Music editing - MuseScore

[Dave2002]

My point is that whether you are using sibelius or muse - I have both - building up competence and confidence in using them does not happen overnight! Yes things may become simpler dreckly!

I appreciate your comments, and of course I was not aware of others who might already have experience with these tools, other than a few of the principal protagonists.

I have made major progress, but still got way to go. I've also been learning more about musical notation than I knew before, and I don't just mean everyday stuff, but rather more esoteric things which are more technical.

Page 1 of the Schubert piece has been completed and sounds fairly OK now, though might need to be checked further. It looks OK on the page too.

Page 2 introduces new problems for data entry, with chords in the LH at bars 45, 47, then a sequence from 50-53. These are actually very easy to do once the keyboard shortcuts are known - which I didn't until recently. Yes - I know I should connect my Midi keyboard, but I'm trying to learn how to do this without extra hardware or hardware complications at the moment, and also to see how feasible it all is.

There are some work flow tricks which help too - well they work for me anyway - though doubtless others will achieve similar results using other methods. Discovering that in the current version of MuseScore there are other data entry methods hidden under the large N at the top left was useful. Re-pitching rhythmic patterns does sometimes save time, and generally becoming more aware of how the keyboard interacts with the program helps.

[Andrew Slater]

Thanks Andrew. That does indeed seem to have been the case. I can't say it was inadvertent - I just didn't realise that the system would treat the notation that way. Now I know the difference I'll watch out for this in future.

I fixed the offending bars which now play as I think they were intended to do.

Do you use MuseScore or other similar systems? If so, what do you use them for?

Glad it solved your problem

I do use MuseScore and have used Lilypond as well. The latter is slower, as it involves entering the info for the staves / parts and notes in a text file and then compiling. MuseScore is an improvement for me. But I am only 'messing about', really, and can't justify paying for any software. I've written a few simple tunes and I'm trying to teach myself to harmonise them. The synthesised audio function is useful, as it can play more smoothly (and faster!) than I can, but I accept that the sound is only approximate. So far I've only used it for piano / SATB and B flat clarinet (transposition is easy), but not together! So I can't advise on other packages, such as Sibelius, but if you have further queries on MuseScore, PM me and I might be able to help.

[Dave2002]

Thanks for these responses, and of course mighty thanks, Dave, for your efforts with the Schubert! The rest under the minim is not essential for my purposes, if that helps!

I'll PM you later in the week.

I have made some progress - and sent you a PM.

[Dave2002]

I do use MuseScore and have used Lilypond as well. The latter is slower, as it involves entering the info for the staves / parts and notes in a text file and then compiling. MuseScore is an improvement for me. But I am only 'messing about', really, and can't justify paying for any software. I've written a few simple tunes and I'm trying to teach myself to harmonise them. The synthesised audio function is useful, as it can play more smoothly (and faster!) than I can, but I accept that the sound is only approximate. So far I've only used it for piano / SATB and B flat clarinet (transposition is easy), but not together! So I can't advise on other packages, such as Sibelius, but if you have further queries on MuseScore, PM me and I might be able to help.

I am finding the exercise of trying to produce a score for the D571 piece informative, and arguably helpful. Of course the stated aim of MuseScore is to produce a printed text, not a rendition - though having an approximate rendition is to some extent helpful to me, because it enables me to learn, and become (maybe) more proficient.

I suspect that Sibelius is better in respect to playing back renditions of music scores, and allows better control of the text, though there could still be a very significant learning curve, and of course there are cost implications for those of us who are unlikely to make a living out of music. For example, in bars 49-53 (inclusive) of D571, there is a chord sequence in the LH, and it is interesting to hear what this sounds like (might sound like) without the left hand. My experiments with MuseScore don't suggest a very easy way to do this, though it is of course possible. There are two obvious solutions. One is to export the score as Midi, then identify the appropriate audio track, and mute the others. The other is to copy the score, and do a quick delete of the parts which the composer/arranger does not wish to hear, or alternatively to copy the relevant sections into another temporary score set up specifically for such purposes.

MuseScore does not seem to have a more refined control of dynamics in the rendered versions, which I believe may be the case with Sibelius. If a bar is marked pp, and then a subsequent sequence of bars are marked ff, then MuseScore does render dynamics, but if a hairpin crescendo is placed between the relevant bars, then I belive that MuseScore does not understand, and will ignore that dynamic marking. Doesn't affect the printed text though, as the intention is that another "performer" will generate the appropriate sounds.

One area I'm having particular difficulty with is the use of multiple voices on one stave. I'm still somewhat "hit and miss" in that area - with a lot of trial and error, until I get things more or less right. Bars 38-43 of D571 might illuminate this kind of problem.

I have been aware of LilyPond for some time, and have written quite a large number of articles in LaTex or TeX on which LilyPond is based. I drew the line at the extra complications of trying to write music in such a markup system, though I'm prepared to believe that for printed results it may be good. Probably most musicians who are less interested in publishing than in creating and performing music, will want to leave the technical issues of producing printed texts to others.

