Bring back single note dynamics in MS4?
Can't seem to find any support for this in the app and couldn't find anything on searching the forums.
Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.
Can't seem to find any support for this in the app and couldn't find anything on searching the forums.
Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.
Comments
SND works in MS4. What is it that you are experiencing?
In reply to SND works in MS4. What is it… by bobjp
Maybe I just don't know how to do it. I tried through the handbook, but all of the places I looked, the section was not filled in. In MS3, I clicked on the hairpin and then set the dynamic change in the inspector. In MS4, I click on the hairpin, check the properties, and there is no ability to set the dynamic change.
In reply to Maybe I just don't know how… by Novelty
True. In MS4 you can not adjust the properties of a hairpin, yet. But there is more to SND than that.
Awhile back, before SND was a thing in MS3, you could have a string of half notes with a hairpin under them. Put pp at the start and a ff at the end. In playback, each note would sound louder in steps. Rather than a smooth progression. With SND, each note gradually gets louder. You need some kind of starting and ending dynamic mark. This is true in both MS3 and 4.
In reply to True. In MS4 you can not… by bobjp
I tried this (not exhaustively) and it worked but the sound was not as good as I could get in MS3 using SND.
In reply to I tried this (not… by Novelty
You did this with MU4 using Muse Sounds and thought MU3 sounded better? Which instrument? Can you attach the score? Should be no contest, MU4 should sound orders of magnitude better than anything you could possibly achieve in MU3.
In reply to You did this with MU4 using… by Marc Sabatella
I didn't state this right. I tried putting a string of notes (e.g., 4 quarter notes, when I wanted a single fading whole note) with a single d. hairpin and it didn't produce a good fade. I then tried another approach (outlined below, but - using a triple dotted half note, a hairpin, a rest, and a dynamic mark to simulate a whole note fade). There is no question that the sound quality of MS4 instruments is much better than MS3. If MS4 had the ability to manipulate SND like MS3, I was hoping that eventually, I could avoid having to go from MS to a DAW to finish many of my compositions.
In reply to Maybe I just don't know how… by Novelty
You were never supposed to have to set dynamic change in the Inspector - ti works to simply add the dynamic markings normally (i.e, one somewhere before the hairpin, one immediately after). This was true in MU3 and remains true in MU4.
In reply to You were never supposed to… by Marc Sabatella
Maybe not, but the designers went to the trouble of putting a checkbox for SND, a velocity for the amount of SND, and a dropmenu for the type (exponential, ease-in, ease-out, etc.), and it worked well. For MS3, it didn't translate to MIDI, so moving to the inevitable DAW, the fade had to be reproduced, but at least it allowed me to hear whether that is what I wanted at composition time. In MS 4, I've used work-arounds (e.g., noted above), but they are all cludgy**. The MS3 procedure was simple, easy to understand, and created clean manuscripts.
**e.g., creating a triple dotted half note, a diminuendo hairpin, a 16th rest, a dynamic mark on the rest - when what I want is a whole note fade and the next measure's starting note back up at an audible velocity. It works well enough, but MS3 worked better (at least for me).
In reply to Maybe not, but the designers… by Novelty
Yes, the original implementation was far more complex and was clumsy enough that those hacks were necessary. The new implementation is much cleaner and no longer requires all that. Agauin, it's not clear what problem you are running into with the new simpler system, but if you attach your score and describe it more precisely, we can understand and assist.
In reply to Yes, the original… by Marc Sabatella
o.k., thanks, I will. Probably not until tomorrow though.
In reply to Yes, the original… by Marc Sabatella
What the OP said was that he has a whole note that starts loud and gets softer by the end. Then the next beat is louder again. Which could be done by defining the hairpin in MS3. In MS4 you need to use tricks.
In reply to What the OP said was that he… by bobjp
In real life, if you want a real musician to do this, you need to put a dynamic marking at the end of the hairpin, then a new one on the next note. That's exactly the same for MU3 and MU4.
