Latterly his considerable work has been uploaded to the Scriptorium as well, with our Rich taking over and putting Mike's produce in the appropriate format for upload. I myself have used with gratitude many of Mike's Files as the basis for my own NWC notations, subsequently uploaded in Midi format to my Website.
Auditing the enharmonic spelling is what you need. But ... irritatingly, Noteworthy only does this one way round - and in your case that's the wrong way. But you can still crack the problem by first effecting a transposition - up, or down, one or two semitones; sometimes one works, sometimes the other - then effecting the enharmonic audit, and then transposing back again. In your case, transpose down two semitones, make the audit, and then transpose up two. Voila!
They are to be played as a sequence - 1 - 1,2 - 1,2,3 - 1,2,3,4 - which keeps repeating going back to the start and playing up to the next note, and so on. Much like the attached.
I can see how to do it with special endings, but ... we're limited, are we not, to 7 of them, and I need ... 140-odd. The best I can do is include a duplication of the notes (green) in batches of 7, 14, 21, and so on, each followed by another 7 special endings. Can you think of a better way?
Until relatively recently there was an original Forum accessible at https://noteworthycomposer.com/nwcforum/. Perhaps I nodded off when we were told it was going to be erased, and so didn't see that? Anyway, shouldn't the Forum Numbers Count start from this old one?
Using Noteworthy Files with a suitable emphasis, and the Viewer is good, but as good - and with the advantage that it works for people with Macs, Tablets and Smartphones - is turning them into Midi versions. I make a Master Midi - with all the dynamics and so forth - and then directly prepare from it whichever Voice-emphasised versions are needed. For this I usually employ Chris Hills's - https://chrishills.org.uk/ChrisHills/midiplay/index.html - MidiPlay, which works fine. You can see/listen to the results on my Website, www.learnchoralmusic.co.uk,
In vocal scores where two voices - soprano and alto, say - are shown on the same staff it is occasionally the case that one or other voice is divided into two for a single bar. When depicting this, and especially when the notes are semibreves, and thus without tails, it is common to show the divided voice with the two notes "combined" by a symbol character that looks like an open square brackets. This shows that those two notes are sung by one of the Voices, the other (third) note being sung by the other voice.
Does anyone know what this symbol is called - if it has a musical name - and how to implement it in Noteworthy?
Tell me; did you ever persevere with my suggestion - almost exactly 3 years ago - of note entry using not the mouse but instead effectively only the number pad and the right-hand + and - keys, plus a bit of left-handed Control and Shift work? It's really very fast when you get used to it!
I'm not unwilling, I merely thought that chatting directly to Richard might be quickest.
OK. Here you are:-
>> > Hi, Richard. >> > >> > At 14:19 29/05/2017, you wrote: >> > >> >>Not aware that there was any system maintenance - but what is it >> >>that you think is broken? >> > >> > A couple of days ago an attempt to visit the Website got me >> >a message along the lines of "Site not available. Routine >> >maintenance in progress" >> > >> > Then, the next (?) day my visit showed me more or less this >> >- see Forum attachment - but without your upload (and, of course, >> >without mine). Firstly, all input between David P's and yours had >> >vanished, and secondly everything was marked "new" despite the fact >> >that it wasn't ... and "new" won't go away after reading the latest posts. >> > >> > You can tell Mike Shawaluk, who just come online.
>> > >> > And I've just noticed that my own post has now gone! >> >
> At 14:42 29/05/2017, you wrote: > >>Can't see the same as you and your post is still there. > > Hmmm. Fascinating, Captain. I'm using a PC running Windows >2000 and Firefox. The Forum Homepage now shows Mike's but not mine, >and nothing else after your Scriptorium update entry. Everything still "new". > > However ... > > My Android-running Nexus 4 Firefox shows MY post but not >Mike's and also nothing else after your Scriptorium update. > > ? > >
>=============================================== > > I see the same with android nexus 4 and chrome. > >===============================================
> > Ah, no sorry - I DO see Mike's answer to my post. I misread >the phone's display.
Posted a response on the forum. See if you can see it.
