Floating Mode

• Apr 8, 2013 - 06:53

I was just trying to write the sheet music of a youtube video. I enter 3-4 notes, then I need to make little adjustments, like... some notes need to be a little bit longer, others need to be shorter, and so on.

If I change a quarter note to a quarter and half, the next note gets deleted. If I make a note shorter, the application inserts a silence after my note.

Now, don't tell me "MuseScore needs to keep the bars with correct notes". I know that.

But that's not a reason not to offer a better note entering/playback system. Simple:
If there are missing/too many notes within a bar, MuseScore should display an indication (e.g. notes go red), and write in some status textbox by how much it is missing/has too many notes. When playing, it should INTERNALLY ignore additional notes, and add a silence(s) to represent missing notes within a bar.

Suggestion to the devs. Take this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvwAC42dyWA&list=PL35BB33AC44906BE3
Try writing it manually (no midi) in your application (do some mistakes if you're too good). Then try to do it with Guitar Pro, you'll see.


Comments

The Guitar Pro system isn't inherently easier; it is just a matter of what you are used to. People accustomed to the MuseScore note entry method would struggle as much with Guitar Pro as you do with with MuseScore. But it would be interesting to see some actual controlled usability studies on this to see how the novice would see it.

There are two types of note entry systems in the world.

In one method changes to the notation affect the graphical display directly, and if that means subsequent notes magically move earlier or later in time in order to accomodate the change, amd rests need to be inserted or notes deleted at the end of the measure, so be it. Shorten a note and everything else after it moves earlier to accomodate the change. This is the method you are accustomed to, and it is used by Finale, Encore, and apparently Guitar Pro.

In the other method, changes to the notation affect only the changed notes where possible, and subsequent notes are left in their exact same time position unless you explicitly move them, and if that means a rest needs to be inserted or the next mote deleted to keep other notes at their same time positions, so be it. This is method used by Sibelius, MuseScore, and probably every MIDI sequencer ever.

People who are accustomed to one method always jhabe trouble adjusting to the other and imagine the other method is inherently more confusing or difficult. Sibelius users have trouble adjusting to Finale for this reason just as Finale users have trouble adjusting to Sibelius. I think those of us who are familiar with *both* methods would be largely in agreement that there really is no inherent difference in usability between them - whichever you are accustomed to will seem easier, until you get accustomed to the other.

Right now, I could enter the example in your video - or any other example - much more easily in MuseScore than any pther program, because that is what I have been using for the last couple of years and I am very used to it. wo years ago, I would have been able to enter it more easily in Finale (which works more as you describe Guitar Pro as working) because that's what I was accustomed to. Again, now that I have experience with both methods, I can say there really is no major difference in usability - I'm faster with whicever pne i am more accustomed to.

But as I said above, it would be interesting to see an actual usability study on this.

The above is a big picture state,ent, but doesn"t help the person who is accustomed to a different style of note entry learn the mUseScore method. So maybe this will help:

Don't thimk of MuseScore's main goal here as being about keeping the length of the measure constant. That's actually just a side effect. It's main goal is to *keep notes on the beats where you entered them*. If you enter a note pn beat 4 of a measure, then it stays on beat 4 unless you move it. It doesn't magically move backwards to beat 3 just because you shorten something earlier in the measure. In very many cases, this is a good thing - you often don't want chanes early in a measure to affect notes later in the measure. But in some cases, you do want to take notes later in the measure and change when they satart.

And it seems this is what you are talking about. When you say you want to shorten a note, what you really mean is, you want it to be shorter *and* and you want the subsequent notes to move earlier. ell, MuseScore allows that - you simlly cut and paste the notes you want moved. That way you are in control of how many notes get moved - just the next note, all way to the end of the measure, all the way to the end of the phrase, all the way to the end of the piece, whatever. Select the notes you want moved, ctrl-x, click where you want them moved, paste. It's simple and direct.

Yes, in certain cases, it's slightly more work than just shortening a note earlier in a measure (if the notes Giitar Pro decides to automatially move earlier happen to be the exact notes you wanted to have moved). But pretty often, you'll want more or fewer notes moved than the program moves automatically, and you'll end up having to do more work to fix it up. And as I said before, in many if not most situations where you decide to shorten a note, you don't want any other notes to move at all - you just want the note shorter. So in all of these cases, the MuseScore method ends up being easier. These cases where the Guotar Pro method is easier and the cases where the MuseScore method is easier really do cancel each other out such that overall, neither method has any significant advantage. Again, its just a matter of which you are used to. And once you know how to handle the "harder" cases, they aren't actually so hard at all.

Actually, I was talking about a mode, not about removing the current way that MuseScore works. It would be nice if users could just toggle between the 'classic' mode, and the 'floating' mode (idk, a menu checkbox). That way, everyone would feel comfortable with the application. Would it be doable with a plugin?

In reply to by alexandre_thib

While implementing a separate mode would be *possible*, the question is whether it would be worth the enormous effort it would take, considering that it would provide zero additional functionality over the current mode, provide zero additional efficiency over the current mode on average, and just be of zero use whatsoever to the majority of users. It would really only be of any use to newcomers to MuseScore who are coming specifically from either Finale or Guitar Pro, and even then, it would only be of significant value only during those first few days that it would normally take to adjust to the existing MuseScore input method. And while it may take longer than just a few days for some people to adapt, I would consider that more a failing of documentation than of anything else. With sufficiently good documentation - which would help everyone - there's no real reason it should take more than a few *hours* at most to adjust to this different style of note entry.

All that said, it does seem to me that that while a plugin could not affect how the existing note entry mode works, it should be possible - if an enormous amount of work - to implement a brand new "floating mode" as a plugin. You'd select a egion (normally a single measure) and run the plugin. The plugin would throw up a dialog box that presented its own editor, operating on its pwn private copy of the selection it would make. Within this dialog, you could do whatever you wanted and it would affect only that private copy. When you hit OK, the plugin would copy the edited contents of the region back on top pf the priginal selection.

In principle, there is nothing there that wouldn't be doable. But as I mentioned, it would be an enormous amount of effort for very little actual benefit. And it would run the risk of being obsoleted next time the plugin framework changes.

The thought of trying to transcribe from a video straight into Musescore fills me with horror!

Input is far too slow to keep up with the flow of music.

Even in GuitarPro I would struggle.

No.

I would do what I was trained to way back when - write it out on manuscript paper.

Then I would transcribe that into MuseScore :)

The problem, of course, is the durations, and this is where real-time MIDI input would be a winner, albeit you have to do one voice at a time. Of course a lot of work would need doing on an AI to recognise durations in MuseScore.

Maybe one day we will have a programmer on the team who understands MIDI well enough to implement this.

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