Two voices on E sharp don't recognize they are the same note
I think this is a bug.
If two voices in a stave come together onto the same note, normally Musescore recognizes this and brings the note heads together. All the notes apart from the E-sharp in this (treble clef) extract are behaving as expected.
But for the E-sharp, it always adds the second sharp, suggesting it is not correctly recognizing that the notes are the same.
I have had to make the first sharp invisible.
Comments
How did you enter them? Can you share the score?
I believe you have added the accidentals via the palette,, these are seen as courtesy accidentals. Instead move the notes (down then) up a semitone using the cursor keyes.
I'm not sure this is considered a bug, but it is an annoyance. MuseScore will default to displaying the accidental if you use the pallet or note entry button to enter it. If the key signature allows, in voice 2 enter the E then use the up arrow to make it sharp. If the note changes to F natural then press J until it is respelled correctly and the extra sharp will disappear.
I wouldn't consider it a bug. When you explicitly add an accidental from the palette you generally do not want MuseScore trying to out-think you and removing your accidental. There is a valid way to get the notes and that is, as mentioned, by entering E, pressing the UpArrow and then using J to get the enharmonic that you want.
In reply to I wouldn't consider it a bug. by underquark
Thanks, and I now agree there's no bug. I was not aware of the "J" function - you learn something every day!
In reply to I wouldn't consider it a bug. by underquark
I would not simply discount this as a bug. A bug can be by design not only accidental. If a user puts the same accidental on the same note in all 4 voices he wants only 1 accidental showing. I can't think of any situation to think otherwise. It is not a ridiculous expectation that MS would realize this. It is obviously by design, but is it the right decision?
In reply to I would not simply discount by mike320
The thing is, everywhere else, the whole point of the accidental button is to force the accidental whether needed or not. Not sure it would be wise to special case this one - the behavior of the accidental buttons should be consistent.
Better might be to find another way to achieve the desired result.
In reply to The thing is, everywhere by Marc Sabatella
I was simply presenting food for thought with the hope that this would be discussed. I agree consistency is important, but this IS a special case that should be given some thought. If it's left alone, then so be it, but at least it was given some thought.
In reply to I was simply presenting food by mike320
I kind of think the problem is a little more fundamental: right now it's a little too hard to create an E# in some cases, so people resort to forcing it. The case at hand is only one of the problems that result. Another is finding yourself with multiple E#'s in the same measure each with an explicit accidental. We took steps to make this less likely for 2.0 compared to 1.3, but there are still some slight oddities here and there. Not sure what the solution is. Downside of special casing this particular situation is that it doesn't address other cases. Also it makes it hard (impossible?) to force both accidentals to shower should you want that.
In reply to I kind of think the problem by Marc Sabatella
The double accidental thing happens on every pitch. not just E#. E# is no more difficult to make than an F# when the key signature has flats and requires a sharp to be entered if there are sharps in the key (since F is the first sharp). It is then called a courtesy sharp, but it's the same idea when entering notes.
As I sat here pondering all the implications of making the sharp disappear I had these thoughts. How do you allow the user to force the accidental to be displayed if that's what he wants. I like the user to be able do do what he wants no matter how ridiculous within the confines of entering music. I have seen double sharps written as 2 sharps in alto sax music but the 2 voice - 2 sharps would probably cause confusion to a musician trying to play it and therefore should not be the default display. I haven't even brought up flats. 2 flats is standard notation for double flats. Do I need to say more? I still don't see why the user would want to do this, but he should be able to. Perhaps the J key could cycle through displaying the sharp or flat if it is not already happening with the new code.
In reply to The double accidental thing by mike320
Well, no, the double accidental *doesn't* normally happen on every pitch - at least, not if you enter the accidental correctly in the first place (using arrow keys rather than the palette or the toolbar icon). Try this with an blank score in C major (eg, (My First Score")
1) note input mode
2) type F Up
3) switch to voice 2
4) type F Up
5) Ctrl+up/down if necessary to put the notes in the same octave
You'll see only one sharp. The *only* reason we might see a double on the E# is because the toolbar or palette was used to enter the accidental, because it is not obvious how else one *should* be doing it. But if you *do* manage to figure out the "correct" way - "E Up J J" - you will end up with only one sharp.
It is true of course that there can exist situations where F# will similarly appear to require use of the toolbar and thus lead to the same problem, but this won't happen nearly as often due to the rules for how the up/down keys work and where F# and E# appear on the circle of fifths.
Again, use of the toolbar normally means, you absolutely definitely want this accidental to appear, whether necessary or not. It means this regardless of whether there are multiple voices involved. So it is really only meant for things like courtesy accidentals - situations where indeed the accidental is not required but you are trying to force it display anyhow. Use of the toolbar to enter ordinary (not courtesy) accidentals leads to all sorts of other problems, such as seeing multiple F#'s or E#'s in the same measure.
