, should I notate the staccato somehow in the score? (Sorry if that is a dumb question.)
In reply to Thank you again. "Simplify… by VGF666
To be clear: if you want the 32nd notation, uncheck (meaning, turn off) the simplify durations option. But only do that if the goal is to add more notes in those rests, because otherwise, it's unnecessarily hard to read. Realistically, a pianist is not going to play it any different whether you notate it as staccato eighths, or as sixteen notes alternating with sixteenths rests, or thirty-second notes with lots more rests. But they'll be shooting you dirty. So that's why you should stick with the easiest to read.
And yes, notate the staccato - but in your example, MuseScore did that for you already (that's what the dots represent).
In reply to To be clear: if you want the… by Marc Sabatella
Yes, it looks pretty bad with all those pauses, so I will go with your suggestion. Thank you, you are very informative and very clear.
In reply to To be clear: if you want the… by Marc Sabatella
Can I ask you a separate question? You obviously know a lot about music and the reality of performance vs composition vs scores. My question concerns the text that is sometimes included at the beginning of a score, for the conductor or whatever. Is there a standard way that the vocalization in choral pieces is done, when there are no lyrics involved? Is there a word for that? Is it okay to mention, or a standard way to say, that the singing can be just "la la la" or whatever, open to the interpretation of the conductor?
In reply to Can I ask you a separate… by VGF666
Even when no actual lyrics are involved, it's typical to add the desired syllables ("la" or whatever) directly to the notes just as if they were actual lyrics. But I'm sure if you just added a note at the top of the score people would be able to figure it out.
In reply to Even when no actual lyrics… by Marc Sabatella
Thanks! OK how about this one. As far as I can tell, the timing of these two are the same, with different ways to notate the same thing. If so, question: Which one is more standard, or in other words, which one would be easier and better for the performer/conductor to handle?
![Screenshot 2021-10-22 151020.png]( "Screenshot 2021-10-22 151020.png")
In reply to Thanks! OK how about this… by VGF666
The second by a mile. This should happen automatically when importing MIDI, but if further edits result in problems like the first, the command Tools / Regroup rhythms fixes it.
I also recommend studying up about how music notation works - not just how to read the notes, but the rules of how/why it’s written the way it is.
In reply to The second by a mile. This… by Marc Sabatella
Thank you! I didn't know about the Tools / Regroup rhythms option. The first example is what Musescore gave me, it's good to know I have a way to potentially regroup them automatically.
Also thx for your advice re learning more about music notation. Can you suggest a resource?
In reply to Thank you! I didn't know… by VGF666
MuseScore gave you the first on MIDI important? That shouldn't happen; can you attach the MIDi file that produced that error?
If you mean, that's what it gave you if you enter it explicitly, well, yes, MuseScore does display exactly what you ask it to, so if you ask it to display something incorrect, it will do that. But it shouldn't have created that by default on MIDI import.
And no, I don't have any specific recommendation for books / courses on notation fundamentals. It's covered a little in my Basic Music Theory course, but that's really more about teaching music, with notation rules covered only here and there as needed (see https://school.masteringmusescore.com/p/basic-theory)
In reply to MuseScore gave you the first… by Marc Sabatella
Yes, Musescore gave me first on MIDI import, which is why I'm grappling with it. Many, many instances all over the score.
Also, "regroup" isn't doing anything. I select the part and click regroup and nothing happens.
In reply to Yes, Musescore gave me first… by VGF666
In that case we definitely need you to attach the MIDI file with the problem. The one you attached previously imports just fine for me.
In reply to In that case we definitely… by Marc Sabatella
Here's the midi of an excerpt: test erase 2.mid
Here's what Musescore gives me for the midi:
![test score erase 2.png]( "test score erase 2.png")
Here's what I would like it to look like (I think), my fix:
![test score erase 2b.png]( "test score erase 2b.png")
Regroup tool had no effect BTW
In reply to Here's the midi of an… by VGF666
The first version follows standard notation practice.
The second version would cause much headscratching and mumbling about "who wrote that and why?" It might get played correctly, eventually but there is little hope of anyone doing so without a lengthy preliminary analysis of how the notes fit with the beats. The first version makes that obvious.
In reply to The first version follows… by SteveBlower
Thanks. Really? Others have told me the opposite. I would definitely want to follow standard notation practice. If you scroll up you'll see that's how this whole thing started.
In reply to Thanks. Really? Others have… by VGF666
Yes, really!
Here's a worked example that shows why it is better to show where the notes lie in relation to the main beats. https://notes.noteflight.com/nfbehindthenotation-beat-clarity/
Or look at a sample of published scores and see how many follow what you did in your "corrected" version and how many follow what MuseScore produced for you.
In reply to Here's the midi of an… by VGF666
As I said before, the version with the ties is absolutely correct, you had said MuseScore gave you the unreadable mess with the double dots and not a single beat in clearly sight. That's why I was confused - MuseScore wouldn't not normally make that msitake.
Stick with the default, it's correct and infinitely easier to read because you can easily see all four beats.
Hello,
![32thMIDI_Import.png]( "32thMIDI_Import.png")
in the MIDI-Import Settings, you can to uncheck "Simplify durations". Unfortunatly, other durations (2nd chord) are affected with this too.
In reply to Hello, in the MIDI-Import… by Pentatonus
Thanks, yeah, I will have to decide if I want it look like that.
VGF666... You wrote (in your various posts):
As far as I can tell, the timing of these two are the same, with different ways to notate the same thing. If so, question: Which one is more standard...?
and:
I would definitely want to follow standard notation practice.
and:
Can you suggest a resource?
See:
https://musescore.com/marcsabatella/rhythmic-patterns
for the 8 basic recognizable patterns
and:
https://musescore.com/marcsabatella/notation-rules-rhythm
for the importance of ties
In reply to VGF666... You wrote (in your… by Jm6stringer
Thanks for the plug :-). Those are handouts from the online course I mentioned. I make the handouts available for free, but the course itself is quite inexpensive and goes into much more detail (video, etc). Still, as I said, the course is more about theory, only touching on notation rules here and there, so you'll learn more about notation rules from other sources. Still, the info on these handouts is useful and relevant here.