This section allows you to view all Show Posts made by this member. Note that you can only see Show Posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Mike Shawaluk
If the above does not make sense, I can create an example for you.
Many thanks to him for this addition!
I too hope that 2022 is a better year than this past one has been.
The small vertical bars cannot be moved to a different place - they are always at the top or bottom staff line (which makes them only usable for 5-line staffs, I guess).Although it's unlikely that people will use these objects with number of staff lines other than 5, you can make the following code changes to make them independent of staff line count:
Code: (lua) [Select · Download]
local sl = nwcdraw.getStaffProp('Lines')
as remarked by Mike in this posting from 2017There are two signs that you are growing old. One of them is loss of memory, and I can't recall what the other one is.
I really don't remember that specific posting, although I do remember using Arial Unicode MS for certain characters that Times New Roman doesn't have.
Side note: I found the Unicode check mark character by googling "unicode check mark", so I wasn't aware that Charmap or NWC didn't show it.
For the "English" version of the V, which looks like a "tick mark", I have used the "square root" symbol - this is not correct (see attached example from a Rutter score), but I'm right now too lazy to rebuild this with some sort of lines or beziers or whatever.That sounds very much like a gauntlet being thrown. Let me take a look at that (I used beziers in my Arpeggio and Brace objects)
Edit: Might not have to resort to beziers after all. There is a Unicode check mark symbol that appears to be present in Times New Roman. I'm attaching a snippet with the symbol inserted as text. Unicode character U+2713
I haven't yet experimented with the new objects, but I think I see how they might be very useful.
Version 1.1.1 is now available in https://www.opagust.be/?q=content/mxml2nwc
* More permissive treatment for 'line' value in the 'clef' element
* Omitting linebreaks in 'Text' objects.
* Bug fix in slur processing
I'm seeing the correct slur handling for the sample file I sent you, but I'm getting the same mangled |Text and |Tempo objects as before (line break inserted before |Pos)
Edit: My bad, I just realized that the sample file I sent you already had the line breaks stripped out Let me forward a copy of the original XML that hasn't been fixed.
I have tried out your converter on a score that I created in MuseScore some time ago for our choir, namely Randall Thompson's "Alleluia". For the most part it created a very faithful rendition, comparing side by side with the page view in MuseScore. There were a few anomalies:
- I was informed that there were 3 unknown user objects in the score. Going to Manage Objects... I saw the unlikely names of Pos:11.612, Pos:16.046 and Pos:5.522. Opening the nwctxt file in a text editor, I searched for these strings and found the following elements:
It looks like your converter inserted a stray newline for those three elements. I decided to look at the MusicXML file to see whether there were newlines after those elements, and indeed there were. I deleted the trailing newlines and reimported the score, and there were no extraneous user objects. Perhaps your converter could strip any trailing newlines from text elements to prevent this from occurring.
- There were a few instances of incorrectly applied slurs, where the slur did not extend far enough. The slur looks correct in MuseScore, and I did not try to decode what was in the MusicXML file to see if that was causing the problem. If you wish, I can forward the .mxl file to you (along with the MuseScore score, if that helps).
There are a few new Windows 11 features that aren't 100% available yet that I'm interested in checking out once they get rolled out to the general public, including the Linux subsystem and the ability to run Android apps.
OK, here's an example. The top snippet is NWC; the bottom snippet is Sibelius. Staff metrics are roughly the same. The good news here is that looking closely at the Sibelius example shows pretty clearly that its smoother appearance is the result of anti-aliasing raster graphics instead of using vector graphics, so it should be doable in NWC without a lot of recoding. Sibelius uses a better-looking font (that's easily fixable, of course). The bottom line, here, is that the NWC snippet looks amateurish compared to the Sibelius snippet. That can make a huge difference when sending music to calls for scores.The snippets you posted are screen captures from the applications, and don't represent the score output that is printed. I agree that the NWC snippet looks a bit jagged, but that is only what you see while editing the score. Once you print the score to a PDF file, the lines won't be jagged at all. Sibelius is rendering the output in its editor differently, and that does make for a nicer appearance, but again, it's only something that is seen while editing the score.