To me, part of the problem is that it is far from obvious that the toolbar is *not* the correct way to add ordinary accidentals. I am wondering if maybe the behavior of the toolbar should be changed, so that it enters an *ordinary* rather than a *forced* (eg, courtesy) accidental. Some other method could be devised to add the forced accidental.
In reply to Well, no, the double by Marc Sabatella
You totally ignored what I said about it being no more difficult to make an F# than an E# when the key has flats in it. I realize all that you said about note entry. Forget that. You can enter an E, up arrow, j until you see an E#, that is well established. If someone chooses to use the tool bar (which should force a sharp) the result should be a single sharp if the voices are in unison rather than multiple sharps or flats as happens currently. Currently if voice 1 has an E# and you put another E on the same spot in a different voice it shows a natural, which is ok but maybe not ideal. The intuitive thing (for me) to do is click the sharp button on the tool bar, that's where my pointer usually rests during note entry. I then press J until the unnecessary sharp disappears. I'm used to that. If I decided to assign a shortcut to the accidentals it would give the same results. The only reason I haven't done that is that I can't think of anything logical to use. I prefer not to use my mouse at all if I don't have to while entering a score. I understand I could use arrows, but that breaks my rhythm. This isn't about me any way.
I think the current result of using the toolbar is what most people expect. If you click the accidental, it WILL show up on the score. It is not expected that using the toolbar to override a default natural in another voice results in 2 of the accidentals on the note. That is why this thread started. That is why I suggested allowing J to always (always is a new word and might make this easier to digest from a programming point of view) permit a courtesy accidental in every case. That would make the use of J consistent. If the user puts a courtesy # on a note then presses J it will eventually show the courtesy # again (probably after 3 or 4 presses). If the user enters an F and there is a # in the key signature, eventually enough J's will show the courtesy #.
In reply to You totally ignored what I by mike320
I have been using the toolbar to add accidentals a *LOT* in the scores I am working on, as they include huge numbers of accidentals and corrective/cautionary accidentals that are sometimes not theoretically necessary. I may be able to work differently now I know about the "J" function.
I had not previously been aware of the "J" function, or that there was a difference between accidentals applied by different methods; I'm not an advanced user, but not a beginner either! I cannot even find the "J" function under any menu or toolbar - how are we supposed to know about it? Normally in application UIs any keyboard shortcut has at least one menu/tool/button equivalent from which one gradually learns the shortcut. Am I missing something?
In this light, I'm inclined to agree with Marc's post above, that the toolbar could (by default) add accidentals that behave the same as those added with up/down arrows, and some other way is found for the "forced" accidentals (perhaps an option/switch that toggles the toolbar between the two modes).
But unless I'm just being a bit blind, the most important point for me from this thread is the need to make the "J" capability far more obvious. Could there be a button in the accidentals toolbar and something under the Notes menu?
In reply to I have been using the toolbar by crispin
PS in case anyone's interested, here's the score that brought this up, and also exposed that there seems to be no way of doing natural-sharp to recover from a double-sharp without inserting a symbol...
https://musescore.com/user/72156/scores/3271906
In reply to You totally ignored what I by mike320
I didn't think I *ignored* your observation about F# - I acknowledged there *are* indeed cases. I just pointed out they would be less common, which is demonstrably true. F# is part of the key signature in sharp keys so it requires no accidental. It is is produced via "F Up" in C as well as most flat keys - try it in F, Bb, Eb, or Ab and you'll see. The *only* keys where it is hard are Db, Gb, and Cb. So it's only three out of the fifteen possible keys (1-7 sharps, 1-7 flats, or C) where F# is hard to enter. Whereas E# is hard to enter in *all* the flat keys, as well as in C. And even in the sharp keys, it requires an explicit accidental in five out of seven of them, unlike F#, which never requires one in any sharp key.
Meaning, this case really does come up a lot more often for E# than for F#.
I'm not sure that's an important distinction, though. My point is, the problem is not *just* about what happens when a note is doubled between voices. There are *other* bad things that happen when one is forced to use the toolbar mechanism ("forced" accidental - internally called a "user" accidental FWIW) rather than the "normal" mechanism. So rather than just deal with this one bad thing, I'd rather look at reducing the likelihood one will rely on a "forced" accidental rather than a normal one in the first place - that way we fix *all* the bad things at once.
So again, I definitely agree there is room for improvement here. I'm just trying to figure out the best way of improving things - ways that will improve *all* the problem cases, not just this specific one, and ways that don't make other things more difficult than necessary. I'm certainly open to suggestions, including those you've made thus far. I'm really just thinking aloud here, as I imagine we all are. It's premature to come to conclusions, I think.
