Tuplets tie/ligature
Hello all,
I want a tie or some kind of ligature on tuplets numbers. I can add normal tie and by resizing and changing the it can be used. On the other hand I'm wondering is there any way to do such tuplets like in the picture attached. Since a while I've been looking for an answer, trying to find another way but couldn't achieve what I wanted yet.
All the best
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| tuplet.jpg | 94.97 KB |
Comments
See #13332: Curved bracket version needed for tuplets.
In reply to See #13332: Curved bracket… by Jojo-Schmitz
Hi Jojo, I was wondering if this has been discussed in regards to curved brackets over tuplets in jazz-style lead sheet notation, such as in the attached screenshots? Currently a triplet displays only the number 3 below the tuplet. Is there a setting that can be changed to adjust the appearance - for example to the number and a curved bracket appearing above the tuplet, as in traditional jazz lead sheets?
In reply to Hi Jojo, I was wondering if… by edwardjc
You wrote:
Currently a triplet displays only the number 3 below the tuplet.
That's not true...
While not a curved ligature, a tuplet bracket can be used and its direction - above or below - set in the Inspector.
See:
https://musescore.org/en/handbook/3/tuplets#inspector
In reply to Hi Jojo, I was wondering if… by edwardjc
To be clear:
The modern standard in all genres - jazz as well as classical - is for the tuplet bracket to be displayed if and only if there is not a beam connecting the tuplet. It is not necessary or advisable to add brackets in cases where there is a beam, and it's never advisable to use a slur instead of a bracket, because a slur means something else and can cause confusion. It's not the case that this is the norm for 'traditional jazz lead sheets" although no doubt some individual people who aren't aware of the notation standard may have made this mistake when handcopying charts (eg, the old illegal Real Book series). I wouldn't recommend compounding their error though.
That said, if you wish to do this for whatever reason, just add a slur.
In reply to To be clear: The modern… by Marc Sabatella
It's not about the need to follow some notation standard for us regular people. There are loads of scores of music from the Romantic era with curved tuplets in them. They are a lot of the time more esthetically pleasing, with the angled brackets somewhat jarring to the eyes. And so I'm effectively adding myself to the demand pool. Please consider. Thanks.
In reply to It's not about the need to… by loluores
I belong to a transcription group which copies a lot of old scores from the 18th and 19th centuries. We are always puzzling over whether a slur over a tuplet is really intended as a slur or as a tuplet bracket - and either case is feasible.
So we certainly would not want to see the rounded slur-type bracket introduced - even as a minority option. It's a quick path to total confusion.
In reply to I belong to a transcription… by DanielR
As one of the reviewers on the same project as DanielR, I uphold the policies of notation we have set down to assure unity and clarity in the scores we post. I am not disputing any of the policies here nor am I advocating that we change our current bracket policy. Face it, we've seen some really strange notations and they need to make sense. In those instances we are forced into an interpretation.
However, I disagree about letting people use the slur type triplet bracket. These are a very legitimate historical notation that has been used more than it hasn't throughout the history of music notation. Putting this type of option in the hands of the transcriber put the interpretation of these makes it easier for them to transcribe historical scores as I've been doing for years. If the slur type brackets were made available it would make the job of the transcriber easier since they would no longer need to try to determine for themselves if they are looking at a slur or a bracket. This puts the interpretation back in the hands of the conductor or performer where it belongs.
In reply to As one of the reviewers on… by mike320
I agree, slur-like triplet 'brackets' should be made availabe as an option. And when looking like the OP's example
![tuplet.jpg]( "tuplet.jpg")
![traditional-jazz-style-notation-triplet-appearance-2019-12-24_1246.png]( "traditional-jazz-style-notation-triplet-appearance-2019-12-24_1246.png")
I don't think there's any ambiguity about them. Very unlike this one:
where it could be a slur and a fingering notation
In reply to I agree, slur-like triplet … by Jojo-Schmitz
The first picture is an exception to the ambiguity argument. I've rarely seen it. Most of the time the slur type brackets have the 3 between the notes and slurs as in your second picture. Those are ambiguous. Honestly, if I saw that type of bracket I would turn it into a square one because there is no ambiguity.
In reply to It's not about the need to… by loluores
For the record, I completely support having MuseScore provide this option. I will also continue to strongly advise people not to use it for any music you expect anyone alive today to have to read, as it will do nothing but cause confusion. Whether you as an editor happen to subjectively find it more aesthetically pleasing than the standard should be beside the point if other musicians will need to read the piece - the needs of the musicians come first, that is the universal rule to follow where possible. And musicians will want the notation to be unambiguous and also in keeping with how they are accustomed to reading music.