Play durations altered via the PRE are not conveyed from MS3.6 or 3.7 to MuseScore 4.1
In MuseScore 3.6 or 3.7—via the Piano Roll Editor—I can alter a note’s playback duration to make it longer or shorter than the note’s face value. NOTE: I’ve attached a short MS 3.7 test score to illustrate. I also opened the MS3.7 test score in MS4.1 and have attached the resulting MS 4.1 score, where the lack of the extended play durations is clearly audible.
To be clear, in MuseScore (and other notation apps) it's possible to adjust a note's play duration independent of the notational face value duration. The play duration is governed by the Piano Roll Editor's Len property ... aka Duration (multiple) allowing scorists to generate realistic playback by imbuing durations similar to the interpretation expressed by a skilled musician ... all without altering the notational presentation.
Granted MS4 hasn't yet reinstated the missing Piano Roll Editor (thus duration editing is missing in MS4) but I expected that MS4 would see and honor any altered durations encountered when opening a MS36 or MS 3.7 score. Unfortunately, my test suggests this is untrue.
I also exported the MS3.7 test score to XML and MIDI (both attached). The results are:
• No altered Len durations apparent in MS4 after MusicXML import.
• On opening the test score’s .mid export file in MS4 altered durations are indeed included.
As originally stated, the altered Len durations are omitted on opening the MS3.7 test score in MS4.1.
Am I correct in thinking that MS4 should be able to recognize and include altered (Len property) play durations found in MS3 scores?
scorster
MacOS 13.5.2
Macbook Air, M2
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| MS3.7 PRE to MS4 (Test score).mscz | 10.82 KB |
| MS3.7 PRE to MS4 (Saved from MS4.1).mscz | 21.42 KB |
| MS3.7 PRE to MS4.mxl | 2.47 KB |
| MS3.7 PRE to MS4.mid | 456 bytes |
Comments
It doesn't surprise me in the least that MU4 can't recognize something that it doesn't have the technology for. I'm not sure that notes artificially extended by the PRE are indeed face value. What is the face value of a half note?
Or maybe MU4 does see the longer notes, but has no way to have the sounds play them.
But I confess that I'm probably not qualified to speculate in this thread. I've never used PRE. I don't even have MU3 on this computer anymore.
As a side note, I know PRE is a big deal to many people. What would be of more use to me would be the ability to lengthen note under a slur. Sibelius has this and it makes quite a difference.
In reply to It doesn't surprise me in… by bobjp
First, MS3's Piano Roll Editor (PRE) shows an editable Duration parameter. And, in the context of MuseScore, that is what I'm referring to when using the term "playback duration." That said, I don't believe that MuseScore officially uses the term "play duration" ... or "play duration" or "sounding duration" ... though I advocate that it choose a term for this purpose.
Unfortunately the term "Duration" is ambiguous. I've witnessed many using the term to refer the note value.
Performers often "interpret" a note's duration, even from one pass to the next, imparting a "sounding duration" that is longer or shorter than the written value.
@ bobjp wrote > *I'm not sure that notes artificially extended by the PRE are indeed face value.
As long as the displayed "note value" (eighth, quarter, half, whole ... ) remains the same the face value hasn't changed.
@ bobjp wrote > What is the face value of a half note?
Not sure I follow ...
I'm referring to the note's face value regardless of the note's "play duration." In MuseScore the default play duration equals the note's face value (in other notation applications I've seen it be a small percentage less than the face value.
A written half note always has the face value of a half note. Nothing looks different to the reader if the half note's play duration is extended reduced in the PRE.
@ bobjp wrote > ... use[ful] to me would be the ability to lengthen note under a slur. Sibelius has this and it makes quite a difference.
Lengthening a note "under a slur" is easily accomplished in MS3's piano roll editor. Though the effort would be greatly reduced if the Selection editor could select all notes within a slur, with or without the final note. Then one could choose to lengthen the play amount x, or by x% ... or perhaps apply a keyswitch. Results would surely vary depending on the sound library in use.
scorster
In reply to First, I don't believe that… by scorster
I may have been confused by the title of the thread:
"Face-value play durations not conveyed from MS3.6 or 3.7 to MuseScore 4.1".
Later you called them "altered" durations. So I was just trying to figure out which is which.
If I have a slur that is 20 notes long, how easy is that to adjust note length with PRE. In Sibelius there is an adjustable preset for note lengths under a slur. I add the slur and all notes under it are reset to a value I preset.
