Score – Parts Synchronisation Bug

• Mar 4, 2024 - 11:21

I’ve already posted this in the forum but here is a typical example of, to my understanding, a bug.

Take the Piccolo in measure 67 in the attached score as an example. As you can see form the snapshot, the hairpin is visible.

HairpinInScore.png

If you now check the Piccolo part, there is no hairpin, see below. By deletion of the hairpin in the score and insertion of a new one, the hairpin is suddenly visible in the Piccolo part again. To me, this is a clear bug. I've attached the MuseScore file as well so you can "play" with it.

HairpinInScoreMissingInPart.png

The behaviour is completely random and can happen at any time which means you can never rely on correct instrument parts although the score is correct. For smaller pieces with few instruments it is easier to live with, but in my case with 39 staves / instruments it’s not acceptable.

Attachment Size
PasDeDeux_NyttFörsök.mscz 1.34 MB

Comments

• Mar 4, 2024 - 13:23

Ok, I read the GitHub ticket but it more or less means MuseScore is not useable for the time being. There is a work around mentioned, which is basically what I've done without success. I cannot generate instrument exports for our musicians if I cannot trust the output is correct.

Reply

• Mar 4, 2024 - 13:40

The most complete workaround is to reset the part from the Parts dialog, but alas, this also loses any custom formatting you've done.
Obviously, the best thing to do - although I don't know if this is compatible with your workflow ? - is to wait until you've entered all your score (main score) before generating the parts.
This has always been the same basic advice with each new version (2, 3 and therefore 4) that might encounter this kind of problem at some point in their development.

Reply

• Mar 4, 2024 - 15:34

The score is ready, no music more to include, but since a week, I'm struggling with MuseSore's "unwanted features / deficiencies". I'm currently going through the parts and performing necessary format changes to fit the music on 1 or two pages. At the same time I'm proof reading against the handwritten score and it was then I realised a lot of dynamics were missing in the parts albeit included in the score.

I'm in a little hurry because I need this piece for our symphony orchestra Wednesday this week. I've still two other pieces to finalise. Much longer than this one and I fear what problems I will encounter when I start going through and finetuning the parts (the scores are ready) for these. The other two, must be ready after easter.

The big difference between Lilypond and MuseScore which I previously used, is that in Lilypond you can complete the parts first, Then you can simply import them by reference into the score. If the part is correct, it will also be correct for the score and you don't need to touch the part again (single source). The formatting of the score has no impact on the content of the part and you cannot "destroy" it by mistake.

Just now I'm really "pissed" with MuseScores score vs parts deficiencies and the large amount of unnecessary effort needed to "hopefully." get score and parts correct. For me, at least, this has a much higher priority to be fixed than playback deficiencies but that only me.

Reply

• Mar 4, 2024 - 16:24

"What steps to reproduce?"
Good question! As written in the bug report, no one has yet figured out when and how this happens, what is the trigger.
Just for the record: here's a measure that doesn't work: test1.mscz
1. Open this file
2. Create part
Result: hairpin missing in Piccolo part
I cannot for now reproduce from scratch

Reply

• Mar 4, 2024 - 16:25

I don't make any changes to music, dynamics or something else on parts level. All changes are introduced in the score.

The "magically" visible hairpin was there after I deleted the corresponding hairpin in the score and simply inserted a new one, in the score of course.

I'm going through the parts just now. Almost all hairpins, cresc._ _ _ _ and dim._ _ _ _ in the score are missing from the parts so I do the same. Delete the existing hairpin, cresc._ _ _ _ and dim._ _ _ _ in the score and insert new dynamics. That seems to, at least temporarily, fix the issue for the part but I'm not so confident it's the final fix because you just need to touch something in the score or maybe a random effect and the dynamic elements disappear again.

So far, I'm not missing any rehearsal marks as was addressed in the GitHub ticket.

Reply

• Mar 4, 2024 - 19:06

I give up. Never mind how nice MuseScore is but having spent most of the afternoon to correct for the missing dynamics in the parts, I exported all parts and the score. Guess what, all dynamics disappeared in the parts again. Maybe I'm not fair to the development team, but this is an absolutely fundamental flaw. With this, I'm sorry to say, MuseScore is not usable. No way MuseScore can be used to establish professional orchestral material instead of Dorico, Sibelius, Finale or whatever.

I've no time to engrave the piece in Lilypond anymore until Wednesday this week. It's embarrassing but most likely I've to enter the dynamics by hand with a pencil.

I need more than a bottle wine to recover from this lost day.

Reply

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