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

General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
Hi Susanna,
I've managed a little time to check it out - the problem is the duration of the chords, they're too short.

This segment of code from the user tool specifically excludes chords shorter than a crotchet (4th) note:
Code: [Select · Download]
foreach ($clip->Items as $item) {
$o = new NWC2ClipItem($item);
// If this is a non-grace chord and is not preceded by a grace note,
// and it is larger than an 8th note in duration, then add a grace note arpeggio
if (($o->GetObjType() == "Chord") &&
!isset($o->Opts["Dur"]["Grace"]) &&
(count(array_intersect(array_keys($o->Opts["Dur"]),array("Whole","Half","4th"))) > 0) &&
!isset($priorNoteObj->Opts["Dur"]["Grace"])) {
$chordnotes = $o->GetTaggedOpt("Pos");
$chorddur = $o->GetTaggedOpt("Dur");

Lines 4 and 5 of the snippet above are a comment describing it and line 8 has the section that does the work of excluding these particular chords.

It would be fairly easy to modify the tool, or just double the duration of these chords, run the tool and then halve them again...

A quick test shows the "fix" to be as simple as changing this line (line 8 in the code snippet, line 47 in the actual file "nwsw_ArpeggiateChord.php"):
         (count(array_intersect(array_keys($o->Opts["Dur"]),array("Whole","Half","4th"))) > 0) &&

to this (add the red bit, don't forget the comma):
         (count(array_intersect(array_keys($o->Opts["Dur"]),array("Whole","Half","4th","8th"))) > 0) &&

OK, that explains why later arpeggios did work, because they were all quarter notes.  But it doesn't explain why the dotted eighths worked the first time.  In any case, I'll admit that it was a lot of arpeggio for the length - the one time it did work, I tested it and it pretty much ran into the next note.
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
Take note that, although it does not show, this is a tenor clef (lots of fun working with that, as I am not at all familiar with where the notes go! - just like I originally learned to read music - tell me where middle C is and I'll take it from there).
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
Did you remove all the hidden grace notes?
Did you select the visible chord?
Sorry, no ideas.
Could you attach a snippet?

N.B. You probably will have to wait a bit for an answer since I'm just leaving for holidays.
Yes, to both of the above questions.  Right now, I don't have anything hidden except the tenor clef sign.  I finished the tenor clef, and I was able to arpeggiate all the smaller chord.  I'll work on getting a snippet for you.  Maybe someone else will figure it out while you're gone.  When I click on the tool, it acts like it is doing something, but there's nothing there.  I always do an undo after I try in case something happened that I can't see, and that will mess things up even worse
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
More on arpeggios - working on a different piece, and the arpeggiate tool isn't working full time.  All I can think is that I "broke" something.  The arpeggios (most of them) go through both bass & treble clef, and I'm using a tenor clef to articulate them, so they will all be one arpeggio.  First time I used the tool on one of those monster arpeggios, it worked just fine.  But I thought I had done something wrong, so I undid it.  Now, I can't redo it, nor can I do any of the other "monster" arpeggios.  Nor any others until I get well along into the file.  Then they seem to start working again (although I haven't yet put them on the tenor clef).
Yes, I did notice that.  I am working from a book that was in a set many eons ago - a piano teacher when I was in college was giving away the set to his students, a couple or so to each student.  They were compiled in order of difficulty, within the books, and from book to book.  I got the first two books, which gives you an idea where I stood in proficiency!

I've got all the notation done now, and I've put in a few of the arpeggios.  From now on, everything is refinement.
General Discussion / Re: Arpeggios
MusicJohn - another question - I notice you have braces on the two violin staves; how do you make them cross the layered staves?  I try it, and it only puts the brace between the first staff, and the one it is layered to.

And another note - my version is strictly a piano version, no option for voice.
General Discussion / Arpeggios
I'm still on Largo from Xerxes - is it common practice/does it make sense to use multiple layers for one staff?  For instance, I already have a layer to make everything come out even - can I add a layer making invisible arpeggios, while showing the arpeggio symbol on a visible staff?  I presume I would have to make the notes with the symbol mute, along with the notes with the actual sound being invisible.
To all of you, thanks!  MusicJohn, I downloaded your file, and will look at it at my leisure.  I'm sure it will have many things to teach me! I wasn't familiar with the extra note spacing property.  I'm sure I've seen it before, because I frequently bring up the dialog box it's in.  I was just going to finish notating the piece, then set it aside until I get more proficient with the software.  Now I can keep going, for a while, anyway.
How did he get the quarter note in front of the dotted quarter?  I ran into a problem with it overlaying the bottom of the dotted quarter, and wound up using a combination of the two methods.  I had two occurrences of that.