There is more, but ... the conversation ends thus:-
At 15:29 29/05/2017, you wrote:
You have to be logged in for it to know who your are and therefore if "it" knows that you have seen a post.
Errrmmmm ... no, that's not the way I remember it. I rarely log in, but it still knows me (web address, I guess), and if a post is new to me then it says so but after I've read it it isn't, and doesn't. So something has changed somewhere; everything is now "new" regardless.
Also, you have to be logged in so that "it" knows that you are allowed to see all posts - for example, only nwc2 users and virtuosos can see Back stage I think.
Mmmm - but at one stage previously some such posts were shown in the Forums listing when I am logged on, but now they're not. Only one is now, for instance -
State of the beta? William Ashworth Back Stage A week ago
So you need to be logged in so that "it" knows you are a virtuoso.
Something has changed somewhere!
I'm sure you know all this. Still recovering from those birthday drinks ? Or perhaps take more alcohol with the water
Sort of, yes, and yes - in that order.
And ... no-one has commented upon my seeing a page saying something like along the lines of "Site not available. Routine maintenance in progress"
At 17:00 29/05/2017, you wrote:
> Errrmmmm ... no, that's not the way I remember it. I rarely >log in, but it still knows me (web address, I guess), and if a post >is new to me then it says so but after I've read it it isn't, and >doesn't. So something has changed somewhere; everything is now "new" >regardless.
You normally don't have to log in because once you have done that - it can last for ever unless something changes it. So when you log in, there is a check box that says something like "Stay logged in for ever".
No. That is, I always log in and then I always log out (except right now, where I'm in for 60 minutes).
I don't want to go an check that because I don't want to logout. I can't remember what my password is. I have it written down somewhere. I suspect that you were logged in "for ever" but then for some reason, you were logged out.
> And ... no-one has commented upon my seeing a page saying >something like along the lines of "Site not available. Routine >maintenance in progress"
Well, I didn't see that - but that happens every so often. But as far as I can see, there is nothing different recently.
OK, maybe it's just co-incidence, but ... something has changed!
Yes. I may have been one of those that ranted about this before.
Almost all my use of Noteworthy involves the keying-in of Choral Works - I'm working on Handel's "Deborah" at the moment, which is typical - and invariably any "lone" (not part of a group) note on the centre line of the upper/treble staff - B - is shown tail up and yet infuriatingly when keyed in NWC always shows it tail down.
It really would be nice to have the ability to change the default!
Using Noteworthy I prepare a lot of Midi Files of major Choral Works, which Files I then upload to my Website for any Singer to use to help them learn the Work. Sometimes I "borrow" Midi Files previously prepared by others, and import these into Noteworthy so that I can fettle them into my preferred format before uploading them (with thanks to their original maker).
For the most part, Noteworthy is quite good about importing Midis, and provides an NWC version which is reasonably accurate and usable. Sometimes, however, it isn't, and doesn't.
Here is an example using NWC2.75. It is the soprano line of the Agnus Dei from the Requiem by a well-known modern Composer, and I have shown the line in two forms. The upper staff is as the Composer wrote it (or, at least, as I keyed it in). The lower is what I get if I export the File as a Midi File, and then import it back in, otherwise untouched.
There are, clearly, several things "wrong" with the imported staff.
Firstly, all the time signatures are "misplaced", being positioned before rather than after the relevant bar line.
Secondly, the staff has been given the "wrong" enharmonic signature.
Thirdly, Noteworthy fails to "recognise" the triplets.
Fourthly, ... there are other differences, but these are not Noteworthy's fault, because they relate to data not passed on in the Midi File - dynamic markings, beaming, some tied notes.
It's the time signature and enharmonic tuning matters with I find most irritating. My question, then, is: can Noteworthy be changed to deal with them, or am *I* doing something wrong, and is there any way I can force Noteworthy to get them right?
In much the same way it would be nice if the "topic" line - which in this present case is
"Topic: A wish - another OK box in the character map window... previous topic - next topic"
- was repeated at the bottom, so that, after reading several comments/replies on a Topic, one could stay down at the bottom and then click forwards or backward with the previous topic - next topic buttons.
