Skip to main content

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Susanna

1
It sounds to me from what you say, that your two new staffs are very short.  Less than one system (length across the page).

If this is the case, try extending the staffs by adding duplicate bars until at least the end of the first system
I added a few visible bars where I didn't have them before, and that fixed it.  Thanks for your help, anyway.  I guess that was pretty much what the problem was.
2
I took a piece of music that I had previously modified and made another change which required the addition of two staves.  Each of the two new staves contains 2 rests and 3 notes, along with - on one staff only - a lyric line with two words (3 syllables). Each of them, of course, is layered with another staff. Everything "works" just fine, and it looks OK on the viewer, but when I print (or even preview the print) those two new staves are missing altogether.  I've tried printing with everything unlayered, and they don't show up at all.  I'm sure it's got to be something simple, but I can't figure out.

Edit:  I just made a small change to the one staff - reversed the stems of the notes, and added some rests where they should have been, but weren't practical to add without the extra layer - that staff now shows up on the print preview.
3
There are many aspects of NWC I love, but trying to enter more than one part to a stave is not one of them.  I realize this CAN be done - clumsily - with layering, or even more clumsily by pretending it's a lot of chords.  Is there really a fundamental technical reason why NWC could not cope with entering multiple lines on a single stave?  Could a note not be tagged as belonging to one part rather than another?  E.g. by temporary colour-coding?
Seems to me that would be more clumsy than layering. 

Edited - I responded to this without seeing the other posts.  I don't know why it came up on my screen first.  So just ignore it.  (Is there a "delete" function to handle stupid mistakes like this?)
4
Hello all,

I was struggling with "Mon amant de Saint Jean", which I am putting into Noteworthy and Midi for a French choir.
The structure of the verses, refrain, bridge and coda is:
A B C D
   B C   E
   B        F

Then, I remembered that I had a Noteworthy file with "repeat" somewhere in its name. "Repeat Clever Trick.nwc," it was called.
It was not quite what I wanted, but the idea was good.
From that, I created another flow-demo, and you will find the clip here. (Another flow from what I described above, but the idea is the same.)
One certain R.G. may have found more ways of doing it, and I will be happy to see if that is the case! Well, here goes Trick.

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.51,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Tempo|Base:Half|Tempo:60|Pos:9
|Key|Signature:C|Tonic:C
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:-1
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatOpen
|Ending|Endings:4
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:4
|Bar
|Ending|Endings:1,2
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:0
|Bar
|Ending|Endings:2,3
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:1
|Bar
|Ending|Endings:1,2
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:2
|Ending|Endings:1,2,3,4
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatClose
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:3
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

cheers, Rob
Gonna save that - it looks like something I might be able to use from time to time!
5
Many thanks for your latest helpful  messages Mike and William. Thanks to your tip Mike, about toolbars, I now have my old friends the semibreve through to the hemidemisemiquaver once again at my disposal! I think I'll wait until tomorrow night before tackling the Pardypack William. One other thing I have forgotten though is how to hide staves.
     Cheers,
          John.
On the page setup - the first "page" has the names of the staff.  Normally they all have "x" in the box next to the staff name. To hide the staff, click on the box to remove the "x", and you have hidden the staff.
6
I was mistaken about my viewer; it is 2.5.6a
7
My Viewer is 2.55, but Composer is 2.51a. No problems, except that sometimes, in viewer (so far, only one piece) the highlighting jumps ahead of the view (or the view lags behind the highlighting).  Already been mentioned, and not worth a serious look at, since it's extremely rare.
8
I use Firefox's adblocker, but I can't imagine it would eliminate the problem.  I would think it would be more likely to cause it.  On the other hand, problems I have due to the adblocker are usually clearly defined, and don't leave you guessing - well, maybe not that clearly.  If something grinds away for a while, and you see the script-blocker bar at the bottom of your computer, with the the "Options" selection at the right end, you can click on that, and then allow - either temporary or permanently - the "offending" page.  That doesn't seem to be your problem, though.
9
OK, I'll try that now.