   Hi, Susanna.

   With layering, what you see it what you get.  Or rather, what you see on the score - some notes tail up combined in the same staff with other notes with tails down - is what you get when you use two (or more, but let's not worry about that just yet) layers for each relevant staff of the Score, one for the tail up notes and one for the tail down notes. 

   First, then, create two staves for each staff of the Score, one staff below the other (a bit like Sops 1 & 2, or 1st/2nd violins).  Preferably they should have different channels, otherwise they may not actually play properly!  And the first staff of each pair of staves should be set to layer on top of the second staff of the pair.  Then start entering the notes in each staff.

   To start with, keep the two staves separate/unlayered, and enter the notes in each, exactly as written in the Score, tail up notes on one staff, tail down notes on the other.  I recommend doing this a bar at a time, first one staff, then the other. It's simplest if you pad out each layer/staff with invisible rests of the right duration in the places where there aren't any notes with the appropriate tails but only notes with the wrong tails (provided the bar lines match, this indicates you've probably got it right).  And then, when you combine the two staves - when you permit the layering actually to be effected - they will seamlessly blend, one on top of the other, to provide the staff as shown in the Score.  And you have achieved just what you want.

   MusicJohn, 19/Jul/14

OK, I understand what you're saying, and I do know how to work with layers.  I just didn't see how it would apply here.  I'll give it a try.  Thanks.  More than one way to skin a cat, I guess.
I just figured it out, but I can't quite see how I would make it work with layering.  Hey, I'm still pretty green at this stuff, so be patient with me.
I can see I have my work cut out for me.  This same condition occurs a number of times in this piece.  And I couldn't figure out how to make it work, so I just copied/pasted what you did.  Which I can't do every time, of course, because the music is different.  I'll work on it.

Thanks, Rich, I was pretty sure you'd come through for me.
This afternoon I started notating Handel's Largo from Xerxes, and at the thirteen measure, something went wrong.  If you are not familiar with it, most of the piece has a melody on the treble clef, plus chords of 3 quarter notes in each measure.  The base clef is mostly 3 quarter-note chords. On the 13th measure, the melody line is a dotted quarter note followed by an eighth and another quarter.  The chords on the same clef line up correctly.  But on the bass clef, the third chord lines up under the eighth note, and it thinks there should be another 8th of a beat in the measure.  Anyone know how to deal with this?
This is what it looks like:

Nonsense. Frybyte wants polymeter, not polyrhythm. I made the same mistake. Took an hour or so of trying to rewrite the song as polyrhythm for me to realize this.
The file attached to the main topic is rather short of "looking fine." Sustain Pedals that preserve width, 'Increase spacing for longer notes', and a dearth of Spacers are not signs that you care much about how the song appears. At least you don't have staff metrics set to 26pt, although 19 rather than 18 is a curious choice.

As you say, you don't post here often, but attaching a song using fonts that most of us do not have is not friendly.
Sounds good, but the song attached is so bizarre that that is not possible. NWC can handle reasonable polymeters, but this goes way beyond reasonable. I doubt that any notation software can make sense of it.
I discovered that by selecting the default piano template, you automatically get staff metrics of 26.
When I have trouble with display/print (nothing complex like the OP described), I keep displaying the print preview.  On the one piece I had problems with, neither the original nor the view looked right, but it printed correctly.  Depends, I guess, where your priorities are.
NoteWorthy added the symbol for a turn to NWC2STDA years ago.
Sure enough, I just found it.  I wasn't aware of that character set until now.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
I think 18 is about the standard size for a score.

Are you talking about the printed score or the screen appearance?
That's quite different. In the latter case you can zoom at wish without any impact on the printed score.

