Since the practice mode was added recently it strongly reminded me on an app called 'flowkey'.
Additionally to the notes flying by in different tempo you have a function called 'wait' where you can either connect your device via usb-to-host or use the devices microphone to recognize play notes as midi input. The score only proceeds to the next notes if the matching midi was recognized. For more info visit https://www.youtube.com/user/flowkeychannel
I dont know if this makes sense for other instruments than piano but i would love to see that feature in the android app!
Since the practice mode was added recently it strongly reminded me on an app called 'flowkey'.
Asking "is this about the services on musescore.com, or the desktop and mobile application programs?" and divert to .org if the latter?
I think something that would definitely be something worthwhile would be to make the brass and winds sound like an ensemble or a section, like the battery sections with MuseScore Drumline.
I write a lot of stuff for marching band and drum corps, so definitely a new soundfont would help for a more realistic-souding playback. Is anybody else with me on this?
Thanks so much!
I don't know if this is a bug or not but when I went to my profile, the score pictures were huge, so huge that I couldn't see all 4 scores that I uploaded without having to scroll. Why are the score pictures so big and is this something that's going to be fixed?
I am very fond of the work done here on musescore, and I would like to try making some songs that hasn't been added to musescore yet, so i went to download the music creating tool you have, but when i scrolled through all the different devices that you can download the software onto, I couldn't find the Google Chromebook option, so i searched the Chrome store, Nothing again, but then while i was looking through the community posts, I realised that there could be a group that reports problems, so here I am. I know a lot of people who own a chromebook other than me, who also plays music, I try to introduce this website to as many people I can, and whoever I show this to Is suspicious at first, but learns to love it after giving it a try (and a little of me going "this is how you listen to the song, this is how you change the speed that it plays at, this is the tutorial mode..." ect) And i thought that they might want to make music to, but they only have a chromebook, so same problem again.
So it would be great if you added the Musescore maker on chromebooks, thx
And sorry for the long post ;)
my effort for this is named Minuet in C Minor.063019
By the way, I LOVE this course!
In measures 9-11, I was unable to enter the dotted half note without it automatically creating and tying with a note in the next measure. Also an extra "half" rest in measures 10 and 11 were automatically created and I could not delete. I used the V shortcut to grey them out.
I was not able to get the grace notes in measure 4 to have both of the stems without the strike-though. So I left it.
In MusicScore 2, the access to "Text Style and Text Properties" are quite easier by right click on any texts if we want to make some changes; unfortunately, in MuseScore 3 this link to quick access is removed. I suggest that the link to "Text Style and Text Properties" by right click should be kept as MuseScore 2 does.
After installing the recent version of musescore 3, when ever I open it it closes before I can do anything. Any solutions?
I attempted to file a dispute over a copyright claim made on one of my original scores. But when I hit submit nothing happens.
Broke his arm. :(
I just joined this for something to do. What exactly happens here?
I think I might leave MuseScore.
I'm really busy with all my stuff. I'm probably going to leave.
I know I haven't been active in this group, but let's change that! We should add like a TON of scores to help boost morale, or ask people to join to keep things fresh! I'd hate to see this group get lost in time...
May I offer his Sextet (op 48) for your consideration?
It is beyond me why this problem still hasn't been fixed. It has been there for more than six months. It was claimed fixed in MuseScore 3.0.2 -- it wasn't. Now with OS: macOS High Sierra (10.13), Arch.: x86_64, MuseScore version (64-bit): 220.127.116.1151, revision: github-musescore-musescore-59a887d it is still a problem.
I think the problem is related to hidden instruments in the score.
The score: https://musescore.com/user/181766/scores/5627580
has uploaded fine however if I hide the four string instruments the score will never be processed:
I have written full canons before and I have attempted writing fugues. But every attempt at writing fugues, at least 4 voice fugues leads to parallel octaves because I'm like:
Okay, I have reached an octave, now what? Going down to a 7th won't work because that will lead me back to the same octave. Going to a 9th also won't work unless it is between the tenor and the alto because I can't play a 10th interval with a single hand so if the 9th is between the tenor and the bass or between the alto and the soprano, my only choices are either to go back down to an octave or to leap. Going back to an octave seems like the better option because I conserve leaps, but it just delays the resolution of the octave. Contrary motion to a 6th might work, but what if that doesn't fit with the harmony? Only other solution I can think of that doesn't break the parallel octaves rule is a leap in 1 or both voices involved in the octave. And in general I want to use as few leaps as possible outside of maybe a subject entry, and if I have to use a leap, I would prefer a third over a sixth.
And I end up not finishing the fugue
Now I've been told that the distribution of 4 voices in a keyboard fugue is generally that the bass voice is alone in the left hand and that the other voices are generally in the right hand. But, it seems to me, that having 2 voices per hand just feels more balanced. I have also been told by a few people that fugues are easier to write than canons. Now this seems very counterintuitive to me. In a canon, you have the same melody, just delayed by a certain amount in each line. Sometimes this has a ground bass below it. I won't give an example from Pachelbel because you all know it. Instead, here is a 4 voice canon by Mozart played by a string quartet:
As you can see, every voice is playing the same exact melody until the cadential section is reached.