In reply to I may have been confused by… by bobjp
@ bobjp wrote > I may have been confused by the title of the thread:
"Face-value play durations not conveyed from MS3.6 or 3.7 to MuseScore 4.1
Yikes! Thanks so much. I fixed the title.
scorster
... alright, here we go :) ...
According to Merriam Webster:
"Should" as auxiliary verb —
...1] used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency
...2] used in auxiliary function to express what is probable or expected
Assuming the second definition, the answer to your (scorster's) question is [yes]. Limited to the first, however, it would seem our response would be found in the negative. The MuseScore people appear to hold no obligation in providing functionality in fulfillment of your expectations (i.e., to bind note-event information from previous versions of musescore into a Mu4 framework correlate, supposing there to be or will be such a contraption [one may hope...]).
Regarding bobjp's question: "If I have a slur that is 20 notes long, how easy is that to adjust note length with PRE." Seeing this in conjunction with the statement: "I've never used PRE. I don't even have MU3 on this computer anymore," it would be safe to say: without downloading first a version of 3 (which is not as easy as one might presume for versions 3.3-3.6.2 for some reason at the moment), it would be impossibly difficult to perform such an adjustment. Supposing bobjp were to download an appropriate version, it would seem likely due to his having never used the PRE that there would be a fair amount of ease-lack within the attempt, barring any further ado regarding relevant information in the calculation.
Have a nice day :)
In reply to Alright, here we go… by worldwideweary
World Wide Weary wrote> According to Merriam Webster:
"Should" as auxiliary verb —
...1] used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency
8...2] used in auxiliary function to express what is probable or expected8
Assuming the second definition, the answer to your (scorster's) question is [yes].
= = = = = = = = = = =
Thanks for clarifying. Indeed I intended Merriam Webster's No. 2 definition.
And I'm glad you concur with my expectation.
scorster
In reply to Alright, here we go… by worldwideweary
So I would ask why should MU4 be able to play altered note durations? They are different programs. A different program might play altered durations. But should it? The playback engine for MU4 has been rewritten. MU4 is moving in a different direction. Good or bad, I don't know. There are several incompatibilities between v3 and v4. We can speculate all day about MuseScore people providing functionality or not. Or we can move ahead and use what is there and get on with it. There are plenty of things that I wish any version of MuseScore did that aren't going to happen.
Regarding PRE. Please. I know what it is. I know what it can do. I've never had need of it. Just like I have little to no need of v3.
In reply to So I would ask why should… by bobjp
"Why should MS4 be able to ... ?" For the same reason/s that this capability was designed into MS3 and deemed important enough to be supported by the plugin API. Hopefully this deficiency will be rectified when we get PRE in MS4.
It's quite usual for later versions of software to improve on their predecessors in many areas and at least equal them in others. MS4 may well achieve this within its lifetime but it doesn't right now. In its present state I have no use for MS4 and will be sticking with 3.7.0 a.k.a. MuseScore 3 Evolution.
In reply to "Why should MS4 be able to … by yonah_ag
bobjp wrote > "Why should MS4 be able to ... ?"
Yonah_ab wrote > For the same reason/s that this capability was designed into MS3 and deemed important enough to be supported by the plugin API. Hopefully this deficiency will be rectified when we get PRE in MS4.
Agreed! And I'd like to think that altered play duration "import" functionality is achievable before the resurrection of the Piano Roll Editor.
Significantly enhanced playback was one of the main advertised improvements in MuseScore 4—and clearly this has been delivered robustly enough to serve some people. But for me it's a showstopper that MuseScore 4 opens earlier score and "silently" discards carefully crafted playback durations that create realism for styles like guitar finger-picking. The omission of artfully altered durations seriously mars playback for me, regardless of the quality of the sound libraries. Additional it effectively corrupts my scores without posting an alert, as previously mentioned.
It's is another serious regression. And potentially a loss of the user's work.
Since better playback was a primary v4 goal it's hard to understand that this was overlooked. And if it's just now known, it would make sense for the matter to become a priority. Along with the reinstatement of the PRE.
========================================
This from GUI pioneer Jef Raskin (a dedicated musician himself) who advanced the term "ergonomics of the mind" in his book The Humane Interface:
Jef Raskin's No. 1, uber, utmost concept on good user interface, "Preserve the user's creation as a whole and all its details, i.e. Don't loose data, distort data or alter the appearance of the user's presentation, even when their preferred presentation or whimsy departs from application defaults."
scorster
In reply to So I would ask why should… by bobjp
bobjp wrote Good or bad, I don't know. There are several incompatibilities between v3 and v4 ... we can move ahead and use what is there and get on with it.