The largest concern I have about NWC's graphics is the apparent absence of any anti-aliasing at all, which shows up in the slurs, but even more so in the hairpins and beams. This is a common raster-graphics problem, but the "big three" have solved it, possibly by going to vector graphics - which would require a large-scale rewrite of the code, so I hope there's a better way.I don't think this statement is correct. From what I can see, all of NWC's drawing objects are either TrueType fonts or line/curve objects, each of which are vector-based. If you print a score to a PDF file using an appropriate driver, you can zoom in to a ridiculous factor and see that there is no "chunkiness" that would be present if the objects were raster-based. Ultimately, when you print the score, it will need to be rasterized by the laser or ink jet printer at whatever DPI that device supports.
I don't recall what graphical subsystem is used by NWC, but I'm quite certain it handles the various elements as vectors. Perhaps someone who is more familiar with those subsystems can weigh in here. I don't debate the various enhancements that would be nice to have (some of which I discussed above), but I don't want to see NWC's graphic subsystem unfairly discounted.
You posted a reply while I was composing this message, I'll respond to that separately.
I guess it's all a matter of personal preference, but I'm happy with the current form of lyric entry. I'd just like lyrics to allow some additional formatting, such as bold or italics.
I agree with @hmmueller's comments on note spacing. Currently, NWC gives two options in Page Setup for note spacing: "Increase spacing for longer notes" can be on or off. It is my understanding that there are specific rules on how much space is before/after each note/rest duration and bar line, and this checkbox toggles between two different sets of rules. (If @Rick G. were still with us, he would quote those values for us now.) By using spacers (hopefully fewer than the millions suggested previously) those spacing distances can be individually overridden, but as anyone who has ever done this can attest, it's extremely tedious, plus it clutters the score appearance in Edit mode. I think spacers are fine for individual measure tuning, but I'd prefer a better way to control the general staff appearance. One option would be to replace the current "two choice" system with a slider with perhaps 10 choices. Another option would be to have a "Custom..." submenu, that lets the individual spacing values for each duration be entered. Also, there should be an option to change the spacing in the score, in much the same way that instruments can be change by inserting an instrument object in a staff.
Another option that needs upgrading are song lyrics. Better control over line spacing, font properties like italics, and an easier way to change these values in the middle of the score, using a boundary object or something similar.
Text object placement has improved in recent versions, namely the ability to more finely control the vertical placement. However, horizontal place hasn't changed much. There are the various alignment choices that we've always had (Best Fit, Best Fit Forward, As Staff Signature, At Next Note/Bar) combine with Left/Right/Center justification, but I often find myself inserting spacers to "nudge" a dynamic into the position I want, because the available combinations of justification and alignment/placement don't give me what I want. I understand the need to maintain backward compatibility, but perhaps we need a new option that would make it easier to position text and other objects. Maybe some sort of "position with offset" option, with a +/- numeric value that lets me put the object right where I want it.
When I compare the appearance of NWC score to other programs, once thing that I tend to notice is the appearance of slurs. Native NWC note slurs are quadratic Bezier curves, which generally look fine for 2 or 3 notes when the note distance is not too great, but they start looking a bit odd when the slur distance is greater. The user object API includes the ability to draw cubic Bezier curves, which I use in the SlurCubic object. It's possible to get a much nicer looking slur with this type of curve, and I'd like it if NWC used these natively. Of course it's possible to hide a particular slur using a marker object, and then draw a SlurCubic in its place, but that gets tedious quickly.
This final suggestion is more of a convenience item than a "graphical improvement" issue, but I think there should be an easier way to align notes and slurs/ties on multiple layered staves. It has been previous suggested that a staff setting could be added which allows the slur/tie direction on layered staves to change when they are layered. Maybe there could also be a way for a layered staff to "see" the notes on the previous staff, and adjust their appearance based on them. This would be similar to how multiple note chords automatically adjust the stem length, or adjacent note heads will shift so they don't overlap.
I would welcome feedback or questions on the above.
(Edit: I corrected a few typos)
Or better yet, a staff property setting in the next version of NWC that lets you specify the barline height for a percussion staff with a single staff line.
