Prima Voltas at multiple places does not repeat.
Hi people,
This score is being played straight through without respect for the Prima Voltas and the repetition signs in version 1.3. I would like it to play the score the following way:
1. Play measure 1-2
2. Play measure 1 and then jump to measure 3.
3. Play measure 4-5.
4. Jump back and play measure 1-2
5. Play measure 1 and then jump to measure 3.
6. Play measure 4 and then jump to measure 6.
7 Finally, play measure 7.
Am I doing something wrong or could it be a bug?
Regards.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| prima_voltas_multiple_places.mscz.mscz | 1.98 KB |
Comments
perhaps it would be better to attach your score here
http://musescore.org/en/handbook/how-ask-support-or-file-reports
In reply to Ciao Rickard, by Shoichi
Ciao Shoichi,
The file is attached now. I attached it the first time but it seems the preview option might have made it disappear. Regards
This roadmap is to complicated, jumps into repeats work (like in step 4), but won't repeat, so playback would be like step 5 directly.
See attached for the best you can get.
In reply to This roadmap is to by Jojo-Schmitz
Jojo-Schmitz,
In your example it ignores Prima Volta 1 when it returns to Segno and jumps directly to Prima Volta 2.
In reply to Jojo-Schmitz, In your example by ickefes
Yes, I know and explained why that is: Repeats bars are ignored and treated as if it were the last round when jumping back into them.
As I use a "D.C. al Coda" the Segno is not needed...
And, looking into your score, repeats bars don't nest (and the start repeat is missing)
In reply to Yes, I know and explained why by Jojo-Schmitz
Well, I should not need a repeat bar in a beginning of a song if I am correct.
In reply to Well, I should not need a by ickefes
Yes, the start repeat at the beginning is not strictly needed, but you have 2 end repeats, so MuseScore has no way to match them. At least the 2nd end repeat needs a matching start repeat, and it has to be after the 1st end repeat.
In reply to Well, I should not need a by ickefes
In notation that is true, but for playback purposes it is necessary.
In reply to Yes, I know and explained why by Jojo-Schmitz
This is not doable in Musescore? I hope it can be done somehow because otherwise Musescore is useless to me I am affraid.
In reply to This is not doable in by ickefes
It is not doable. Unroll your loop.
If it is to complicated and confusing for MuseScore, it'd be even more so for a musician.
You could add a text 'with repeat' to the D.C. al Coda' to tell the musician about it, it still won't playback the way you want it though
In reply to This is not doable in by ickefes
I'd say if you are thinking of MuseScore as a playback program, your conclusion is correct - it's not the right tool for whatever it is you are trying to do. The primary purpose of MuseScore is produce sheet music. The fact that it also happens to provide some sort of playback facility is just a convenience to help you get the sheet music correct. Even once you fix the error in this score that is causing the problem, you will likely run into other cases where the playback facility is simply not up to the demands you may be placing on it.
But in any case, the point here is that your score has issues you need to fix before MuseScore can play it. This isn't because of a limitation in MuseSvcore - it's because your score is musically incorrect. You have a closing repeat at the end of bar 5 with no corresponding opening repeat. One might *guess* you wanted to repeat back to the beginning of measure 4, but you can't leave that up to guesswork. Both human musicians and MuseScore need to be told explicitly where to repeat back to. And if you truly want to that repeat to go back to the beginning - which is nost definitely not what I'd have guessed - you need to either use DC or write this out twice. There is way to use repeat signs to indicate that. Again, this isn't a limitation in MuseScore - it's inherent in how music notation works.
For just one measure more than your original and one more that Jojo-Schmitz has used (note "used", not "recommended"), you could simplify it a lot. IMHO it's much easier to read, play and trouble-shoot.