It is possible that by "tough phones" irasusy79 was actually referring to "tuff" phones - http://www.tuffphones.co.uk/ . They all seem to run using Android as the OS; as I understand it, there is not going to be a version of Noteworthy running under Android.
Rick G probably thought it was too obvious to mention this, but ... I didn't know the answer, so I went via "Help" File options dialog tab" to Tools|Options|File ... and found the tick box he is referring to.
In Noteworthy the tempo change commands "rallentando", "ritardano" and "ritenuto" all seem to do the same thing; gradually change - up or down! - the tempo to the next tempo marking on the staff. So, basically stick one in whenever you want the slowdown to start, and then insert an appropriate reduced tempo mark just before the end - say, at the start of the last bar. If you want a "ritenuto" - which usually has a sudden but small reduction in tempo at the very start of the change, put that in just in front of the "rit" marking. So, a crotchet tempo of 100 might change to 90 just before a "rit" two or three bars from the end, and be followed by a 60 at the start of the last bar. You can make these markings invisible if you wish, though I don't.
Going back to Musicalgenocide's query ... I am not a guitar player, but I can imagine strumming the strings - with successive down and up strokes - where each down stroke is slightly more vigorous, and thus louder, than the following up stroke, with the first down stroke of a set a bit louder still. So, with this strumming on one note staff, why not include a hidden corresponding, "parallel", staff, using the same Midi channel, on which is notated simply a matching succession of rests and a suitable set of dynamics (preferably effected using the MPC Volume or Expression command rather than an actual dynamic, so that they do not affect the overall loudness set for the note staff). Something like the attached.
Possibly there could be made micro tempo changes (using the MPC Tempo command) in the same way.
Thanks for all your comments. Once I move over to NWC2 - 2.75 - I will endeavour to make use of them.
Meanwhile ... still using W2K I fear I may have to continue adjusting each staff, one by one, changing the pitch using the Staff Properties (F2)/Midi window (in 2.75, of course, this pitch control has been moved over to the selected Instrument Window).
It really, really would be nice if I could transpose - ie, modify the pitch - the lot all in one fell swoop!
Of course, one possibility, albeit rather time-consuming, is to convert the File to nwctxt, do a find-and-replace of the several "trans" commands, and then convert back to plain nwc. That works - provided I choose the right variety of plain text to convert back to - though it's a bit draggy to import to 2.75, save as nwctxt, load into Notepad and do the f-&-r and save, import back into 2.75, and finally export as 1.75. Still, worth doing with a File with lots of staves.
I know that in the past a wish-list item has been an expansion of the "Transpose" function to work not only on one Staff at a time but in addition, and if so chosen, on the entire (multi-staff) Score in one fell swoop. This latter would be very convenient when trying to match/compare a previously-written NWC Score with a recording of the Work that has been made at a lower pitch - typical of many Classical pieces which were originally intended for playing at "Baroque" pitch (C=415) rather than modern pitch (C=440). Changing an orchestral score staff by staff, while perfectly possible, is a bit of a drag! And it's especially irritating for me, when working on a Choral Score, such as a Mass, with maybe ten or more independent sections.
So: can we do a "whole Score" transpose now, with 2.75 (if so, I can't find how!), or ... has someone made a User Tool for this?
Has anyone come across problems playing either NWC or Midi - or, indeed, both - Files under W10?
I have a 5-year old PC originally using W7 but recently upgraded to W10. I find that when I try and play a Midi File using large numbers of channels/tracks/staves I get repeatable drop-out of one (or more) of the staves (this might be channel-related, but I'm not sure). Moreover, when I play the NWC File from which the Midi was derived, I get the same drop-out - as I suppose I might expect, since, or so I understand, NWC Files are actually played via Midi.
An example is the orchestrally-backed 7-voice Zadok the Priest, which requires 17 staves, downloadable from the Scriptorium - I attach a simplified NWC sample of this (Bars 22 to 30 of the Work), in which everything has been set to "p" except for the Tenor voice which is "ff". This plays perfectly OK under W2K (and I am told it does under XP, too). However, under W10, the Tenor voice drops out again and again.