[Dave2002]

I seem to have met some tricky problems using MuseScore - though these would not necessarily be solved by using Sibelius, or another music typesetting system.

I am basing my tests on transcribiing D571 by Schubert - obtained from here - https://www.free-scores.com/download...c.php?pdf=1437

Actually the comment that page 2 is identical with page 3 is helpful. I thought there might be minor differences, but that does indeed seem to be the case - the pages do seem identical.

The tied notes, and additional voice parts in the RH around bars 40-43, before the ff section were slightly problematic, but the same passage (page 3) round bars 73-76 is more troublesome - somewhat surprisingly.
The issue is to do with slurs/ties and layout. In MuseScore odd things happen to slurs/ties if they occur at the end of a line. This is not a problem in the PDF which is downloadable from the free-scores site, but it seems to become a problem in MuseScore as the spacing seems to put bar 74 at the end of a line. Perhaps by chance this did not happen with the similar bar at 41.

I have tried to change the spacing, but so far without a good result. I could put line (system) breaks in, but the results would probably be ugly - though maybe serviceable.

Re comparing MuseScore with Sibelius, trying to fix this problem showed up other aspects. I exported a Midi file of the current working, and also an uncompressed MusicXML file. I then imported these into Sibelius Ultimate - I still have some days of the trial left. The Midi export didn't work well, as Sibelius interpreted the piano staves as two separate lines, and showed them on the treble clef - with the RH going way down! It also changed the time signature to 2/2.

The MusicXML worked reasonably - and I was wondering whether I could use Sibelius as a way of fixing this tie/slur/layout issue, and then importing back to MuseScore. I've not tried that yet. What I have tried is to render the music audibly, and my first observations are:

1. the piece is slower in the Sibelius rendering.
2. the piano sounds more reverberant, and more like a period piano, than the automaton like rendition in MuseScore
3. the "playing" seems slightly more sensitive than in MuseScore.
4. Some of the slurs have been applied multiple times when put into Sibelius
5. There are some extra marks in blue in Sibelius - which may relate to layout. As yet I've not found out what they mean. They might be helpful - if I knew how to twiddle them.

Othere differences and aspects when comparing Sibelius and MuseScore, in so far as they might affect me, are:

1. MuseScore is free (on desktop computers) and that means I can use it on several different machines.
2. Sibelius is not free - I don't know how many computers I can use it on.


These issues are relevant as I use different computers for different purposes - for example a laptop for portability, and desktops (several) for more intricate work.

[Dave2002]

Music Scanning Software

OK - a few days have gone by, and I've tried to input a Gibbons Fantasia into MuseScore. It's only two pages - with 3 parts, and I've not finished it yet. This is without using a Midi keyboard, which would almost certainly speed things up enormously. That'll be my next set of "experiments" - or maybe the next + 1.

Mozart and Rossini were obviously very much faster - using pen and paper, and also actually creating their music "on the fly". However, they didn't have access to photo copiers, or computers, so they either had to copy their own music out, or get others to do it for them.

My own somewhat slow rate of progress is speeding up, with more familiarity, and the use of shortcuts. Compared with time spent on film production, in which weeks of work might only result in one minute's worth of usable film, my rate is faster.

There is some point to my efforts, if one assumes that having music to play with others enables a worthwhile activity. Without that assumption, the whole effort is completely without merit. Once the music has been encoded it can be distributed to others, and individual parts printed off etc. The Gibbons piece is one we played (not very well) a few days ago, so now we want to practice it and see if we can improve.

However, since in some cases I already have some printed music, I wondered if scanning software might be a useful way forward to give a significant speed bump to encoding and manipulating scores and parts. This article deals with this, and suggests that it does indeed help a lot - https://www.musicrepo.com/music-scanning-software/

There is also a video embedded in the article, which shows how it can be done. Testing such software out has been added to my list of things to do, and I hope that I might get this working by the New Year - if I'm not forced to "enjoy myself" and kept away from my computers and computer tools.

[Dave2002]

I have made some progress - and sent you a PM.

To Silvestrione:

I've sent you another PM with the new link. What I've sent is incomplete - I think I have most of the rest in another file, but it'll probably take you a day or two to figure out what to do next anyway.

You should be able to toss the file straight into Musescore and see the score, and also play an audio version of the music.

If you do have a Midi keyboard and interface you'll almost certainly find it a lot easier than I have done to date, but against that I have found out quite a lot which might have passed me by otherwise.

[Dave2002]

Today I discovered that it’s possible to specify ways of playing in Musescore - in particular tremolo, pizzicato, arco for some string instruments, and mute for some brass instruments (trumpets). Obviously markings can be put into any score as text, but these particular markings can cause different electronically generated sounds to be output when the score is “played”.

However, I’m not sure that it’s possible to have sections repeated in a different way = though of course that effect could be obtained by duplicating the whole section and marking the copied section differently.