It worked.
10
OK, I found it - it works the same as the print preview, and it works OK for me.
11
Did you mean the print preview?  Works just fine for me.
12
Well, since a long time I only use Firefox and I remember having used the preview many times.
I can't say exactly when it stopped to work, but I think it's not such a long time.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/754843
Susanna, you're using Firefox. Does the preview works for you?
Honestly, I don't know what 'preview' is.  I just know that the new version of firefox caused a few minor problems for me.  Tell me what it is, and I'll check it out.
13
Scary, since I just upgraded to the latest version of Firefox.  Did you check to see if Firefox is blocking any "add-ons"?  I just ran into the case where it was blocking some outdated add-ons - also blocked NWC viewer when I tried to look at something on the scriptorium; I just had to tell it to "allow" the add-on.  It didn't care if I ran it on my computer, but running it on the NCW site "alerted" it.
14
I have now tested ver 2.51a of the Viewer. You can see the problem clearly with Josh Hauck's version of
Ave Maria from the Scriptorium. Start playback around the 1:55 mark. When it jumps, the play location is way off to the right. NoteWorthy Composer does a much better job.
Yep, I looked at that, and that is exactly what happened.  In Composer, it did work correctly.  That was the first time I saw anything like that.
15
Mike:
1. The separate viewer program
2. The latest version (not beta)
16
I just upgraded to the latest version of Firefox yesterday, and I notice now when playing a piece, it plays several notes past the end of what displays before changing the display.  This seems to happen only in Viewer Mode.  It also seems to be related to the fact that in Viewer Mode, when the piece goes back to the Master Repeat open, the display is set several bars before the beginning, and this seems to be the number of bars that play "ahead" before being displayed.  (Am I making any sense here?)
17
Thank you, Lawrie!  And a Merry Christmas to you and yours!
18
General Discussion / Re: "A New NWC 3?"
If it does everything you want it to do, it will have to use massive resources, and the greater the resource requirement, the more buggy it is likely to be.
19
General Discussion / Re: "A New NWC 3?"
I'm beginning to think this is some kind of trolling 'cos it sure is non-sensical...  Wish I had a "shrug" emoticon...
Will this work (if it shows up - I've never tried to post emoticons here before).
<Image Link>
I guess it just gives a link to the smiley, but the link works.
20
Alt-255 used to be good fun in the Dos-days.
In modern Dos-boxes it does not work anymore: you could have a file like Holy<alt-255>Cow.txt which showed in the directory as "Holy Cow.txt" - and nobody could find it.
Worse still, a filename could consist of a single Alt-255 - and you would hardly notice it.

But hey, old hat - and a discarded hat, at that.

Having said that, 255 (as the highest possible number in 16 bits) may still serve as a special character, and you have found it.
Alt-0255 is quite different: a 4-digit code denotes a Unicode character.
For instance, Alt-128 is simply a character of the old Dos Ascii-set, whereas Alt-0128 is the Euro-symbol €. Hey.

Well, that's about enough for a side note.
It might make for a good character to use in a password (if you don't forget it).
21
General Discussion / Re: "A New NWC 3?"
It took me a great effort to read it. No paragraphs, no indentations, very long sentences, mysterious concepts (diagonal retrograde?)

Can anyone explain it to me?
I am in full agreement with you!  White space is your "friend!"
22
Instead of cluttering up the thread, I decided to start a new one.  Rick, from the example you gave me, it seems it should work as I wanted, but I've come across another issue - there are separate endings to the two chorus lines, and I'm not sure how deal with that.
Thanks!  I'm still a little shaky on the software, but there is really an awful lot to learn.  I start something that doesn't look too difficult, then I run up against something like this.  Rich has gone over a lot of stuff with me on other things I have worked on, and I have learned a great deal in the last few months.  It pays to ask questions, even if it makes you feel dumb!

Edit: Now I really feel dumb!  I quoted me instead of you.