When I examined the registry path you gave, it was empty on my system (that is, it contained only (Default) with (value not set). I ran NWC and went to Tools > Options... > Folders and there was an entry for Object Plugins, which listed ":programdata:\Noteworthy Software\nwc2\UserPlugins". Just for fun, I highlighted this entry and clicked Modify... and then clicked OK without changing anything. I then reran RegEdit32 and lo and behold, there was now a string named UserPlugins in that key, with the expected value. So it appears that NWC will create the string once you modify a folder value from its default. (I should mention that I recently had to reinstall Windows 10, and hence NWC, so my system was in a "clean slate" mode.) I would suggest that if you don't find a UserPlugins string in the registry, that you could assume the default user plugin location that NWC uses.
Thanks again for the quick turnaround.
(It took me a while to find the program. It would be nice if it gave the option of creating a shortcut on my desktop )
Maybe the other people in the thread can comment: does it make more sense or less sense to exclude muted staves rather than hidden ones? Perhaps both?
Edit: I was originally confused by @lawrroc's message, and now I have reread it, and understand that he wanted the parts to be on their own staves, not as a chord, which I have done. @hmmueller's solution is probably more appropriate after all.
I just discovered that if someone is missing the MusikChordSerif font the plugin crashes.Fortunately, NWC 2.75 and later include the font as part of the installation, so the only way it should be missing is if someone intentionally removed it.
... the Markup object somehow remembers the last size of the text ...I would remove the word "somehow". I understand that you are reverse engineering the code and it might not be obvious how it remembers the previous size, but I'd just say that it does. It's possible that the "remembering" might be part of the plugin API.
/wwhiteout: If whiteout is the number 1, text is written in white (I wouldn't know a good use for this, actually). Setting it to 0 activates standard drawing.(Emphasis mine) I have used the whiteout feature in at least one of my plugins, to put a white number on a black dot in a guitar chord chart. However, I believe that Rick has used the command as its actual namesake, to "white out" some actual notation so it can be redrawn "properly". This take careful positioning. Anyway, you might include one or more of these examples in your manual.
Hello Mike,It's hard to believe that I wrote that message 5 years ago... The short answer is "not yet". One of the tricky parts about a spanned slur is that there needs to be a way to specify the slur endpoints at each end of the span. Given that the slur objects are visual only, it seems easier to just notate them as two slurs.
Did you ever found a way to fix that?
As part of my research, I recall that there may have been something along the lines of "perhaps there will be a mechanism in NWC (next version) to make this easier". But we know where that topic leads.
Sorry I don't have better news.
I am paraphrasing him here, but he considered it a sort of toolbox to be able to solve one-off issues in a score, to be able to create something that NWC could not do natively. It's also worth noting that Markup.rg is a display/print only tool - it has no ability to play back. Thus, any of the examples that include extra notes or playback modification like arpeggios or 8va would have to have a hidden staff that does the playback.
I'm grateful for @hmmueller 's XText object, and that it's able to create the notation for this. I suspect that @Rick G. 's Markup.rg object could also be used to create this, but it seems that only Rick knew how to use his object, and he's rather busy at the moment teaching the angels to notate their scores properly.
From the comments that have been written, this notation sounds like a bit of a fringe case, and since XText works for it, I don't think it makes sense for me to further complicate Tempo.ms by adding tied notes.
@hmmueller has got it pretty much spot on, in my opinion. I appreciate the faith that some people have in my understanding of the internals of NWC but except for programming of custom objects, I don't know much more about the NWC code than most of the rest of you here. The one thing I can suggest is that if a custom object can render something in a certain scaling or way, then I would think that NWC itself should be capable of that. Version 2.75 included a number of important native improvements, like being able to position things at 0.01 staff unit precision, as well as the percentage scale factor that @hmmueller mentions. But I have no idea whether this whole idea is currently on the NWC roadmap. Or if, in fact, a road trip is currently planned. There is not currently an active beta in progress (other than the beta version posted several years ago). We will all have to wait until the author of NWC has more to say on the subject.
One way to correct this would be to add spacers to the measures with the hidden notes.
And to be fair, I'm not 100% positive that my MIDI In issues are rooted in NWC. It's not currently a major concern for me, but I thought I'd mention it.