In reply to In real life, if you want a… by Marc Sabatella
I am attaching two scores (MS3 and MS4). Each has three sections with 3 measures. The measures are:
A. 1 count measure with dynamic setting
B. 4 count measure with a note and hairpin
C. 4 count measure with a note coupled to a dynamic setting.
The sections are:
1. SND off (MS3).
2. SND On, note fades to 0 velocity.
3. SND On, hairpin linked to second voice, and last 32nd rest in voice 2 set to ppp. This last works as long as ppp is outside of my hearing ability, looks messy, and requires more energy to implement.
Number 1 doesn't work and we wouldn't expect it to.
Number 2 works well in MS3 but not in MS4.
Number 3 works in both, but I've listed the reasons I don't like it, and it is a lot of strokes if I have a lot of single note hairpins in a piece.
You would know much more about real musicians, but my preference is to signify fading a single note or chord with a naked hairpin and leave it to the musician to fade the note as they think it is right to sound. I like uncluttered scores.
In reply to I am attaching two scores … by Novelty
If you prefer letting musicians guess, then as I said, just add the dynamic and hide it. But your score isn't "uncluttered" as is; it's nonsensical. A diminuendo from mf to mf? Makes no sense whatsoever without the explicit dyamics.
But it is true that in the extremely contrived and nonsensical case here, it is somewhat faster to use a setting than to use actual music notation. But the vast majority of hairpins are more straightforward, and dynamics are simple and effective and will sound earthshatteringly better in MU4.
In reply to If you prefer letting… by Marc Sabatella
Except that it isn't a diminuendo from mf to mf. Anyone can see that the whole note starts mf and gets softer. The next note is mf. Is it proper notation? No. In MS3 it is possible to make playback work. Proper or not. In MS4 it isn't possible, at all. You can fake it like the OP has at one point. He is just asking how to do it in MS4 like it was in MS3. The answer is, you can't. Pretty simple.
In reply to Except that it isn't a… by bobjp
Of course it's possible to create this notation in MuseScore 4, and it's possible to make this nonsense play however you like. Simply add the dynamics as shown in the example - the same dynamics you should be adding anyhow for the sake of actual musicians reading the score. If you really true want the notation to look nonsensical, you can hide the dynamic, but why on earth would anyone choose to deliberately create notation that doesn't reflect what they actually want, regardless of which versions of MuseScore they are using?
And again, this is a contrived nonsensical example, The original claim that MuseScore 4 simply doesn't play single note dynamics is just plain 100% flat out wrong. There are silly corner cases one could make up where it takes a few more clicks to get an oddball playback effect that is contrary to common sense, but make no mistake - in normal music written normally, single note dynamics just work.
In reply to Of course it's possible to… by Marc Sabatella
Please post a two measure example. One whole note in each measure. Measure one starts forte and has a diminuendo hairpin. It needs to end in pp. Measure two starts forte again. In MS4 you have to change the first whole note. For example, make it a dotted half tied to a quarter. So, forte on the dotted half, hairpin, pp on the quarter. I have no problem with doing it that way. But that isn't the point.
The original question was about bringing back the ability to define a hairpin. Simple as that. The OP admitted that he asked the question not quite right. Of course SND work.
Doesn't help that you consider his notation nonsensical, oddball and contrary to common sense. Something was possible in MS3 that is not in MS4. Along with a list of other things. And before you say that the list is not that long, just know that I am using MS4 exclusively. I only use MS3 to help people with file corruptions. About which there are may postings. And point people in the right direction to find settings to help them get MS4 to playback well.
In reply to Please post a two measure… by bobjp
The original post was not about "the ability to define a hairpin". It was titled "Bring back single note dynamics in MS4?", suggesting the OP simply didn't realize the function is still there. They stated "Can't seem to find any support for this in the app" (emphasis mine), not "it works in the vast majority of cases but I have an unusual special case that seems to take a few clicks more than MU3".
So I am simply correcting that mistaken impression. SND is present and works fine.
The unusual case shown in the example is nonsensical - anyone reading it would assume it was a typo. But, contrary to your claim, it remains possible - you just need a few additional clicks to make it happen. The exact same extra clicks you'd need to make the example actually make sense anyhow.
