Check the attached: two staves, one with one note having one sharp accidental; the other with two notes, one having one sharp accidental. Now layer the staves. From whence the extra sharp?? Thank you.
Do we have any idea when the breve will be supported natively in Noteworthy? I am running into more and more situations where breves are indicated, but there is no way to notate them without all sorts of hijinks with other fonts, hidden notes, etc.
I have requested this several times, both in the forums and in the wish list, but have no idea if/when breves will be supported.
Another alternative is Bullzip (www.bullzip.com). I've been using it for about seven years and have never had any problems. Good luck with solving your issue. db
A wish list wouldn't necessarily need to be voted upon by members. Just knowing what has been requested could keep the number of duplicate requests to a minimum. Additionally, knowing what has been requested may light a fire under other members who have expertise in programming and NWC to come up with an alternate solution or enhancement.
So, I guess having the hairpin assume the characteristics of the preceding dynamic is out of the question, but without a good reason. jim_jr has it right (too many "clicks" to accomplish something so simple).
Perhaps I am the only one who is bothered by this, but if dynamics are hidden ("Visibility Never") in a score, why are the ensuing hairpins visible?
See the attached sample. The dynamics (mf, f) are not visible in the lower staff, but the hairpins are visible. Seems to me if the dynamics are not visible, the hairpins should not be visible.
In the case of the attached sample, seeing the hairpins in the lower staff is not necessary (or wanted).
Perhaps the hairpins could take on the visibility of the preceeding dynamic.
I have had rather impressive results with "PDF to Music Pro" from www.myriad-online.com. This program takes an PDF file that was generated by any music software, plays it, exports it in miscellaneous formats, plays and even sings it.
I use it to export a file in mxml format, then use "Music XML to NWC Converter" from www.niversoft.com to generate input into NWC. This combo is definitely not perfect, but can save a passel of time, especially with a large score.
Bullzip installs as a pseudo-printer. You "print" your nwc file (or Word, or whatever file) by selecting the Bullzip printer. It saves the output as a pdf file into whatever directory you choose. You can then print that pdf file as you would any pdf file.
PDFtoMusic Pro is $199. Pricey, but the $49 version (non-Pro) doesn't have the options in Pro. Pro will export to XML, mid, etc.
For converting nwc to pdf, I use Bullzip (a freebie from www.bullzip.com) which will work with nearly every application. It defines a PDF printer that will save your output as a PDF file wherever you want to save it. Anything you can print on your printer can be saved as a PDF file.
There is a program I use, PDFtoMusic Pro, available at myriad-online.com, which can read a PDF score generated by any music software, play it, export it in miscellaneous formats, play or even sing it. It works on about 95% of the files I've tried. It's nice since you can get a feel for the music before converting it.
You could also use the Microsoft "Snipping Tool" to select the portion of the screen you want, then save it as a JPG (for instance) file which you can insert into your document.
Now, THAT will help since my chubby paws are already over there anyhow to enter the notes. I do use the ENTER on the keypad occasionally (usually when I miss the "3"), but never thought of the * for TA.
Is it possible to disable certain short-cut keys in NWC2? Since the last NWC updates, "Q" is used for notehead selection and "\" is used for notehead color. As a sloppy typist, I frequently hit the "Q" instead of "TAB" while coding, and similarly with the "\" instead of "ENTER". Most of the time, I'm many measures ahead before I look up and see (e.g.) red notestems with no noteheads!
If it were possible to disable these two keys, it would save me beaucoup time (not to mention $$ for typing lessons!).
I've been plagued with dissimilarities in the appearance of dotted notes between layered and non-layered staves.
Example 1: "Without Layering" - notes entered twice at each position per staff. Example 2: "With Layering" - notes entered once at each position per staff, staves layered.
Having upgraded my ancient PC to a new one, I found it running Vista 64-bit. Unfortunately, most of my apps, including mxml2nwc, was running 32-bit. This caused a problem.
I contacted Nicolas who kindly updated and provided me a 64-bit version which runs superbly! He also provided me with the following download information for this forum: (His quote)
I've searched the forum and have found similar problems, but not this one. In the attached NWC2 file, please look at measure 64. I have unlayered staves 1 and 2 to show the spacing difference. Obviously, layering causes a double tune sig.
I cannot find what is causing the spacing problem at Special Ending 2.
Last March, I "upgraded" to Vista. Just after the first of the year, I attempted to modify my templates to reflect the date change (to 2008), but was unable to save the templates. Yes, I have Admin priveleges. The message is "(template name) failed to save properly" but the old ones still exist and I have to change them manually for each new composition.
Is there something in NWC that will not allow saving modified templates under Vista? The templates are in: C:\Program Files\Noteworthy Composer\Template
Yes, I'm still on 1.75c, but doubt the new version would act differently.
Many thanks for your assistance. Y'all are great answering queries. Doug
I code 4-part choral music (like from CPDL) for my church choir and for another choir I'm in. As there are quite a few "user fonts" available for Noteworthy and the program allows for six, is there a standard/consensus on which should be included in a "typical" NWC document for choral music? If so, in what order?
Is there (or, probably more rightly, could there be) a suggested "template" of these fonts and a quick reference list of what each provides?
Example: User font 1 Boxmarks User font 2 cresc User font 3 NWSlur etc.
Then a one-page list showing what Boxmarks codes provide what graphic, followed by cresc, and NWSlur...
This would be most helpful for the occasional user such as me. I only have about 2900 choral selections, and since 1999, have altered my templates to include some of the fonts, but I invariably end up having to add another or rearrange a template, then I really get screwed up! How are all you handling situations such as these??
Many thanks (and I LOVE some of your posts on other topics!!) and still awaiting NWC2 (non-beta. I don't do beta.) Doug Baumann
And, wouldn't it be nice if even page numbers were at the upper left instead of all page numbers at the upper right. (At least, they're all at the upper right in V1.75.) That way, when the music is printed two-sided, the page numbers would appear as in a book.
Any idea (however general) for the full release of V2.0?? I've been waiting and watching for over two years when 2.0 was starting in Beta.
I've had Noteworthy since 1998 (original distribution was on a 3.5" floppy), and have always downloaded updates and upgrades (with appropriate remuneration)... never got the CD, so can't try the Betas.
By the way, I have just under 10,000 NWC files, mostly choral, some instrumental (and nearly 80% Baroque) if anyone is interested.