I'm finding out what more of the options do, too!
23
Instead of cluttering up the thread, I decided to start a new one.  Rick, from the example you gave me, it seems it should work as I wanted, but I've come across another issue - there are separate endings to the two chorus lines, and I'm not sure how deal with that.
24
General Discussion / Re: Two line Chorus
Perhaps this attachment does what you want.
I just checked over that clip again, and it does do what I want; I just have to figure out how to implement it. 
25
General Discussion / Re: Two line Chorus
Original is for a one measure Chorus. Here is an attachment for a two measure Chorus. HTH
I don't think I did it exactly the way you showed; I'm not sure about how you handled all the different endings.  I have local repeats around everything, master repeats around the chorus with 1st ending; 2nd ending indicated with a "4" for 4 verses.  It looks like you put "endings" to include all the verses, with the endings juggled a bit for the chorus;  I don't quite get it.  (Don't mind my ignorance, I've just been getting the hang of this software in the last few months).
26
Well, almost.  Now it highlights both lines of the chorus on both times through.
27
General Discussion / Re: Two line Chorus
Perhaps this attachment does what you want.
That looks like it might; I'll try it.
28
I want the chorus to repeat with different words - but I want it to do the same thing every time as it does on the first verse.  After the first verse, it only highlights the "repeat" words both times.  Am I clear enough, or does this sound muddled?  Yeah, Richard helped me out a lot with figuring out this stuff, but this is not quite the same as anything I've done before.
29
I've also got a problem with repeats, no Segnos, but the chorus repeats with different words.  After the first verse & chorus, only the "repeat" words of the chorus are hi-lited; it will repeat the chorus, but the second repeat words are always hi-lited, whether the first time through or the repeat.  I've tried different tactics, but can't seem to make it work right (honestly, I don't remember what all I've tried; it's been a while since I worked on it.
30
I can't remember where I found it.  I just now looked at Flurmy's thread on "False acciaccatura," which I think was where I found it originally, but I don't remember, and don't remember what it was like.  What I did when I had arpeggios that went across two staves (bass & treble), I created the actual (complete) arpeggio on a tenor clef, and hid it.  It was quite an arduous task for me, because I have had no experience with the tenor clef, and it was ticklish to get all the notes right.  Especially since there were many above and below the clef.
31
Isn't this sort of thing being addressed in the new release? Or was that just a "test"?
32
In any case, I figure anything new I can learn, even if I don't plan to use it in the near future is worth learning.
33
Not that I'm looking for any such thing, but I looked where you said and didn't even see a program folder. Don't know how I could tell if it was hidden.
34
OK, they only show up after you start the procedure to add text.  Now I get it.
35
These are courtesy accidentals I believe - just reminders that an accidental is in place, and have no effect on the music.

If you want to include then in your score, simply use text items.  For a sharp, use characters "(d)" from the staff symbols font (or staff cue symbols if you want a smaller one).


Code: (nwc) [Select · Download]
|Text|Text:"(d)"|Font:StaffSymbols|Pos:10|Wide:N|Justify:Left|Placement:BestFit|Color:0|Visibility:Default

I am not particularly interested in the original topic here, but I would like to know where I find the "StaffSymbols" font.  Is that new to the Beta release?  It's not in Page setup that I can access.  Or is it a special "unofficial" font?
36
What I should have said, it seemed to play the grace notes like "regular" notes.  -  after the treble chord had sounded.
37
   Hi again, Susanna.

   Strange.  It plays OK to me.  But ... try this one - a "revised" version of Rick's - and tell us how it sounds.

   MusicJohn, 18/Aug/14

Now that one was really weird.  It played the treble chord first, then played all the grace notes, followed by the bass chord.