In contrast, fugues seem in all ways more complicated than canons. If I had to describe it as a cross between 2 forms, I would say that it is a cross between the canon and Sonata form. It has the main melody in multiple voices, just like a canon. And sometimes there are 1 or more countermelodies that also appear in multiple voices. There is also motivic development which is similar to what you find in Sonata form. 1 thing that differs the fugue from both canons and Sonata form is that the voices are like completely independent even if you don't take time into consideration. Time is what makes the lines of a canon independent. Fugues have lines that are independent through melodic shape alone. Sonatas rely on the relationship between melody and bass. No such relationship in fugues. In that sense, sonatas are closer to a ground bass canon.
And like I said before, I have never written a complete fugue, just a few complete canons. Even something like Fugue in C minor WTC I seems easy for a fugue but hard for counterpoint in general and especially compared to canons. Here is the fugue I'm mentioning and this video uses color to show the 3 independent voices:
So are fugues really easier to write than canons if they are almost like a cross between the canon and the sonata? If canons are hard, then wouldn't fugues be even harder?
A member here asked me this morning, “Are parallel octaves and [perfect] fifths ever OK? Will I ever see them?”, and I thought a polished answer belongs here.
There are genres, such as rock and roll, where parallel chords going up or down the guitar neck are wholly idiomatic — so-called “power chords”, as well as the bass-scalar beginning of Bob Dylan’s Like a Rolling Stone (does that count as “classical” yet?). In most kinds of Jazz, block chords moving in parallel are no problem at all, especially chromatically. Or heavy, two-handed keyboard chords in eight or ten parts in romantic or modern music.
In classical music, there are "octave/unisono" passages, such as the opening of Bach's D minor harpsichord concerto BWV 1052, or that of the famous D minor Toccata BWV 565, where all parts are in octaves for several measures, as well as countless concerti by Vivaldi and others. The unisono opening of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, or that of Mozart’s Eine kleine Nachtmusik , literally could not be more famous (those don't count as "parallel octaves"). But not perfect fifths.
Between lines of hymns (4-voiced “chorales”), i.e., after a fermata, Bach not infrequently allows voices to proceed in otherwise unacceptable parallels; the mind of the listener is usually expected to “clear its table/buffer” at such points (but not always). Try here http://www.bach-chorales.com/ConsecutivesInChorales.htm for a discussion of parallel fifths in Bach Chorales.
And in symphonic music (but not classical/baroque), there are places where one instrument (in a fuller texture) doubles another at the octave, in the manner of "octave" organ stops (e.g., flute/bassoon), but that is "romantic era" gesture. And, of course, many orchestrations involve two different instruments playing the same part in unison. In many Bach cantatas, the continuo and vocal bass go "in and out" of tracking each other in exact unison, which causes occasional small passages to "look like" consecutive unisons amidst a seeming run of independence. But not fifths.
And there are cases of “parallels at larger note values”, where the parallel intervals are not directly adjacent, but other notes intervene between them, which may or may not be acceptable depending upon the specific notes and context, and their acceptability may be contentious: "Sounds like fifths to me!". "Well, not to me."
There is a cadential anticipation gesture that causes parallel fifths between the melody and a descending seventh, where parallel perfect fifths are, remarkably, tolerated (e.g., https://www.bach-chorales.info/BachChorales/B361.html bar 4). And there is a case of the resolution of so-called "German Augmented Sixth" chords where they are inevitable, and occur so regularly in Mozart's oeuvre that they are sometimes called "Mozart fifths".
Parallels and unplanned doubling are also permitted between continuo right-hands (realizations) and obbligato instruments and voices (but the RH must be contrapuntally rigorous with its own LH, i.e., the common bass line); the real-time continuo "realizer" is not supposed to be aware of those parts; this is a complex subject; see my many continuo realizations posted here for examples (note that usually realizations are not "written", so you won't "see" them).
And then there is the matter of “direct fifths/octaves”, not exactly parallel, but similar motion into a perfect interval leaving the forbidden unsaid but implied, whose acceptability varies from style to style, composer to composer, and time to time, and with respect to which Bach is considerably more lenient than the theorists of his time.
And occasionally, composers make errors.
Otherwise, the answer, for contrapuntal writing of putatively independent parts, is just NO, if you want your work to resemble that of composers who held fast to this guideline.
Meanwhile the new MuseScore App works for me, even with files stored on my device (although a simple "open" from file manager still does not work - but "open with" does).
What I miss is keeping some settings stored so that on next time starting the application these settings stay selected:
- startup-page: from the 4 selections (browse, bibliothek,...) start directly with the same tab that was used the last time
- when closing a file, come back again to the formerly selected collection (e.g. Songbook). Actually I always come back one level above (my collections).
- classic view: keep this selection in mind for the next opening of a score. I prefer this one, esp. because it keeps the portrait view (and does not switch to landscape, which is not so nice on a tablet.