I wonder whether someone has already put together a "how to" that collects this information in one place and gives a few examples. A number of new selectors were created for 2.75 that include some of the plugins I created. In fact, I recall making some small changes to several of the plugins to allow them to display better within a selector. For example, if you put an Arpeggio.ms in a staff with no chord after it, it used to display nothing. Now it displays a "default" arpeggio.
Currently, selectors can only be used to insert NWC notation at the current location. I always thought it would be great if there were a way to create a selector that would run a user tool. Specifically, the user tool code that is present within a particular plugin. Alas, that feature has not yet made its way into NWC.
I have a possible explanation for the extra character: is it possible that there is an "0" text later in your score, that is far above the staff lines? If the measure it is in is in the following system, the text could be printed beneath the staff lines of the previous system. Does my explanation make sense?
For some time I have been considering a user object-based solution to n-tuplets. The approach that made the most sense to me would be to create a series of grace notes that correspond to the desired ntuplets, followed by a rest whose value is the total for the ntuplet. Then you mute the grace notes and make them and the rest invisible, and you put the object in front of them. The object would draw the notes, stems and beams, and could potentially play them also. Does this idea/approach make any sense?
(I held off on doing this in hopes that the next version of NWC would have support for ntuplets. And also because I rarely, if ever, use >3 tuplets.)
In practice, you only need to add a system break barline to the topmost staff, but adding one to each staff will look nicer in the editor. This workaround is documented in the official Noteworthy Composer FAQ, which you can find here.
Hi MikeThanks for the reminder. I should have remembered this, since I did participate on that other thread.
Strictly speaking, it's not NWC2's exporting to MIDI that is the problem. NWC2 doesn't like a string of Instrument changes with no notes between them. This thread explains:
I will let Lawry and Flurmy continue helping you with the custom template thing in NWC 1.75. Perhaps in the background, we'll figure out a way to correct the NWC 2.75 MIDI export behavior so it handles program changes more consistently.
Yes - I use it for creating MIDI files because NWC 2.75 doesn't export to MIDI properly.I would be interested to know what differences you are encountering in MIDI export, that you feel are incorrect with the current version of NWC. I have never encountered bad MIDI exports with it. If you have a sample score that exhibits this, that would be helpful (I still have my NWC 1.75b CD around here somewhere, I supposed it will still install under Windows 10. Or perhaps there is a portable version on the CD)
I'm not sure if what I am about to say makes sense, but could that maybe be done with a user object?Don't think I haven't thought about it I think it would be beyond the scope of a user object to be able to "take over" the playback of all notes, trying to establish its own interpretation of performance styles, articulations, etc. It seems more likely that a future version of NWC could include something to allow this.
Is it possible to customize an instrument so that it responds more or less to note velocity? It seems to me that this should be possible, since when I am playing different pianos on my Yamaha keyboard, it feels that some of them have different touch sensitivity. Some, like Fender Rhodes, change the tone of the note dramatically when you use more velocity. Anyway, if this is possible, then it might be possible to use a piano sound that is less velocity sensitive as a work-around to NWC being unable to customize the behavior of articulations.
Personally, I would very much like the ability to customize the multipliers used for the various articulations (velocity and duration), in the same way that dynamic multipliers can be customized in instrument settings.
User tools are a standard feature of NWC for adding features to the editing and creation of scores, so this should result in the behavior that you want.
NWC has a number of "audit" functions that will correct accidentals, bar line placement, enharmonic spelling and note stem direction. It seems that a tool to audit beat boundaries would be a very nice enhancement. As @Lawrie Pardy says, it should not be too difficult to do this via a user tool. While I consider myself to have reasonable programming skills, I haven't done that many user tools, so I might not be the best person to tackle this. However, there are a number of skilled user tool creators here, who I'm betting are already thinking about how to tackle this. What I can do is to search through Behind Bars for the relevant details/rules, since I happen to own a copy, and I can try to summarize them here if there is interest in creating a tool.
Can you help with another issue? Is it possible to enlarge existing lyrics?Yes, you would do this under Page Setup - the icon that looks like an open book. In that dialog, there are multiple tabs, you want to go to the Fonts tab. On that tab, you would choose the Staff Lyric font, and increase the point size. You can also change the actual font, or use bold or italics.
Hope this helps!
The anchor does not highlight.Just the center part of the anchor will highlight.