Repeat with R doesn't always add measures to the end when necessary
Repeating a selection of notes at the end of the score does not add measures to make room for the repetition unless there is at least one empty measure.
You should be able to repeat for as many times as you want even if you reach the end of the score, in which case it should always add more measures for you to accommodate. This would be handy for the case where you want to create a repeating ostinato, but you didn't put enough measures for it in your score.
- Make a new score with 8 measures.
- Fill the first two measures with notes and then select them.
- Press R on your keyboard three times.
- Press R a fourth time and see the issue: it does not add the 9th and 10th measures to fit the fourth repetition. If there had been 9 measures instead of 8, it would have added the tenth measure for you, but still you could not press R a fifth time to add the 11th and 12th measures.
Does anyone like or dislike this behavior?
Does this seem like a bug I should report?
Should R not append new measures to the score endlessly?
Thanks,
Riley
Comments
And again, it does add measures in the case where the score has partial room for your selection. But it should add measures in every case, no?
In reply to And again, it does add… by Riley Sullivan
... "stop making sense"
In reply to ... "stop making sense" by worldwideweary
I know, right?
Really?
1. Just because "R" doesn't work the way you think it should does not make it a Bug.
2. The whole concept of "R" was a late addition to MU3 not too long before MU4 was in beta. Before that, there was no way to do that except C+P.
Should "R" work endlessly? Doesn't make much sense. There are so many more important things that need to be worked on.
In reply to Really? 1. Just because "R"… by bobjp
Fun fact: a git log shows the code for ScoreView::cmdRepeatSelection added in 2012, part of a bulk "initial commit":
Author: Werner Schweer
Date: Sat May 26 14:49:10 2012 +0200
void ScoreView::cmdRepeatSelection()
In reply to Fun fact: a git log shows … by worldwideweary
Sorry, but it did not work for note or measure repeats. It was a big deal when they announced it in 2020 or so.
In reply to Sorry, but it did not work… by bobjp
Interesting. Here's MuseScore 2.x (Released Jul 31st, 2018) performing note repeats on a range via cmdRepeatSelection() function ['R' shortcut]:
In reply to Really? 1. Just because "R"… by bobjp
In response:
"1. Just because "R" doesn't work the way you think it should does not make it a Bug."
Well I'm not necessarily saying it is a bug, it's just I thought that it must be either a bug or a half-implemented feature, based on the fact that it adds measures sometimes but not every time.
"2. The whole concept of "R" was a late addition to MU3 not too long before MU4 was in beta. Before that, there was no way to do that except C+P."
The "R" feature is functional in version 3.2.3 (maybe earlier), which came out in September 2019. The first MS4 Beta was October 2022—a full 3 years and 1 month later.
And anyway, fine, let's not call it a bug, and it's true that there are more important things to work on right now, but it's worth mentioning to the head developers, even as a feature request if nothing else. Am I not right in this at least? That way they can decide what's important and what's not? I also just wanted to get a discussion going in this forum, to see how many agree (such as #worldwideweary) and how many disagree (such as yourself) with my sentiments, so thanks for your input.
In reply to In response: "1. Just… by Riley Sullivan
The "R" function already works in MuS 2.3.2 - or even before.
> Does anyone like or dislike this behavior?
I'm neutral on that.
> Does this seem like a bug I should report?
In my opinion it is not a bug, just implemented that way.
> Should R not append new measures to the score endlessly?
If you are writing notes normally and have reached the last measure and want to continue writing, then no new measures are added automatically. This behavior is comparable to the R command.
In reply to > Does anyone like or… by HildeK
I'm surprised to read that the "Repeat" function was only implemented at a certain point in V3, and then in V2. In fact, this feature has always existed, it was one of the basic functions of Version 1 (I've just checked with 1.3 with which I learned Musescore): well, the behavior described at the beginning of the message is strictly the same!
As far as I can remember, it hasn't bothered anyone for 10 years. If you need more measures, add some, is that too simple?
Frankly, version 4 is so far behind in catching up with missing and crucial features (if only that) that I can't see myself defending a change in behavior when the developers have so many important things to do. And certainly not wasting their time on trifles, insignificant things (in my opinion).
"If you are writing notes normally and have reached the last measure and want to continue writing, then no new measures are added automatically."
That's right. That's how MuseScore works. Guitar Pro, for example, is different. Each time a measure is completed, another is automatically added by pressing the right arrow. You can start with a single measure, and the measures are added one after the other.
In reply to I'm surprised to read that… by cadiz1
You answered me.
But I said:
My first contact with MuS was version 2 and it works the same way. I can't say anything about older versions, only that the R function already existed before V3 to correct bobjp's statement (The whole concept of "R" was a late addition to MU3).