The drop-out effect, which occurs whether using NWC 1.75 (which I normally do) or 2.51a, doesn't seem to be related to the usual Midi problem of having too many staves/instruments for the number - limited to 15 - of available Midi channels.
Mmmm. Rich has been gently nagging me about this, but ... since for the most part my Files are Choral Works used simply for rehearsal assistance, and 1.75 generally provides any sound effects I can be bothered to utilise (and anyway 2.5 et al, and now 2.75, seem mostly to be about visual improvements), I have never found it necessary or even especially advantageous to move up. However, once 2.75 comes out for real I will bite the bullet (and probably break another tooth, but hey, that's life), and switch over. And I might even use my W7-upped-to-W10 machine!
Yes, Mike's right. I'm afraid I'm still using NWC 1.75 running under W2K, which doesn't seem to get so tetchy about Administrator Powers (or the lack of them). My apologies for probably misleading you.
It might be something as simple as you're trying to save it in the wrong place.
You must do a "Save as ..."
You must then go to the "Save in ... "part of the "Save" window, and navigate to where Noteworthy has actually stored the Custom/Rythm and other Template Files. On my Computer that's C:/Program Files/Noteworthy/Template.
Try again, and come back and tell us how you get on.
The problem is to provide a simple way which keeps the score looking the same, and overall playing the same, but still gives the "breathing" gaps indicated by the Score's punctuation.
Rick's cunning use of hidden grace notes is interesting, but somewhat less "simple" than dotting and slurring. Good, though, and worth thinking about if you really need to keep the appearance right while also having it sound right.
Bill's breath marks with a real length insert a real pause, which unacceptably disturbs the flow of the music. And they don't transfer to Midi. And anyway it's the _punctuation_ which defines the breathing space.
Bart's suggestion of a zero-length breath mark and a sostenuto performance style marking is, in the circumstances, of little help; the punctuation indicates where the singer should breath (so a breath mark is unnecessary), while "sostenuto" doesn't do anything special either in Noteworthy or in Midi (as he subsequently notes).
So I may have to stick with a slurred staccato/staccatissimo. But thanks anyway.
Incidentally, I see that the sounding length of notes in NWC2.5 - as opposed to 1.75; sorry, Richard - increases in the following sequence (which may be of use to someone):-
Staccatissimo Staccato Slurred staccatissimo Slurred staccato Semplice (or one of the other performance styles which has no effect, such as Marcato) Tenuto/Legato
You say: "Perhaps I'm missing something, but why don't you use the Breath Mark with its pause of multiple 16ths as required?"
Because (a) it puts a real pause in the playing, which then upsets the flow of the music (which is no good if all you want to do is use the punctuation as an opportunity to take a breath), and (b) because it doesn't transfer to Midi (all my output is destined for my Website in Midi format, for use as Rehearsal Files on any machine more or less independent of OS and software).
Choral singing is full of punctuation, and sometimes this is where the singers are expected to snatch a breath.
In my NWC 1.75 Choral Rehearsal Files I usually deal with this - providing a shortened note, and so leaving breathing room in the sound output but without actually deviating too much from the Score notation - by marking the note staccato but at the same time slurring it to the next note. This lengthens the note sound to something longer than staccato but a little shorter that plain "semplice", with a significant gap before the next note.
This simple and easily-applicable technique provides a resulting breathing space gap that has a length that depends on the length of the basic note. Generally it sounds fine, though some modification may be needed if the basic note is long - a semibreve, say - while the breathing space is required to be quite short. I usually cope with this by splitting the long basic note into two shorter notes tied together, and then applying the slurred staccato technique to the second of the two.
A problem arising from using this technique is that the NWC Score then looks rather odd/messy - which I don't usually mind, because I'm really only interested in what it sounds like, but it must be rather irrtating to the rest of us who perhaps want to print the Score out, and have to "clean" it up first. So: can anyone suggest an alternative (simple) method to achieve the desired breathing-space effect that leaves the Score looking OK?
You say: "... Personally I believe that Noteworthy's in-line display is easier to follow on today's wide-angle screens, with only a limited number of flip-backs to the LH edge."