The other sample was actually like something I had already tried, without success.
38
Just downloaded that and played it on my computer - it still plays the bass chord after the treble chord.  Could it maybe be some setting on my computer?
39
I have been trying to synchronize those two chords with bits and pieces of what I have been shown here, but nothing seems to work - except removing the grace note altogether.
40
Indeed the tricks used in my example are not so trivial. (You need to be Rick to discover all of them ;-)
Anyway they are explained in the thread False acciaccatura


In the wee hours of this morning, it just occurred to me what you had done there - you had make an arpeggio across 2 staves - and to think that, on two pieces that I did, I went to all the trouble of putting the arpeggios on a hidden tenor staff - and I have never before known how a tenor staff worked.  Doggedly working up and down from middle C, trying to get everything right.  Bad enough that I was unfamiliar with the tenor staff, so many notes went above and below the staff.

Yeah, it's going to be a while before I figure everything out.  I think I am going to have to print some other stuff out to study later.
41
I'm pretty sure I got all the notation corrections done.  Will work on the other stuff later.  Time for me to get off the computer!
42
That's because you are still running 1.75. It stopped working on the newer versions.
He couldn't have played it on 1.75, because it was created in 2.51a.
43
My head is spinning!  MusicJohn, thanks for the comments.  You've got my head swimming!  I printed your post so that I can study it at my leisure.  Flurmy, I don't recognize some of the objects in the segment you posted; I will try reading the code and see if I can figure it out.  Um, it seems that the objects I can't figure out are invisible muted gracenotes that don't look like gracenotes but I can't figure out how they are created.  Hey, I'm rather a neophyte to this software, so pardon my ignorance.  Anyway, thanks for all the help - so far.  Maybe I can get it figured out later.
44
I just used text for the articulations, because my sound board doesn't seem to accommodate them very well.  I have to turn it almost full volume to hear the "p" indicated notes.  Which makes other parts extremely loud.
45
   

   Hi, Susanna.

   Presumably by now you have completed your rendition of the Largo?  Perhaps you'd like to tell us how you got on ... even let us see your resultant File (which I'm sure we'd find of interest)?

   MusicJohn, 14/Aug/14

Yes, I finished it, without the pedal notations, because I can't find any kind of font to handle them - they have so many that are up/down on one note, and the characters I used on another piece won't work for that.  In any case, on the other one I mentioned, it doesn't look right in either the software or the viewer, but I got it to work for the print.

One other little problem I was unable to solve with Largo was the final chord - on the treble clef there is a single chord, on the bass clef, a chord preceded by a grace note, and it winds up sounding the chords separately
46
General Discussion / Re: 8 octave
At this time, still just a text insert. Shift the sound up via a hidden clef or an instrument patch.
Ah, I guess you answered it.  You can shift the octave within a clef dialog box.  The clef function has an octave-shift function (giving detail, in case user is as "slow" as I am.  Or maybe some other user might need extra info.)
47
I wouldn't say it was incomprehensible, just maybe a bit on the technical side. Some folks here are less computer savvy than others :)  I did understand it and found it interesting, but since I write software for a living, I'm probably not your average Noteworthy Composer user.
Yeah, I didn't check out Rick's response, but we techies often forget that everybody hasn't learned the same things we have.  I'm not all that comfortable with NWC yet; I can read the code files - I should be able to write a complete piece using NWCTXT, but it's more fun and satisfying to just write the music.  That can get pretty complex at times, too.
48
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
Thanks!
49
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
To "disappear" a staff altogether goto |File|Page Setup|Contents (tab) and you can choose which staves are visible - this will remove them from the editor as well so only do this when you're done editing them or you'll need to bring 'em back.  I usually add them to a group called "Hidden" then you can hide and unhide a whole bunch of hidden staves all at once if you want.

Hidded staves still playback.
OK, can I go back at any time to that dialog box and unhide them?  I would think that is the way it is set up.  Although I seem to be finished, I don't trust myself not to have overlooked a detail.
50
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
OK, got it all fixed.  I suspect I had the wrong length of note the first time it worked.  By having it all "fixed," that includes the arpeggio symbols.  It got pretty messy looking, when I had to layer the tenor clef with another (is there any way you can eliminate the appearance of the entire staff without layering it?).  When I first hid everything on the staff, without layering it, in the viewer it showed up as just an empty staff.  Anyway, it looks fine now in the viewer, and everything works.