I'm simply reporting what I've observed and additionally have expressed my expectations and needs.
There have been countless regressions in the various 4.x releases. For me there has been so much lost functionality that I don't use MuseScore 4 but rather, thanks to Jojo, I rely on v3.7 Evolution.
Occasionally I try MuseScore 4 for a specific purpose. In this case I needed MS4 to "read" and honor play durations edited in 3.6 or 3.7. The purpose was to hear a Kontakt library sounding the altered durations and post the result on MuseScore.com. Turned out that was not possible, because of the issue opening a 3.7 or 3.6 score. So, as usual, I quietly go back to MuseScore 3.7, and in this case ... I leave a note in a bottle.
BTW, as reported, I tried MusicXML import and MIDI import. The latter brings the durations on board, but the notation is far from what I want ... and not fixable while also preserving the altered duration. Please see the attached image where Line 1 shows the desired notation, and Line 2 shows how MS4 logically notates the extended durations, in a manner that I specifically I want to avoid.
In short, this post highlights yet another issue/regression/bug blocking me from adopting MuseScore 4 for serious or daily use. For me the MS4 minuses far outweigh the pluses.
scorster
In reply to bobjp wrote Good or bad, I… by scorster
Interesting that the MIDI import works as expected. This suggests that MS4 is capable of honouring the MIDI event data in MS3 files so maybe a fix would not be so difficult.
It sounds as though MS4 is not honouring the MIDI event data in the MS3 .mscz file. This can contain note playback duration and also note start time offset. This data is the basis of BSG's well known, (and very useful), "Articulation and Ornamentation Control" plugins.
See https://musescore.org/en/project/articulation-and-ornamentation-control
Well sure, people need to use the version that works for them. The shortcoming that is the subject of this thread does not surprise me. Perhaps v4 does recognize the durations, as evidenced by midi data, but has no way to realize them in general. No way to know if the fix is easy or not. If it was easy, I think it would have been fixed by now.
I feel the same is true of other things people are vocal about.
No save button.
No screen shot.
Only one instance of v4 open in a window at at time.
Each of these have been legitimate grounds for people staying with v3. I get it.
I've always used Save As.
For me, it's just as easy to use other screen shot things.
I don't need 15 files open at once.
But then my needs are simple. Or are they? I use notation software to compose for small orchestra. I write for playback. I haven't used PRE since I started with software in 2007. And the three things above have no bearing on an actual composition. Two main things affect playback. What you write and sounds you write for. V4 sounds are what I am looking for. Are they perfect? Hardly. Solo trumpet and solo violin 1 leave much to be desired. Violin sections unrealistically tend to swell on successive quarter and half notes. I was looking forward to VSTs. But the three well known ones I've tried don't cut it.
If I wrote notation to hand to real players, I think any software would do.
Sorry, probably more info about me than anyone cares about.
In reply to Well sure, people need to… by bobjp
MIDI duration override for face value duration is most useful for instruments which can continue to sound whilst the player is not blowing or bowing etc. Guitars fall into this category and using the MIDI event data to extend face value durations can lead to a much improved "Let Ring" effect.
You can hear the difference in this sample:
https://musescore.com/user/28842914/scores/11375725
Without "Let Ring" the bass notes resemble the tune from the old Space Invaders arcade game. Whilst this could be mitigated by using a second voice for the bass tune, this would become impractical for multiple melody strings - i.e. using a separate voice for each string used in the melody.
In your orchestral compositions it may be the case that you would not notice the lack of guitar "Let Ring" because the other instruments could mask the lack. If there was a guitar solo section then this lack would be more noticeable.
In reply to MIDI duration override for… by yonah_ag
Same effect can get achieved with the 'let ring' line
In reply to Same effect can get achieved… by Jojo-Schmitz
Perhaps as in this simple example but in more complex situations the built-in 'Let Ring' line has too many flaws.
See:
https://musescore.org/en/node/286670
https://musescore.org/en/node/319340
In reply to Perhaps as in this simple… by yonah_ag
Actually it wouldn't even work well in this simple example as there would be overlapping ringing notes producing a mushy sound, as described in the first of the above posts. In MS3 'Let Ring' has been implemented as a piano pedal style sustain but a guitar behaves significantly differently to a piano.