Hide Empty Staves Bug
After applying the Hide Empty Staves function on MS, about half a page of frame text was cut off from displaying. HES function did not give a full page to the frame/text as in the Non -HES display. How can I fix this?? Please see attachments below. the first one is HES version pg 64 The second is full display version. Thank You
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Anasazi_Act_I File #4 pv score pg 33-58 fs pg. 51-98 USE THIS ONE.mscz | 149.2 KB |
| Anasazi_Act_I File #4 pv score pg 33-58 fs pg. 51-98 USE THIS ONE.mscz | 149.17 KB |
Comments
First of all take care of the corruptions in that score, anything else is second to that.
Then add a text frame and copy/paste the text from the horizontal frame (which is way to small for the vast amount of text you're trying to place) into thast text frame, then delete that horizontal Frame. You'll end up with a whole page of text.
See attached, still with the corruptions
And it is not a bug, really, it is just that a horizontal frame is as high as the staves it spans and can't fit as much when empty staves are hidden vs. if they are all shown, depending oh how many staves are really empty in that system.
In reply to First of all take care of the by Jojo-Schmitz
Yes, this is another good example of the importance of creating scores as correctly as possible and not relying on the specifics of the current layout. The only reason this worked without hide empty staves is that the system was tall enough that the horizontal frame was able to contain all the text. But the size of the horizontal frame is totally dependent on the number of staves shown, so indeed, with hide empty staves enabled, the frame isn't big enough.
That is why it is important *not* to rely on how big things happen to be at the moment or where they happen to be placed, but to instead think through how to do things so they will still be correct if/when things change (whether the change is due to use of hide empty staves, a change in page size, edits to the score, or updating to a new version of MuseScore).
The best way to make sure MuseScore always treats a large block of text the way you want is to create a text box for it - this resizes automatically to fit the text pretty much no matter what. A vertical frame can work and resizes according to staff size, but if won't resize if you change font size, so it's not as ideal. But I don't think text boxes existed yet in 1.3, so a vertical frame would have been the best compromise in that version.
Use of either a text box or a vertical frame would mean the text would appear *between* systems, though, not to the left of a system as you have it. That is definitely the preferred way for text to be laid out in any case - it's the way pretty much all published scores I am familiar with do it. If you really need to preserve your original layout where the text shows to the left, but still wanted to use hide empty staves, you'd have to decide for yourself how you'd like it to work.
One solution would be to add a page break to the previous system, thus forcing the horizontal frame you have to the top of the next page. And then add another page break to the system with the text, to make sure the next system doesn't overlap it. Or, if there is enough room for two systems, maybe add a spacer to force the second system below the text. Probably best to work on on pencil and paper how you'd like it to look. But really, it's better to just go with the text box than to mess with all that - the end result would probably be just as "fragile" and non-future-proof as what you have now.
In reply to Yes, this is another good by Marc Sabatella
Yes, text frame is new in 2.0 and in 1.x a verticial frame would have been the one to use instead.
In reply to Yes, text frame is new in 2.0 by Jojo-Schmitz
Yes, I had never heard of a "text box" until now. Where do you find that? And yes the vertical frame did work fine in 1.3 it seemed. But I consider the Hide empty Staves scores the only ones to show to a conductor, or even an interested score reader/follower. Also saves big amounts of printing ink and paper!. So I will have to figure out the text box thing for sure. I will try looking it up in the Handbook.
In reply to Yes, I had never heard of a by delhud2
Well, a) text frame had been mentioned to you before and b) it is indeed new in 2.0. And yes, in 1.x you'd use vertical frames instead.
See https://musescore.org/en/handbook/frame#text
In reply to Well, a) text frame had been by Jojo-Schmitz
OK, i will study the Handbook info. thank You.
In reply to Yes, I had never heard of a by delhud2
See my earlier comment about the condensed score, though. As I said before, I don't know *any* professional conductor who prefers working from a condensed score, nor are performance scores (as opposed to study scores, usually collected in small print editions) normally published this way in my experience. yes, it's more paper and ink, but it's *much* easier to follow when conducting is the same instruments are in the same position on each page.