[Dave2002]

Of course Musescore is, or was, like Sibelius, intended for creating and manipulating scores. However, it can also play back scores using Midi. Additionally, it's also possible to input midi files, and either play them back using the inbuilt sounds, or view a version of the score.

I have noticed that IMSLP is now offering Midi files in some cases, in addition to PDF files of scores, or mp3 renditions. For an example, look for the Blue Danube and discover a version for several pianos. There may be many other scores from IMSLP which are also available with equivalent Midi files, and for a very quick fix for arrangements etc., this might be a good starting point.

Blue Danube midi examplle - https://imslp.org/wiki/An_der_sch%C3...s_Jr.,_Johann)

For particular pieces or works by specific composers try searches for "IMSLP synthesized Midi" + name of composer or name of piece.

[Dave2002]

One feature which appears to have been taken out of MuseScore 3 is the abilty to create Albums. This is a pity. It was in MuseScore 2 - which is actually still availble - at least for MacOS. It appears to be a feature which should be put back in - but the developers just haven't got round to it yet.

Users new to MuseScore may not discover this, nor indeed that they may need/want it. The score writing software is fine for producing single "songs" - or pieces, providng they aren't too complex. However, some writers (composers) may wish to produce individual scores for parts of a larger work - for example a symphony (movements) or a song-cycle. The Album feature does allow writers to generate separate, individual files, and then combine them into an album - a larger score.

Also, this means that instrumental parts might be easily generated - create the larger score from separate parts - each part having its own set of instruments. Then generate the parts and print them off as needed.

Until the feature is put back into the latest MuseScore version, anyone who wants to write in this way might be advised to download and install MuseScore 2.
All may not be lost for anyone who hasn't had such foresight, as (perhaps with some limitations) scores can be generated in MuseScore 3, and exported in one of the XML formats for input into MuseScore 2. Once the Album has been created there, the resulting Album (score, text) can be exported back again using one of the XML formats for input to the later version.

Whether there is any forwards or backwards compatibility between MuseScore files (.mscz) I don't know, though I'm told that they are incompatible between versions.

[Dave2002]

I have looked into this issue with Albums in MuseScore, and it appears that the implementation in MS 2 was considered buggy, so not
transferred directly to MS 3. There do seem to be some significant problems, but it would be really nice if some or all of these could be overcome, so that MuseScore 3 had a feature like Albums which actually works.

I would be interested to know if software, such as Sibelius, allows Albums (or similar), so that composers can gather pieces together into collections, or change the order of movements in a work, or even change instruments between movements. If so - and some of us have discussed this before - this would give Sibelius a significant advantage over Open Source projects such as MuseScore - but we have also discussed costs, and the fact that many amateurs don't spend all their time trying to work with scores and also to make a living out of using such software tools.

Financial and other factors may force some compromises and workarounds in order to achieve desired results, if the better software tools are too expensive for amateurs to consider.

[MrGongGong]

So (and I might be misreading what you wrote?) in Musescore you can't make several sections of a large piece and combine them into a single score ?

IMV that is one of the most basic things you might want to do.
Simple in Sibelius

[Dave2002]

So (and I might be misreading what you wrote?) in Musescore you can't make several sections of a large piece and combine them into a single score ?

IMV that is one of the most basic things you might want to do.
Simple in Sibelius

Yep - as in Tchaikovsky writes a ballet - say Nutcracker, then wants to extract individual items and combine them into a suite!
Or maybe Mahler (or Beethoven) starts writing a symphony - writes several movements separately, then wants to combine them into a whole. Then decides to swap the second and third movements.

If Sibelius can do this easily, then there's no contest. Apart from on price, that is.

[MrGongGong]

Yep - as in Tchaikovsky write's a ballet - say Nutcracker, then wants to extract individual items and combine them into a suite!
Or maybe Mahler (or Beethoven) starts writing a symphony - writes several movements separately, then wants to combine them into a whole. Then decides to swap the second and third movements.

If Sibelius can do this easily, then there's no contest. Apart from on price, that is.

This seems a very basic and simple thing that one would do frequently
Can you do this with Dorico ?

Don't most composers writing large scale works start by making sections which they then add / edit / stretch / stitch etc ?

[Dave2002]

This seems a very basic and simple thing that one would do frequently
Can you do this with Dorico ?

Don't most composers writing large scale works start by making sections which they then add / edit / stretch / stitch etc ?

I agree - I would have thought so. Indeed I suspect some composers actually plan things, before even creating any "notes". Who knows how Sibelius was developed, but Musescore would appear to have been designed/developed bottom up - which would explain why it has problems with glueing big chunks together and rearranging them.

I don't know about Dorico. As I recall it's a different beast from Sibelius, but also cheaper, so maybe there's a route to production there - as long as it doesn't shift to a subscription business model. Dorico Elements - currently £85. Might be a good buy. Certainly affordable for some of us.

Would be interested to know, having got this far, if it's possible to import from other music score software, either using the same file types, or the XML variants. Also, would it be possible to export - for example to Sibelius.