In reply to Of course it's possible to… by Marc Sabatella
Well - if this is nonsense - or not proper notation - some of Debussy's scores published in early 20th century use similar notation (Imslip). In any case, the capability to decrease the volume or velocity of a note is a thing in music - I don't have the experience of playing orchestral instruments, but I'm guessing that most brass and woodwinds can do this (SND) and for sure electronic or computer instruments can. What I had in MS3 was a clean and simple way so decrease the velocity of a note to 0 within the time frame of the note, then follow that with a denoted dynamic for the next note, and I liked the idea of different functions for the rates of decrease/increase, although I admit, this is probably not something that matters to the (my) ear. I am a novice at music composition, but I know a very lot about computer software - both using and writing, and this loss of control (function) from MS3 to MS4 was not good for me, a user of the software. Its as simple as that. In any case, my comments were never about the quality of the playback libraries and gain of function for using vst libraries, which are both major improvements in MS4. Anyway, I've said enough on this and it's put to rest for me.
p.s. perhaps my original "claim" was not stated clearly. It was the loss of SND control, not complete loss of SND that is the problem - for me.
In reply to Well - if this is nonsense -… by Novelty
It's important to remember that MuseScore is a music notation program. So the way to achieve a sound is to actually notate it. It doesn't have a simple way of getting the note middle C to play except to actually put a middle C onto your score. So it shouldn't be surprising that the supported way to get a diminuendo to ppp is to actually place a ppp onto your score. The fact that MU3 also happened to provide a control to get a sound without putting the notation there was more an idle curiosity than an important feature.
That said, the plan going forward is to provide more control over the specific volume shaping through the use of separate "lanes" more similar to how some DAW software does it. So it will be far sipelr and far more powerful than what MU3 provided. But meanwhile, the old controls wouldn't compatible, so the ones that were mere idle curiosities were removed, leaving the essentials in place.
In reply to It's important to remember… by Marc Sabatella
Interesting that something that is a mere curiosity has long been supported by other software.
And you could have lead with incompatible controls. Rather than the nonsensical notation approach.
And yet the fact remains that you can't notate what the OP wants in MS4. You can define the hairpin in MS3. And it is interesting that you mention DAW type controls that will enable the same nonsensical notation the MS3 does.
In reply to Interesting that something… by bobjp
As I have explained countless times, of course you can notate it. The posted example shows exactly how, so I don't even have to reproduce it myself - it's right there in the previously attached file.
Anyhow, yes, it's true that it's possible for a user interface to provide these controls even though they aren't strictly necessary. And it's also true - and has been pointed out countless times - the plan is to provide better controls for this in a coming update. Controls bar better than MU3 provides, far better than most other notation software provides. But in order to make that possible, there did have to be an incompatible change to the underlying structure, so temporarily, you have to actually notate these changes. In a few months people will be marveling at how much better is than they possibly could have imagined, but meanwhile, it's still possible to do these unusual things, just takes a little extra work.
In reply to It's important to remember… by Marc Sabatella
@Marc... You wrote:
It's important to remember that MuseScore is a music notation program. So the way to achieve a sound is to actually notate it.
Okay, does this notation work for you when played back?
SND_MS4.mscz
The SND plays, but what about the f ? For me, there is no f increase. I'm using MS Basic sound, MS 4.0.1
In reply to @Marc... You wrote: It's… by Jm6stringer
No, that doesn't, because the "ppp" was added incorrectly. It means to be an actual dynamic, not just text on a hairpin. Currently - both MU3 and MU4 - you'd need to use invisible rests in voice 2 to attach the dynamic properly. See the score posted earlier for an example of how this is done. This is also on the shortlist for improvement, along with the volume lane I mentioned to allow fine tuning.
In reply to No, that doesn't, because… by Marc Sabatella
That said, I'm surprised the diminuendo played at all. But given that it did, it isn't clear why the "f" didn't take effect. Have you reported this on GitHub yet? I don't recall seeing any issues similar to that.
In reply to No, that doesn't, because… by Marc Sabatella
And it has been noted countless times that you can't notate a dim all the way through to the end of beat four in the example using MS4. That's why an example was asked for. Seems to me that if that's what the composer wants, shouldn't the software oblige? Like MS3 did in this case. If changes are coming, that is all that is needed to be said.
In MS3, you don't need the ppp.