In reply to I didn't think I *ignored* by Marc Sabatella
I don't know of any other problem with using the toolbar to add an accidental. In all other cases the accidental shows up on the note as expected by the average use, such as crispin. The only exception being unison in multiple voices. It does even give multiple accidentals if you have unison in a single voice (more about that later). I tried it with F, shift F, ctrl-down, #, click other note #. I'm only using F as an example, all of these could apply to all other notes in the correct context so it doesn't matter how many key signatures it applies to F in. Every note has multiple spellings. As you have been quick to remind me many times, this is supposed to be notation software. The notation of 2 sharps on the note in 2 voices is NOT standard. In fact, if you enter an F with accidental # on beat 1, then voice 2 beat 2 another F it comes up as an F# as expected. I believe this to be the best answer to the issue at hand. If the accidental is applied on the same or earlier beat, then the accidental should apply to all notes on the same or later note on the same line in the same measure. If the user later realized the F was supposed to have a # then I understand MS keeping the other accidental naturals. The arrow should then default to following the accidental in lieu of the key signature.
The F's in one voice I mentioned above are not what one would expect either. One sharp should apply to both F's. Actually the same is true of the notes in different voices. Once the # or b is applied to a note on that line it should be applied to all notes entered later on that line regardless of voice. Most classical music will have courtesy accidentals when multiple parts are playing on one staff in this case, but is not required. Those I enter using the toolbar.
crispin,
the J is explained under note input https://musescore.org/en/handbook/note-input in the handbook right where it explains what the arrows do. This is called enharmonic notes in the handbook. The mega command under the Notes menu is called Respell Pitches, which tries to spell all notes according to the key signature. J is also explained under accidentals in the handbook https://musescore.org/en/handbook/accidental .
I use J because it is a tool I know I have available to me, but the toolbar is the way I have entered accidentals as long as I've been using musescore. Part of this is because I don't try to think about the key signature while I'm transcribing, I'm more concerned with getting the display and notes correct. I'm rather stingy with courtesy accidentals when I write original music, so I probably use up/down arrow J more in that case.
In reply to I don't know of any other by mike320
Thanks - I will read those sections.
But... my assertion would be that in a beautifully-designed UI all mainstream functionality should be apparent to the user without recourse to a manual. Heads for cover...
In reply to Thanks - I will read those by crispin
A respell pitch button in the accidental section of the Note Entry toolbar does not sound at all unreasonable. It could be a sharped note with an arrow pointing to a flatted note or circular shaped arrows pointing in both directions (like a 2 voice tie).
In reply to Thanks - I will read those by crispin
"...functionality should be apparent to the user without recourse to a manual."
That is part of the reason this thread exists. People don't want to read the manual. This is different than other programs if you have never used notation software before. This is the only notation software I've ever used, so reading the manual was necessary. I'm familiar with musical terms, so finding most of the operations was quite easy in the manual. It is especially easy on the QWERTY keyboard since all the notes are on the left hand and I place my right hand on the numeric keypad for durations.
In reply to I don't know of any other by mike320
The other problem with using the toolbar is as I mentioned before - multiple E#'s in the same measure (same voice, same octave). Depending on how you go about creating this, you can end up with unnecessary forced sharps on E#'s after the first. As I said before, we actually took steps to make it less likely you'd end up in this situation in 2.0 compared to earlier releases, but it can still happen, depending on the order in which you enter the notes. It won't *ever* happen if you use up/down to create accidentals, but it can with the toolbar, because these are considered "forced". Same for the double accidental on unison problem - it never happens when adding accidentals the normal/correct way (up/down), but can if you try using the toolbar, because these are considered "forced".
So while I agree that normally you don't want both accidentals on unisons, I am simply saying, I'd like to solve this by addressing the *cause* instead of just the *symptom* - I'd like to consider changing the behavior of the toolbar/palette accidental to not be quite so "forced". Either way, the end result would be you get only a single sharp in the unison cases. But if we address it the way I have in mind, we *also* solve the other cases, *and* we make it possible to have multiple accidentals on unisons if you wish (by making it clear you really do want the "forced" accidental, however we choose to do that).
So it really would be win/win and I am not sure why you seem to be objecting to the idea.
BTW, the example you give of an F# in one voice followed by an F# in a different voice and a different beat is actually a very interesting one. As you observed, much published music *does* include these, for very good reason, because otherwise it may be ambiguous. This is especially crucial if the two voices are read by different players (eg, choral music with soprano and alto parts on the same staff). But it is true this is not so necessary when writing multi-voice music for a single player.
In reply to The other problem with using by Marc Sabatella
In my opinion the toolbar should force courtesy accidentals, that being the F# when it's already in the key signature. An accidental entered by a person should never disappear as long a he doesn't change the note. The only exception being the double accidental on notes in 2 voices, which shouldn't even be necessary for the user to enter. Other than that, your so called fixing the *cause* is just double speak for making other changes that may not be what the average user expects.
In reply to In my opinion the toolbar by mike320
Hmm, I really don't think so. I suppose I probably haven't explained it clearly enough if you are thinking it would be anything other than a welcome improvement. Not sure how else to explain it, but it really is intended to be the best of all possible worlds here. Sorry if I have failed to convey that somehow.