Key signatures still broken in parts
Critical bug, but obviously unsolvable (IMHO bug has its 4th Birthday):
Key signatures in parts get out of sync after a while.
I don't know what I did exactly this time, so I can't tell how to reliably reproduce this bug. The part was correct in the time of producing it.
See attached file. Key signature in concert pitch is c Major. Alto Sax shows in my SAX-Sub-Score (which is technically a part) A-major as concert pitch and f# major in transposed pitch (which was correct by itself, but not relative to the score.)
MS 3.05 / Win10.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Perfect Arranging Template.mscz | 35.15 KB |
Comments
Try the attached version then.
Seems you've changed the keysig of that SAX part and that didn't also change the one of the main score.
Not sure whether this is a bug or by design, whether key sig changes should propagate between score and parts.
In reply to Try the attached version then by Jojo-Schmitz
Same thing in your attached file. And no, I did not change the key sig of the part.
In reply to Same thing in your attached… by olivo
No, here my attachment is clean, 3 and 2 sharts for the SAXes in part and score
Not sure which four year old bug report you are referring to, but my guess is the bug you are seeing here is actually a new one, introduced at 3.0.2 and already fixed for 3.1 beta, in which you can get results like this if you save the score while in concert pitch mode but with the parts transposed. Workaround is to delete and regenerate the parts. See #285781: Non-default style settings in score get applied to all parts on reload, leading to bad transposition and other loss of data.
There have indeed been other bugs with key signatures, transposition, and parts over the years - it's a tricky thing to get right. But, we keep fixing things as they are reported, and as now most should be fixed already or have pending fixes as of 3.1 beta. The only one I know of that we don't have a good solution for is #62416: Changes to staff transposition (and other properties) not reflected in linked parts, which is indeed four years old but I don't think relevant here. Unless you were changing instruments / transpositions in your score after creating the parts?
In reply to Not sure which four year old… by Marc Sabatella
I think, I did not change instruments/transpositions after creating the parts, but I am not sure enough. I must find a way to reproduce the bug...
Thanks. MS 3.1 alpha in the nightlies?
In reply to I think, I did not change… by olivo
3.1 Beta... https://musescore.org/en/3.1beta
In reply to I think, I did not change… by olivo
Did you at any time save the score while in concert pitch mode? That is the big I said I think is most likely what you are seeing.
In reply to Did you at any time save the… by Marc Sabatella
What solves the problem is reapplying the key sig in the score. All parts are correct then. Not nice but almost acceptable. Maybe I saved the score in concert pitch before, but as I said: I'm not sure.
In reply to What solves the problem is… by olivo
When you said you weren't sure if you changed transposition, I thought you mean literally changing the transposition for the instrument in Staff Properties, since that's the other bug I mentioned (the one we don't have a fix for, because we can't seem to decide what the best approach is for linking of staff properties in general). If you meant just flipping Concert Pitch, that bug gets triggered even if you don't change it after generating parts. As long as you have concert pitch enabled in the score at the moment you save the score - whether you put it into that mode before or after generating parts - then loading the resulting file will show the bug. Again, that bug is fixed for 3.1 beta.
In reply to When you said you weren't… by Marc Sabatella
Ah, I understand. No, I definitely did NOT change the instrument's transposition in Staff Properties.
In the meantime I've installed 3.1beta and now I am playing with the new linearize score feature. I will see, if the above mentioned bug shows again.
I will check it out! Thanks.
In reply to Ah, I understand. No, I… by olivo
@Jojo: Thank you for your advice, too!