Double-click on notehead loses multiple selection
When multiple notes are selected, a double-click on a notehead palette entry correctly sets all the noteheads, but also loses the selection. For operations involving multiple steps, e.g. setting 'note properties', this is inconvenient and counterintuitive. Selection should remain unchanged.
Comments
Good catch. Same for articulations, etc. Looks like it is the same in 2.0.
As a very partial workaround, I would note you can also change noteheads to some extent from note properties.
In reply to Good catch. Same for by Marc Sabatella
Yes indeed, but doing this will reset all the other note properties as well, so stem direction etc. will all match the current note's. It's thus safer to reselect, rather than risk changing other features. I have sometimes done this while assuming that all the selected notes had the same properties, only to find that I had forgotten exceptions and had to readjust them. Oh well, at least "a solution exists" as we say.
In reply to Yes, but other things change by spinality
Good point, and I've been bitten by that unexpected resetting of properties I hadn't intended to change as well. I'd like to be able to say that this too will improve in 2.0, as the new Objector Inspector that replaces the various Properties dialogs has a number of example. Unfortunately, it currently is very limited when it comes to working with a selection of multiple notes, so in fact you can't do anything much at all that I can tell. Hopefully this is just a temporary condition.
In reply to Good point, and I've been by Marc Sabatella
> Unfortunately, it currently is very limited when it comes to working
> with a selection of multiple notes, so in fact you can't do anything
> much at all that I can tell. Hopefully this is just a temporary condition.
That sounds ominous; hope you're right. There is sometimes a blind spot in developers' minds between providing "a" mechanism and providing "a good" mechanism. The fact that there is a way to achieve a particular result, through a series of menu actions and keystrokes, may be irrelevant if it can't be carried out quickly and easily.
In a tool like MS, a key goal is (or should be IMO) providing tools that simplify and streamline repetitive operations. Naturally we want detailed fine control over the appearance of individual glyphs; but to be useful for making music, the tool also needs to provide quick natural ways to accomplish most editing and entry tasks. Thus extensive tools supporting different flavors of selection, cut/paste, deletion, modification, and other bulk action operations seem highly desirable -- at least to me :).
If you compare (for example) professional-use tools like Adobe InDesign (using extensive quick-access palettes and keyboard shortcuts that are often customizable) with entry-level point-and-click alternatives, it's easy to see why designers, typographers, etc. demand tools with fast paths for a wide range of common operations. I expect that some MS users will be happy with a simple intuitive tool for creating one chart a year (and we need to support that usage well); but many users will be working through large volumes of material, and will be grateful for every reduction in steps that must be taken to complete common tasks. Otherwise they'll stick with the commercial alternatives.