Slur-type triplet bracket
Request the addition of "Slur" to the bracket type options.
Some pieces have triplets with squared brackets and a 3 above the bracket but when the triplet is to be slurred the slur replaces the bracket with the 3 above the slur. In MS 2.0 (beta) you can achieve this by selecting "None" for bracket type, placing a slur on the notes and then adjusting the positioning of the 3 but it would be nice to be able to do this with fewer steps.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Slur_bracket.mscz | 6.27 KB |
Comments
I support this. Especially a figure like this (with the number "cutting" the line"):
In reply to I support this. Especially a by 255
I has been requested a couple of time before and I don't support it at all. It's hard to read and can be mistaken for a slur, most modern guidelines explain that it shouldn't be use. I would prefer if MuseScore doesn't support it.
In reply to I has been requested a couple by [DELETED] 5
Surely not as the default, but it would be of value to be able to transcribe closer to the original
In reply to I has been requested a couple by [DELETED] 5
>can be mistaken for a slur
It IS a slur, together with a tuplet.
>modern guidelines explain that it shouldn't be use.
![tuplets.png]( "tuplets.png")
Ok for crotchets, but are you sure this
isn't allowed too?
In reply to >can be mistaken for a by 255
I'm aware of the issue in question, though I must say I've never actually seen it (as described and as pictured) in a published score.
On a related note (which I believe I commented upon in a discussion here in past years), it was very common in the pre-digital era - at least at G. Schirmer, which is my personal 'gold standard' in engraving practices - for the tuplet numeral to have a curved (i.e., slur-shaped) line either above or below just the numeral.
Here's an example from Schirmer's edition by Rafael Joseffy of Chopin's Nocturne, Op. 27 No. 2 - with triplets in both systems and a 48-note fioritura in the second system that illustrate exactly what I mean.
If I were to advocate for an enhancement to display of tuplet formatting, it would be this one for its value in replicating historical scores precisely - but it's not something I feel is terribly important or feel very strongly about, especially given that there are workarounds for the few people (I am guessing) who would even care about such a detail.
In reply to >can be mistaken for a by 255
Hmm, what is the source for saying that the curved line some 19th century editors used for triplets was also meant to indicate a slur? I've never heard that claim before.
In reply to Hmm, what is the source for by Marc Sabatella
I don't actually see that claim anywhere in this thread (specifically concerning the practices of 19th century editors).
I tried to make clear that my own comment was strictly about the formatting of the numeral itself with a small curved line above it or below it that superficially resembles the shape of a slur but is not one.
I wouldn't want the issues to be conflated simply because small curved lines tend to be mistaken for, or perceived as slurs when they're not.
In reply to I don't actually see that by [DELETED] 448831
Stevebob, the curved lines in your example are clear. Although it is not obvious, I was responding to 255.
My point was that some music (mostly old, I'll admit, but that includes a lot of 20th century stuff) has triplets with slurs and a 3, and it would be good to include this as an alternative to a square bracket or no bracket. Never mind what modern convention is, if we are only going to stick to modern convention then we have no need for Longas, unmetered plainsong, different noteheads, mordents, lute dots or many of the weirder clefs that are available. So, if it is possible and demand is present I would say that allowing alternate triplet brackets is a reasonable request.
One thing that might help here and also at other places would be to allow a text element to have an opaque background the same color as the canvas. You could then have a slur over your triplet and place a 3 in the middle of it and have the slur line broken (yes, it's not common but I have seen it). It would also help with the situations where you have text breaking across a barline (often in keyboard pieces) and where you want the barline broken so that the text is easier to read.
As for a 3 with a tiny bracket, it can be done with current resources in that you can enter System Text and then press F2 and select an appropriate curve and then change its Vertical offset although I respect that some might also want this as a triplet bracket option.
In reply to My point was that some music by underquark
I think I agree we should consider adding the curved bracket. Of course you *can* create a slur, and set text to have an opaque *white* (not canvas color or texture) background. It should print OK, but might look a little funny on screen.
It occurs to me for the 3-with-tiny-curved-bracket, that might be available as a special font.
In reply to I think I agree we should by Marc Sabatella
With due respect to all ... it seems that some members make claims about 'what they've seen', and it's simply accepted without question. For others - including myself on a number of occasions - I've been asked to produce evidence. A notable recent example was an acciaccatura tied to the same note within a chord that followed it - something that is so abundant in 19th century piano music that I never imagined I'd need to defend the need for it or show examples of it.
Now, the issue is triplets - triplet quavers in particular? - where there is a slur instead of a bracket, with the slur intersecting (i.e., passing behind) the numeral. I've played piano from sheets literally all my life - 59 years - and I've never seen such a thing, but it's treated as though it's a common occurrence.
Feel free to dismiss this comment as random musings - in the category of 'just sayin' and things that I just don't understand ... which I'm sure could fill libraries.
Marc, I still would like to know where the supposed practice of 19th century editors to punctuate tuplets with slurs instead of brackets was invoked in this thread - or to see you admit that you misread something yet again and responded based on that misunderstanding.
In reply to With due respect to all ... by [DELETED] 448831
I'm not really folowng what you are asking me here.
The post I was responding to what I asked for supporting evidence about the curved bracket being a slur is this one: http://musescore.org/en/node/39961#comment-233556. The exact quote: "It IS a slur, together with a tuplet." This was also quite explicitly claimed in the original post: "when the triplet is to be slurred the slur replaces the bracket". Both of these are saying quite clearly they believe the curved bracket - which *was* quite common in 19th century editions (particularly in France from what I understand, although I'm no expert) - is meant to indicate a truplet and a slur together. But I have never heard anyone claim this before, so I am simply asking for a source. I suspect that the people saying this indicates a slur were simply *assuming* it indicated a slur because it looks like one, which is indeed exactly why the practice has falled out of favor over the past century. It's a totally different symbol that the one you are favoring, which I too have seen, probably in Schirmer editions and nowhere else, although that's just a guess.
