Layout changes in 4.5 when opening scores made in 4.4
I just updated to 4.5 but... Every score I previously made looks different now. It looks like 4.5 is using a different spacing ratio or generally some different spacing algorithm, which completely mess up any layout which wasn't fixed (and of course I don't add a system break after every system).
Here attached are some examples, but I repeat that EVERY file I made looks now different.
You can find the MuseScore file made in 4.4 and the PDF I created then in 4.4; when you open the MuseScore file in 4.5, you'll see the layout is changed.
Please help. Thanks!
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Wolf-Ferrari - String Quartet E minor.mscz | 435.4 KB |
| Wolf-Ferrari - String Quartet E minor.pdf | 996.03 KB |
| Witt Sinfonia Alla Turca.mscz | 831.13 KB |
| Witt Sinfonia Alla Turca.pdf | 1.53 MB |
| Wolf-Ferrari - Organ Concerto.mscz | 627.32 KB |
| Wolf-Ferrari - Organ Concerto.pdf | 862.14 KB |
Comments
Due to the layout improvements in 4.5 vs. 4.4.thos suppose to happen, to a certain extent.
And as always: the more you tweaked the layout in an older release the more this bites back in newer releases .
I can currently check these scores though, so can't verify whether that's the case here too
In reply to Die to the layout… by Jojo-Schmitz
Yes, I'm totally aware that improvements can change layout of older score, but of ALL scores, made just with 4.4 (not MS3 or 2)?
Also, I don't see where is the "improvement", since now everything looks incredibly cluttered... :/
In reply to Yes, I'm totally aware that… by stepaparozzi
It doesn't look cluttered too me - it"s pretty clearly an improvement - but if you prefer taking more space uneccesarily, just add more breaks, or increase the minimum note distance and/or spacing ratio.
I've not seen any such difference in my own scores except in a very few corner cases, but my guess is that the relevant changes in your scores were mostly do to the improvements in https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/25099. The previous algorithm - while infinitely better than MU3 - had a few small flaws that would cause some notes to take more space than they should have, and this now corrected. Not sure why you'd have been running into that bug in 4.4.4 more than me or other people who don't see as much improvement as you're saying, but anyhow, that's my best guess.
Fun thing I can add: in the opening screen, I see the scores thumbnails with the old layout, which is different when opened...
In reply to Fun thing I can add: in the… by stepaparozzi
This is the mini image saved with the score so is expected
"I don't add a system break after every system"
I'm afraid this is the thing to do to ensure the same number of measures by line will be preserved from version to version (or even the new fixed feature since 4.5).
Have you tried to increase stretch just a bit in 4.5 to check if that "solves" your current issue?
In reply to "I don't add a system break… by frfancha
In order to reach the original layout, I have to stretch the bars up to 1.4...
Also, changing the note spacing ratio in Style>Bars doesn't change almost anything even whe set to the maximum 2.
In reply to In order to reach the… by stepaparozzi
So adding system break seems all you need
Seems the new layout allows for denser scores, which is good. At least much better than the other way round
In reply to So adding system break seems… by Jojo-Schmitz
It's not good. The new "denser" (=cluttered) layout is very bad looking, I can't understand how that can be seen as an engraving improvement...
In reply to It's not good. The new … by stepaparozzi
Add system breaks and all will be good for your scores.
Allowing for denser scores is good. Making scores wider is easy (as simple as adding a system break), but making denser is not.
In reply to Add system breaks and all… by Jojo-Schmitz
Denser scores are surely better than wide empty pages, but there's a limit beyond which a score is not "dense", it's just horribly cluttered. This limit has been largely surpassed by the new settings.
This is objectively bad engraving, I don't understand this regression of graphic quality in MS. :(
In reply to Denser scores are surely… by stepaparozzi
There's no regression. 4.5 just allows for denser scores and it is dead easy to have them as wide as before, by just adding system breaks. Which are good to add in any case, if you care for layout.
In reply to Denser scores are surely… by stepaparozzi
I disagree strongly. It looks better to my eyes, and apparently to everyone else here. I think you are just used to what your scores looked like before. But if despite what others are saying they see, you think most of the people reading your scores will have preferences more like yours than like ours, then by all means, add breaks where desired - always good practice anyhow to make your own choices regarding system layout rather than relying on defaults always. And 4.5 now makes it easy to loick in that layout.
I have to agree with the OP on this one. "Allowing" for a denser score is not the same as "forcing" a denser score. No need for this.
In reply to I have to agree with the OP… by bobjp
No one is forcing a thing. Previous versions had a bug that defaulted to an unnecessarily spread-out score. That bug is fixed, so scores are now spaced more properly. But if you prefer things spread out more, just add the breaks as explained - and as also mentioned, the process of locking your layout in is now also much simpler. It’s a huge win all around.
In reply to No one is forcing a thing. … by Marc Sabatella
Sorry Marc. The OP didn't use the default layout. He had it set up just the way he wanted. If he had wanted it packed together, he would have set it up that way. 4.5 had no business changing his layout. None. He shouldn't have to add anything to fix it. There are people with hundreds of scores that now might have to spend a lot of time fixing them. In what possible way is this better? We've never had to lock the layout. And now it's too late. Of all the many things that need to be fixed, this is perhaps the most pointless one for the developers to worry about. So yes, let's clutter up the scores and clutter up the Instruments ( sorry, Layout ) Palette. I spend a lot of time on the forums and I recall anyone asking for either of these things.
I have liked many of the changes MU4 has introduced. I use it every day. But today...I've had to spend so much time figuring out what the heck is going on. Never had that problem with any other version of MU4.
In reply to Sorry Marc. The OP didn't… by bobjp
Fixing bugs is always the business of program updates. So is improving the default layout. Virtually every single release of MuseScore has made improvement to the layout. And yes, virtually every single release of MuseScore has therefore triggered changes in the layout of some existing scores. Whether you personally experienced it or, it is an absolutely unavoid fact of life. Improved defaults means scores that use those defaults are improved - that's a good thing.
So again, if you don't want to merely accept the default layout and whatever changes might come in the future, then it is up to you to take steps to lock in your preferred layout. This has been true every since the very first 1.1 update. Not sure where you got the idea that this was never needed before - it has always been the only way to ensure that your score is not affected by future improvements. And this isn't some unique quirk of MuseScore - it is true of virtually every update to virtually every music notation program ever.
Of course, most scores don't end up being noticeably affected by most updates, so you can write a lot of scores and do a lot of updates without ever being affected. but it has absolutely always been a thing, always will be a thing if you don't lock your layout.