Format of multiple measure rests

• May 19, 2016 - 23:39

How can I change the distance between the multiple measure rest bar and the number above it? I.e. I like to diminish it.

Comments

• May 20, 2016 - 01:47

I have the same request.
In the middle of my score I have quite a long multimeasure rest (longer than all the other similar multimeasure rests - why, ???). If I can shrink the long one I should be able to get the last single bar of notes (currently appearing on a second page) onto the first page.

Reply

• May 20, 2016 - 09:19

Marc, thanks for your answer. My aim is to have my notation as compressed as possible (without losing its legibility). I use the { and } commands a lot, and I also use the possibility to manipulate the size of the full page, as well as all components of the staff. But I do not know how to change what you call the default distance between the bar and the number of the multiple measure rest. If the present distance really is "default" should it not be possible to change it?

Reply

• May 20, 2016 - 16:27

I'm confused - I thought you were talking about the *vertical* distance between the top of the staff and the number. This is already very small, and I don't see how decreasing it would save space in your score, unless you are thinking that by decreasing that, you'd be able to move the staves closer together? I'm having trouble picturing a score when that would work - could you post a sample so we can see what you mean?

If however you really mean the horizontal space between the barline and the start of the bar representing the rest, I can at least see how decreasing that would save space. This *is* customizable - see Style / General / Measure / Multimeasure rest margin.

Anyhow, lots of things are customizable in MuseScore, but in general, the things that are customizable are the things where there really is subjective room for debate as to what the best layout is. Things that pretty much every engraver does exactly the same standard way we generally just also do that standard way. If you can show example of published music using a different standard for something that we take for granted as being fixed, that might increase the likelihood of us eventually implementing a setting to control this.

Reply

• May 22, 2016 - 20:21

The first picture is definitely not something you'd want. The second is not standard, but I can see how it might be useful occasionally. Note however it is not just a question of changing the vertical position - it is also making the background opaque. So instead of a vertical position setting, you really would just want a checkbox to create that look. Again, though, it isn't standard, and the priority is usually on implementing standard notation.

Reply

• May 22, 2016 - 22:07

As I understand the first picture, it's meant to show how the user is trying to position the number, and also shows that this can't be done because the bar rest itself also gets moved—and that's why it's "definitely not something you'd want." What he wants is to move the number closer to the rest. It seems very reasonable to me.

Reply

• May 22, 2016 - 22:40

But aside from the case shown - where it actually overlaps the bar, and has an opaque background besides - is this something you've actually seen in published music? I've never seen a number closer to the staff than we put it. So like I said, a simple checkbox might be preferable.

Reply

• May 23, 2016 - 14:46

I mean a checkbox that says, in effect, "Overlay number directly on top of the horizontal bar, with an opaque background so the number is still visible". That is, presumably thwere is no real world use case for any position of the number *except* for the default standard position or the non-standard but indeed useful arrangement shown in the second example above. So why make people fuss about with guessing what sort of offset might be required to get that effect (and doing a bunch of trial-and-error experiments to figure it out), or have to also worry about how to get the opaque background that is required for the number to be readable, or worry about how the offset might need to differ from staff to staff according to the number or spacing of the staff lines. Just have a single checkbox that does exactly what you want, no fussing required.

Reply

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.