In reply to I'm not really folowng what by Marc Sabatella
FWIW, here is what Behind Bars says about this. (p194 about tuplet bracket design)
"The numeral shoud be encompassed by a square bracket, and not the curved arc of older edition, as this look like a slur".
In reply to FWIW, here is what Behind by [DELETED] 5
I think there should be an option to have a triplet using a slur. Whether the slur also means a slur should be left to the interpreter.
![IMG_6543.jpg]()
![Schermafbeelding 2015-09-19 om 13.55.20.png]( "Schermafbeelding 2015-09-19 om 13.55.20.png")
![Schermafbeelding 2015-09-19 om 13.56.24.png]( "Schermafbeelding 2015-09-19 om 13.56.24.png")
Editing this piece of 18th century music I have the option to use the brackets (which looks too modern) or no brackets in which case the number 3 or 6 flips to the other side looking strange as well. What I am doing now is flipping the numbers and then adjusting all the slurs to make space for the number below it. A lot of work that could be avoided by ginving more options for the triplet (tuplet, strange word by the way) notation.
The Musescore example is not exactly the same bar but this should be clear enough for my needs:
No formatting:
After several corrections:
In reply to I think there should be an by SRH
'Tuplet' is the correct word to describe tuplets and tuplet notation. 'Triplet' is a specific sort of tuplet - the most common, in fact, but that term is not used to refer to tuplets generally.
In reply to I'm not really folowng what by Marc Sabatella
Sorry for creating so much confusion, it was indeed a wrong assumption of mine.
Sorry to revive a thread that has lain dormant for over a year, but I really need to be able to create tuplets with slur-type brackets. Why? Because I am writing a book about the traditional folk dance music of the Yorkshire Dales that will include 130 tunes from original source material, including a fiddler's manuscript tune-book from the early 19th century. I made the decision early on to transcribe the tunes exactly as they were written in the original manuscripts, including any errors, so that readers can judge for themselves how to play the tunes rather than being forced to rely on my interpretation. I changed to Musescore from my previous music programme specifically because it offers many useful tools that enable me to reproduce the tune manuscripts faithfully. I only became aware recently that there is one important thing that Musescore won't let me do - reproduce the tuplets as they were written with curved brackets. I accept that modern practice favours square brackets for tuplets and frowns on curved ones, but modern practice is not relevant to the reproduction of a manuscript produced between 1805 and 1812. I would hate to have to abandon Musescore and all the work I have produced using this otherwise excellent piece of software simply because I can't get over this one stumbling block. Has anyone found an effective work-around or is there any chance that the creators of Musescore will provide the option of using slur-type tuplet brackets?
In reply to Sorry to revive a thread that by bobthemusicalcrook
Workaround is simply to add slurs manually.
Adding slurs manually is a lot of work because the 3 or 6 has to be moved manually to the other side, the slur has to be moved to make place…
It would be very nice to have more options for tuplets indeed to reproduce 18th or 19th century notation.
In reply to Adding slurs manually is a by SRH
The work-round of adding slurs manually is very 'clunky'. Each slur has to be placed and adjusted individually and the number has to be moved. This takes a long time when working on some of the hornpipe tunes with which I have to deal, some of which contain large numbers of tuplets.
Wouldn't it be better to have the option to choose curved tuplets in the Inspector? After all, curved tuplets were the norm in the 19th century and are still used in some modern folk dance tune-books.
Yes eventually it would be better to have an automatic option. I was just responding to your question of whether a workaround existed.
In reply to Yes eventually it would be by Marc Sabatella
Thanks for that, Marc. I have used the work-round you suggested. It is painfully slow, especially when you have a lot of music to write out, but it works well enough for me to persevere with Musescore, but not well enough to cure my frustration. I do hope that the software writers make this issue a priority for the next upgrade.
In reply to Thanks for that, Marc. I have by bobthemusicalcrook
A problem with the work-round discussed above is that, while it can be used to represent tuplets with curved brackets, this comes at the cost of the triplets not playing properly when I play the tune through the playback facility.
In reply to A problem with the work-round by bobthemusicalcrook
? Adding a slur shouldn't change playback noticeably at all (the legato effect is *extremely* subtle.
In reply to ? Adding a slur shouldn't by Marc Sabatella
In that case, there must be a bug somewhere because it has changed the playback very significantly in the score in which I have tried this. Perhaps it was because I wrote the score with default tuplets and then added the slurs afterwards.
In reply to In that case, there must be a by bobthemusicalcrook
No, that should work just fine. How is playback different? The only differences should be very very slightly more legato. If you post the score you are aving trouble with and describe what the problem is exactly, we can take a look. It sounds like you perahsp aren't doing something right, but it's hard to guess what.
I just went ahead and filed the feature request: #111626: Add option to display tuplet brackets as slurs to match historical notation
In reply to I just went ahead and filed by Isaac Weiss
That's good, Isaac. I hope your request receives a positive response.
While there is value in supporting this for historical musical typesetting purposes, it should be noted that "this is an obsolete practice and causes confusion between normal slurs and tuplet slurs." (Too lazy to rephrase, sorry)
Source (scan attached):
Gerou, Tom, and Linda Lusk. "Tuplets." Essential Dictionary of Music Notation: The Most Practical and Concise Source for Music Notation. Los Angeles: Alfred, 1996. 339. Print.
In reply to While there is value in by jpcranford
I agree with the cited book. Tuplets with slur type brackets are confusing. I always played them as slurs.