Well, yes, perhaps - and the in-line display has the benefit of being more like the standard "score" commonly shown in most hymn books.
You add: "With a formatted score, as with Sibelius or Musescore the frequent line changes and page changes can be more confusing and harder to follow."
Mmmm. On the other hand, if it's a Choral Work you're singing, then practising while looking at a representation of the real score that you use in a performance is surely best?
Actually, displaying a hymn - where basically you only have the Choral staves (and only two of them at that!) - in the normal formatted way should be perfectly OK ... and will almost never require more than one page, so page turning shouldn't be an issue.
Incidentally, I discovered, to my surprise, that when - as you suggest - you use the Viewer's print-preview capability to display a formatted score while the File is actually playing, it automatically shows that page currently being played at the moment you initiate the preview. It would seem, then, that it shouldn't be too difficult to arrange that the displayed preview page changes to keep matching what's being played.
If you are wanting to display the score - properly formatted in conventional sheet music layout - while playing the music ... that is, if you want Noteworthy to do this - then you're out of luck. Sibelius and Finale and a number of others can do it, but with Noteworthy probably the best you can do is print the Noteworthy File out and display it on one screen while, quite separately, playing the NWC (or Midi) File independently.
In the past people have requested that Noteworthy be able to play from a formatted score, but so far such a capability has not been provided.
You're right, of course - and you're right; I should get out more! [:-)]
Mind you, I'd quite like the ... label to float on top of the staff (and be individually movable up and down, as seems fit) rather than being inserted in a fixed position before its start. This might be partially possible were the panel to be made transparent? Still, I'll give this more thought.
When working with a fairly complex score, with a large number of staves, it would be very convenient if each staff name, or staff label, or some bit of associated and relevant text, could "float" at the left hand edge of the screen, so that I could always see at a glance which staff is what without having to zip back to the start (and then back to my place). This isn't possible with NWC 1.75 (which I am still using), and I don't think it can be arranged with NWC 2.5 et al, though I'd like someone to show me I'm wrong and how it can be achieved.
That's fine for one note on top of the other, but for one note above the other you need to force the tails.
By the way: where does your dead crab "sign-off" come from? When I google it Google reveals that in Monty Python's "Whizzo butter" sketch it was actually "10% more or less" - at least, that's what most of the hits say. [:-)]
If you persevere with it, I think you'll find that entering the notes from the (computer) keyboard rather than using the mouse is by far the quickest and simplest way. The "secret" lies in making full use of the numeric pad on the right of the keyboard - and I'm assuming that, like me, you're right handed. With Num Lock off, and coupled (with the left hand) with the (left) Ctrl and Shift keys, the keys in this pad do almost every conventional thing you'll ever need to do - moving up and down and back and forth with the 2,4,8,6 arrow keys and the Pg Up/Dn keys, flipping tails, affixing ties (with the slash). Best of all, the plus and minus keys increase or decrease the length of the note next to be entered, so "++", for instance, doubles and then re-doubles whatever value the note had when you started, and "---" halves, re-halves and halves again the note value.
With your right hand resting on the desk adjust the right-hand corner of the keyboard, you can reach all the pad keys in a manner which soon becomes a simple touch-typing affair. And you can reserve mouse use for making large sweeping movements over the screen, as for selecting a long line of notes or moving around from one side or staff to another.
So going back to your original problem; there are many ways/sequences of keystrokes to key in the notes to achieve what you want, but here's one.
Imagine you're starting with an empty staff. Noteworthy will open the score with the cursor sitting on the central line, and if - but don't! - you press the "Enter" key will put in the default starting value, a crotchet with its tail down. First, then, enter 4 line-downs (the pad 2/down arrow), then hit "Enter". You'll enter a crotchet (automatically tail-up) on the bottom line. Then enter 2 line-downs, hit the "+" key once, and then hit "Ctrl Enter"; Noteworthy will insert the minim, tail-down, under the crotchet. Then enter 2 line-ups (the pad 8/up arrow), hit the "-" twice, and "Enter", and there's the first quaver in place. Next, enter one line-up, and hit "Enter" again, and there's the second quaver. Finally, do 2 Shift line-lefts (the pad 4/left arrow), to select the two quavers, followed by Ctrl B to beam them (you can reach Ctrl B with your left hand little and index fingers).