It's possible some given conductor might prefer a condensed score when initially evaluating a new composition, but my guess is they would still want a full score to actually work from should they choose to perform the piece. Again, it is best to contact the actual recipient to see what they prefer rather than assume anything.
In reply to See my earlier comment about by Marc Sabatella
Wow! Interesting. I need to think like a conductor, which I'm not! I've always liked condensed scores so much, but it makes sense the way you explained a full score, even though often full of empty staves, is easier for them to follow.
In reply to Yes, this is another good by Marc Sabatella
OK
In reply to Yes, this is another good by Marc Sabatella
Ever since i started with MS, I always assumed the parts would l follow exactly what you saw on the full score If you saw it in the score, and it looked correct, the part would also have to be correct. Now it turns out that I was totally naive and trusting. Silly little old me! i still wonder if I had used Finale I would not have run in to these problems?
In reply to Ever since i started with MS, by delhud2
MuseScore has (linked) parts only since 2.0, before there were only unlinked parts, totaly separate files and changes to score had no effect on parts already created and vice versa. in 2.0 most changes to score propagate to parts and vice versa, esp. all about content. Only the changes reg. layout don't propagate, and that is by design.
An attempt:
I copied the text;
I inserted a page break;
I selected measure 128 -> Add -> insert vertical frame;
Click the frame -> Add -> Text -> I pasted (Ctrl+V);
HES...
In reply to An attempt: I copied the by Shoichi
Vetrtical frame works too, but text frame resizes automagically to fit the text lines
In reply to Vetrtical frame works too, by Jojo-Schmitz
Hei Jojo, the best way of doing things is the right one ;-)
In reply to An attempt: I copied the by Shoichi
Hello Shoichi, I know I need to learn how to use text frame, but for now your version of my file looks marvellous! But how can I use it? i could go ahead and print this file today if it could be used. i guess just replace my own version I had? Or rename your version and save or something? Thank You! Del H.
In reply to Hello Shoichi, I know I need by delhud2
Rename, out of prudence better rename.
Make some order, such as new folders named 'State of the art December 2016' etc. where to keep the scores changed over time.
In reply to Rename, out of prudence by Shoichi
I did notice that your version changed the layout of the whole file some, page numbers were different? Also, I meant on your version, it is a locked version, do I just Save it and rename instead of opening it, and then it would be in my MS files to use?
In reply to I did notice that your by delhud2
Does not exist a locked version (for files * .mscz), you can open edit save as desired.
I would recommend you to adopt a size of standard paper, not to delete the page margins.
And check where you have anchored texts / trills and other ornaments.
Also as Marc said: manual adjustments may generate imperfections
In reply to Does not exist a locked by Shoichi
I had a pop-up when I attempted to save a change in your version , It said "locked file" please Save in another location.!?
As for paper size, My various files for the Anasazi are not all of the same size, some are wider and taller than others. So I am very concerned about when it comes to printing a performance score , done by a printer company. All I can think of, is to have the paper size for the whole opera wide enough and tall enough to cover the largest pages. The smaller pages will just have more empty space on them. Otherwise, the paper score would be a hodge-podge of different sizes! Maybe it would not matter if the Conductor were using an electronic performance score.
In reply to I had a pop-up when I by delhud2
I think it means 'there is already a file with the same name'.
Careful not to overwrite it. Better to save by another name (add a date can be useful, eg. 161129).
Idea:
Open a new score with the necessary instruments (eg. The Anasazi act. 1 page 1-20);
Set page size and margins;
Copy and paste the music;
Insert text frames for annotations;
Adjust (by Inspector) the various elements;
Save to 'December 2016' Folder.
Proceed with the following pages.
So you should have a score from homogenous layout. Then the copy shop will adapt it to the necessary format
In reply to I think it means 'there is by Shoichi
You have to correct some imperfections (little by little) as rests of Voice 3 made invisible but not necessary or as shown in the picture
(I have downloaded your score by MsS.com)
hello, I did use your version (attachment) for printing that file, since it restored all the text so well. Thank you. Makbe I should call it the Shoichi-Hudson version!
In reply to hello, I did use your version by delhud2
My two cents for the Music's good cause ;-)
In reply to My two cents for the Music's by Shoichi
Thanks. Of course, I am working on getting better at doing these operations in MS. Del