What's the difference between studio and non-studio text?
Can anybody explain to me the functional difference between the studio text (text preceeded by the speaker icon) and the traditional non-studio text (the one that we could specify even before MuseScore got MuseScore Studio name). As far as the sound is concerned, I hear no difference here:
but probably there is more to it than just playback.
Comments
The Staff Text just puts all the playback choices in one place. The pizz sounds will be the same.
In reply to The Staff Text just puts all… by bobjp
-- Ah, I see. So the answer is even simpler than what I suspected.
"Studio text" is not the name of something. The speaker icon displays for "staff text", and specifically, staff text on instruments that are currently set to use Muse Sounds. The other text in your picture isn't "staff text", it is a "playing technique annotation". Just a different type of element, just as rehearsal mark is also different, so are lyrics, etc.
In reply to "Studio text" is not the… by Marc Sabatella
@Mark Sabatella: "The other text in your picture isn't "staff text", it is a "playing technique annotation". Just a different type of element, just as rehearsal mark is also different, so are lyrics, etc."
-- So what about such cases when I need the both then? Should I then use the both like here?:
![both.jpg]( "both.jpg")
In reply to @Mark Sabatella: "The other… by innerthought
There should be no reason to use both of these. Either should work. Normally there won't be that kind of overlap in functionality, but these specific markings indeed are duplicated in both types, not sure why. Presumably there is a plan to clean that up over time. For now, it should work to pick either one, but I can't imagine any reason to use both.
Now, if you need different instructions at the same place - like "arco" and "nonvibrato", for instance, then indeed, add them both, just as you would any other different markings (like adding both a dynamic and an articulation, or both a grace note and a chord symbol. etc).
In reply to There should be no reason to… by Marc Sabatella
-- I see. Thank you!