Besides, if the OP's notation is nonsensical, isn't going through added steps and making things invisible, also result in nonsensical notation?
In reply to And it has been noted… by bobjp
Again, you are simply mistake. You (absolutely positiely can notate a dim through the end of a measure in MU4 The example posted above shows exactly how, so please stop spreading misinformation. The method currently involves invisible rests just as it did in MU3 if you wanted to notate it correctly (with the ending dynamic visible). In the future, a much better system is planned, as has been announced and pointed out countless times.
And yes, the original example was nonsensical, as I said, but the method described does make it work, in both MU3 and MU4.
In reply to Again, you are simply… by Marc Sabatella
Sorry Marc. But MS3 doesn't require invisible anything. Playback works without any workaround. Just defining the hairpin. Did you open the OPs score in MS3 and play the examples? And see how they were made? I'm not saying it's better or correct. But it worked. That is all the OP was trying to get across. Not really difficult to understand.
Sure you can do it in MS3 the same (and only) way that you can in MS4. But that was never the question. The question was about doing it in MS4 the same way that you could in MS3. I.E, by defining the hairpin only. You can't. That isn't misinformation.
Anyway, the OP had the good sense to bow out of this thread long ago. So unless you are going to accuse me of something else, I will join him.
In reply to Sorry Marc. But MS3 doesn't… by bobjp
It's not a "workaround" to need to actually enter a ppp if you want to hear a ppp. just like it's not a "workaround" to need to enter a half note to hear a half note, or to need to enter a staccato dot to hear a staccato dot, etc. As with all of these cases, there is also the ability to hear something without seeing it, by entering it and hiding it.
My goal here is simply to avoid confusion and misinformation. I don't want anyone to see this thread and get the entirely misguided impression that MuseScore 4 doesn't support SND, or that normal musician notation doesn't work properly. Seems like that goal is accomplished, so we can all bow out now.
In reply to It's not a "workaround" to… by Marc Sabatella
OK, Never mind. You continue to miss the point.
In reply to @Marc... You wrote: It's… by Jm6stringer
@jm6stringer, The dim does not play if you use Muse Sounds. Interesting.
In reply to It's important to remember… by Marc Sabatella
I can understand. Still wish this one hadn't been fixed. A related issue that I discovered today is that, as far as I know, I can't adjust the velocity of the dynamic marks. Thus, editing "p" to "meno p" and "piu p" is now meaningless for playback. I guess this can also be fixed by better DAW features, but if I had a choice, I'd rather set the velocity in the score. Better yet, I'd like to be able to create new dynamic marks with editable velocity - I could then create "piu p" that would correspond to something more than p but as much as mp. I realize this should be posted in a new thread, but it seems so related that I put it here.
In reply to I can understand. Still wish… by Novelty
At least you can still adjust the velocity of notes.
In reply to I can understand. Still wish… by Novelty
As mentioned, instead of having some velocity controls on dynamics, and some on notes, and then an additional setting to control which one "wins" and how they interact, it's simplified in MU4 so there is only one place - the notes - and it always wins. That doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that someday there might be a facility to create custom dynamics, but anyhow, that's the general philosophy for now.
I was about to make similar topic. I really miss the "velocity" in properties like it was in MuseScore 3. I love the new dynamics in MS4 when it goes for Strings and instruments that usually play only 1 note at the time. But in MuseScore 3 I used "velocity" a lot for piano to layer voices of bass notes, middle notes, and melody notes with different velocity to have brighter sound for melody and softer sound for middle notes and bass notes. And sometimes if bass notes would play main melody I would play it louder than higher notes. Otherwise it sounds flat and unpleasent to my ears. Can't do that by putting dynamic marks because then I would have to use 3 seperate piano instruments and it's not very good to read. I agree that choosing seperately dynamic of each note in MuseScore 3 was too time consuming though and had to click too many times to get to properties of each notes, I wish there was some better way of layering piano notes in MuseScore 4 in the future than how it was in MS3.
In reply to I was about to make similar… by pianodesu
Ok, my bad. I didn't notice that you have to click "Playback" in properties to see velocity for the note. Love that it's still there, didn't notice it in Beta version, more additional clicking than in MS3 though.