As an alternative, you can enter the minim first - from the initial "empty staff, default crotchet" position enter 6 line-downs, a single "+", a Shifted line down (that forces Noteworthy to enter the next note tail-down; Shifted line-up would force a tail-up entry), and "Enter".
Then to add the crotchet, 2 line ups, a single "-", a Shifted line-down (that cancels the tail-up, and thus toggles back to the default; a Shifter line-up would have made the next note tail-up, and all following notes, which you might not want), and "Ctrl Enter".
And then a single "-", a line-up, and "Enter" for the first quaver,
and a single line-up and "Enter" for the second quaver.
Incidentally, if you want two same-value notes - two crotchets, say - to sit one above the other but with the tails in opposite directions, then you must force each tail. And no, you can't have the upper note tail-down while the lower note is tail-up unless you achieve this using layering.
Persevere. It'll come quite easily after a bit. I know! I've done lots and lots and lots of them.
I can recommend Mailwasher - www dot firetrust dot com - for which a free version is available. It does a stripped down preview so - they say - you can see the plain text in the email without any risk.
Mmmm. Thanks. I'll give it some thought - but at the moment I've chickened out, and gone with Richard's solution above (default endings). You can see it in the Agnus Dei at http://www.learnchoralmusic.co.uk/Charpentier/Messe de Minuit-Schott/minuit-messe.html - and that despite the fact that, on a recording I listened to, the repeats are in fact played after the Dal Segno.
Thanks, Rick G. I need to think about your suggestion; to work out how you've arranged the special endings and the local repeats - and how you've blended a flow control staff with other staves not using the same flow control commands. Interesting. I've vaguely thought about that for other reasons, but never so far tried to implement it.
- is saying about this ... but I see that the Default can be made any of the numbered endings and will cause that ending to be played - and to be the one played - after the Segno.
"If you do this then then Noteworthy will play the final note in the repeated bars after the DS marking and will then stop at the proper place.
"After the DS marking, it will not play the repeated sections twice, but then as I said, I don't think it's meant to."
Yes. So in fact Noteworthy is playing properly according to the Rules. OK. I should have looked at this Webpage first. Sorry about that!
"Since your second time bars are the same as the first time bars, if you really want the repeat after the DS instruction, then use local repeats instead of master repeats. It works - I just tested it."
They're not quite, but, yes, I understand the point.
Here's a sequence "extracted" from Schott's edition of Charpentier's "Messe de minuit de Noel" [the Agnus Dei on pages 64/5] (don't worry about the huge missing chunks; they're not relevant).
I expect the red bit to be played (twice), followed by the green bit (twice) followed by the blue bit, and then back to the Segno and the red bit (twice) and the green bit (twice) again, and then stop at the Fine. However, as you'll see, following the jump back to the Segno at the start it plays up to the 1st Special Ending then jumps direct to the beginning of the green bit (once only) and thence to the end of the blue (and stops).
It would help a bit if "Font", or "Display font" or "Notation font" - or something similar - were an item in the Help Contents Index. On the other hand, "Text Command" and "Text Expression Properties" are there, and do provide potentially useful assistance!
In any "help" system it's always a problem knowing what to look up when you don't know how to do something! In the old DOS days I vaguely remember looking up, and failing to find, "Delete", which seemed only to be indexed under "Erase". [:-)]
What you're experiencing is probably the result of the Performance Style you're using - see the "Insert" Menu.
NWC 1.75 has effectively three such styles - Legato, Semplice and Staccato; NWC 2.5 et al adds a staccatissimo. All the other styles, though named differently, are actually each one or other of these. For example, Tenuto is the same as Legato, and Marcato is the same as Semplice.
When you first fire up NWC, and enter notes with the style undefined, it plays Semplice, which is as you described, with a clear cut-off and a hard start. Though in reality the end result differs somewhat depending on what Instrument you're using, you can have the notes run together better, and so sound "smoother", using - as you might expect - Legato/Tenuto.