And of course it's no problem to add more measures if I need more - a normal process.
Only: it would be nice to have if it works like GuitarPro as you described.
In reply to I'm surprised to read that… by cadiz1
Apparently Dorico also performs as Guitar Pro is mentioned:
"Adding bars - Dorico automatically creates bars when you reach the end of the last bar as you input notes. However, it can be helpful to have all the bars you will need in advance." Apparently they went with the non-'American' spelling of measures. Crotchety Quaverists... I say.
In reply to Apparently Dorico also… by worldwideweary
All I'm trying to say is that a new aspect of the repeat function was added to MU3. It might have been the ability to repeat a phrase past the end of a piece. As long as there was at lest one empty measure there already. There were other repeat things added also. Things that did not work before.
In reply to All I'm trying to say is… by bobjp
"All I'm trying to say is that a new aspect of the repeat function was added to MU3. It might have been the ability to repeat a phrase past the end of a piece."
I think you're referring to this thread (https://musescore.org/en/node/303858), then this relative feature request (#304051: "Repeat a note" by clicking a notehead then pressing "R" in normal mode) and Marc's fix for the version 3.5 (https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/6140) which therefore allows you to repeat (R key) single notes in Normal mode, and similarly in the case of a chord, selecting a single note repeats the entire chord.
With previous versions, the Repeat function was reserved for Note input mode.
And so this has nothing to do with copying/repeating X measures and automatically adding more if necessary.
In reply to "All I'm trying to say is… by cadiz1
No idea. All I remember is that something was added to the repeat function sometime in v3. I just downloaded 3.5. In normal mode selecting a note and hitting R does nothing. You can repeat measures. But that doesn't help if you only want one note. Maybe that was what I was thinking of. Sibelius will repeat note in normal mode. Which is what I was used to. It will also do what the OP wants. But that is far less important to me.
In reply to No idea. All I remember is… by bobjp
"It will also do what the OP wants." OP here. So you're saying that in Sibelius you can select a range of notes (e.g. two measures worth, like my step-by-step above) and press R (or something similar) and it will add measures to the score if necessary when you reach the end?
In reply to No idea. All I remember is… by bobjp
"No idea. All I remember is that something was added to the repeat function sometime in v3."
No idea? Well, I can confirm and repeat that this is the only evolution of the Repeat function in the last 10 years. And that it was implemented in version 3.5 (as can be seen in Marc's fix link, or in the releate notes for version 3.5 at Improvements: https://musescore.org/fr/node/308610#Improvements, "Allow repeating a note...").
"I just downloaded 3.5. In normal mode selecting a note and hitting R does nothing"
Sure?
So I don't know how you missed it. Because, as you can see from this GIF, this new feature is at work in version 3.5, since you can repeat single notes and chords in normal mode by selecting a single note., see
In reply to No idea? Well, I can confirm… by cadiz1
I was in the wrong version. However, I found the thread that started the process that resulted in that change. It coincides with one of the dates I mentioned above as being when a change in the Repeat function took place.
https://musescore.org/en/node/303858
I know that we need to be as accurate as possible for the sake of future readers. I hope that when you are as old as I am that your memory is a bit better than mine is now. You seem to be very interested in proving me wrong. The changes made in 3.5 probably didn't seem all that important to long-time MuseScore users. You all had a different way of working. Those of us who came from other software also had a different way of working that did not work in MuseScore. And really slowed us down.
And I am just as guilty. As shown in my first response to the OP. The small difference being that this thread is a request based on a logical process. Logic gives me a headache :) The linked thread is about a process known to work in other software. And for the record, I still wish MU4 could use Repeat to add measures at the end.
In reply to I was in the wrong version… by bobjp
It's not a question of memory (because I too couldn't remember exactly which improvement it was), but just of taking the time to search the web. I took the time, that's all. Being precise and arguing on precise facts is a minimum to help people.
Then, my point is to say that soliciting human resources is not serious for such a negligible point that has never bothered anyone for 10 years, while many of us are still in the loss of major features and incredible regressions (so much so that we continue to work with V3) which, almost a year and a half after the release of V4, seem not to be the top priority of the team ... It's distressing. That said, if the request can be resolved "easily" (?) and a volunteer (outside the "official" team, that is) is interested in this new behavior, I don't care.
In reply to It's not a question of… by cadiz1
And I found the thread that backed me up. We all have our priorities. You think that the repeat functions are negligible. But they are very important to various users. My priorities are are such that I have less than no use for MU3. I compose for playback. So that lets MU3 out right there. As far as the missing features go? Oh well. I get that people need them. So, great that MU3 still is around for them to use. Not like other software. Often an update replaces the older version