All in measures function
Hello, it would be nice to have a function that transforms repeats and returns (Seigno, Coda...) into full measures so that the score becomes with a simple click readable by an orchestra during a concert reading. And when we want retrieve again all simplifications of the score, we can click again on the same button.
Comments
I think I need a bit more explanation.
In reply to I think I need a bit more… by bobjp
For example : When you have a measure with repeat bars, you can also duplicate it, no? But you prefer using repeat bars to reduce the length of your score. But I’m certain cases, you need to delete this repeat bars (like when you play with an orchestra). This is what we need : a button to transform a score reduced in complete score and vice versa.
In reply to For example : When you have… by Azalek
Musicians know what repeat bars are.
I think I understand. Personally I would never need it.
In reply to Musicians know what repeat… by bobjp
No orchestral musician has time to turn his pages to read a seigno 🙂.
In reply to No orchestral musician has… by Azalek
OK, I understand. But what do they do with a paper copy of there part? They turn pages don't they?
In reply to For example : When you have… by Azalek
in version 3 see the Tools>Unroll repeats command. However, this is not undoable Instead it creates a new score leaving the original with-repeats score unchanged. See https://musescore.org/en/handbook/3/tools#unroll-repeats
The function has not yet been implemented in version 4. See https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/issues/9670
In reply to in version 3 see the Tools… by SteveBlower
Oh great! So we can just waiting the implementation I supposed 🙂.
In reply to Oh great! So we can just… by Azalek
Or you can use version 3.6.2 while you wait.
In reply to Or you can use version 3.6.2… by SteveBlower
Good idea 👍
In reply to Or you can use version 3.6.2… by SteveBlower
Or better, just write it that way you want it to begin with. There is nothing wrong with having repeats or DS when used judiciously. So write these where it makes sense, copy and paste where that makes sense.
In reply to Or better, just write it… by Marc Sabatella
A good score for a compositor is not necessarily good for a conductor or his musicians. So that Musescore can be used by more professionals, I think this is one of the features to have.
In reply to A good score for a… by Azalek
Indeed, it's a feature that will be nice to add. But professional all professional composers, conductors, and musicians I know insist on the same roadmap between the score and parts. The composer always writes exactly what he wants the conductor to see, and the conductor always sees exactly what the performers do. I've never met a professional who would tolerate any deviation here. So, again, while the unroll feature might be nice to have someday, if your goal is to achieve professional results, the best way to do that is to write what you want the conductor and performers to see. So no need to wait for the unroll feature or tolerate the sub0-standard results of MU3 - just write what you want to see directly, today, using MU4.
In reply to Indeed, it's a feature that… by Marc Sabatella
I’m not agree with you : There is in no way a question of musical modification but of layout and each intermediary does not have the same reading needs. My experience has allowed me to realize it many times. In short, I will follow SteveBlower's advice. ;)
In reply to I’m not agree with you :… by Talek
Maybe you could explain in more detail your unique needs and we can try to assist better. But if you truly care About achieving professional results, you certainly should not subject your musicians to having to reading the sub-standard notation produced by MuseScore 3 when there is such a superior option available.