I printed a couple of pages, and it is very large.  It seems that I once had the staff metrics set at 16.  The way it appears on the screen seems inconsistent - I can build an entire piece by copying/pasting complete staves from existing files, and get different results.  I did that with one that used to print very large, went to two pages - and looked large on the screen.  When I did the copy/paste, it fit on one page with space left over.  I didn't know for a long time what those different settings represented.  I have learned more about how to use Noteworthy in the last couple of months than I had in the several years since I first bought the software.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Not specifically, but there are some line and bracket drawing characters that might help...
I couldn't find any in your MusikDingsSans but I found I could create something with regular fonts (a straight vertical line on either side of a bunch of underscores).  I had it perfect in the software, but when I looked at it in the viewer, it was all messed up.  I went back to the software and fixed it so it would look OK in the print preview, but it was still messed up in the viewer.  I suppose it has to do with my printer.

Anyway, I've got that particular piece completed, and I learned a lot with it!
Not just a problem with grace notes:
Code: [Select · Download]
It seems that brackets avoid slurs but non-bracketed triplet 3's don't. The collision in the second grouping is fine with me. My druthers is that slurs need not avoid brackets

Kalman, I think NWC2 handles your second clip properly. I don't know how I would play one continuous slur differently.

The attachment is from Scriabin's Poem. Slurs pass thru the brackets. It is also a good example of a slur starting on a normal note and ending on a grace note, and a hairpin with a text modifier (poco).
The arpeggio shown here is something I might find useful; but I'd like to ask about the "rubato" instruction.  I'm not familiar with its use, but does it pertain to the arpeggio, to what the grace notes steal from it?
Never mind, I found it.
Um, I've lost track of something here - I went to the link Flurmy posted, and can't figure out where I went from there, but there was a link for a .png file showing a grand staff "arpeggio," and I can't find the link again.  Can someone tell me how to get back to it?  I had a comment and a question about the image, but I have to find it again to figure out what to ask/say!
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Try 18.
18 is too small for my old eyes!  I'm satisfied with the appearance I get now.
I've got the piece all notated now, including the turn.  Now I have to go back over it and insert the dynamics, which I haven't done much of.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Not specifically, but there are some line and bracket drawing characters that might help...
Thanks, I'll check 'em out!  I'm finally starting to get comfortable with the software, after a lot of help from Rich Woodroffe with a couple of pieces of music.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Well, my staff metrics is set to 26, so that's close.  I thought it looked pretty good compared to the score I'm working from.  Thanks for your work in putting that together!

Got anything to represent the repeated sustained pedal?  I haven't got to working on it yet - looks like a long bracket lying on its side?
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Install the font as you would install any font. Then in Noteworthy, go to Page Setup / Fonts. Highlight the User1 font and click Modify.
Select the MusikDingsSans font from the drop down list (You may not be able read the title since it used characters from the font - but it will be in the list alphabetically). Change the font size to something like 14. Click OK, and click it again.
Font User 1 has now been set up as MusikDingsSans.

Now when you insert text into your music, if you change the display font to User1 and use the char map to select the character you want, one of those characters will be the turn (either R or S - I can't remember which)

Got it!  But I had to make the font much bigger - 28, I think.  Thanks for your help!

I haven't yet got to the point of creating the actual articulation of the turn - still busy keying in the rest of the piece.
An interesting side note: a while ago I picked up one of the books I had for (several) music classes at Penn State, and I found an explanation of how an arpeggio was played, and it used the grace-note method to explain it.  There was a lot of basic stuff in that I already knew when I started with it, and I think a lot of it was skipped in our classes.  Anyway, I don't have many notes in it.  It included solfeggio and dictation, and we had separate classes for those, so I'm sure we skipped those parts, as well as the really basic stuff.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
I blew it big time, not that it makes a difference with the key signature, but it's in A minor, not C major.  Although it varies throughout the piece (it's Für Elise).
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
OK, I found it in Lawrie's fonts, but I don't know how to appropriate it.  I've downloaded his fonts to my computer.  (just in the zipped file).

And after carefully reading your post a couple of times, I believe that somewhere along the line, I had been "exposed" to turns.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
Where can I find Lawrie Pardy's fonts?  The symbol, at least, should be visible, if someone is playing from the manuscript.
General Discussion / Re: What is this?
I'll have to study this a while to get it figured out.  The natural sign is superfluous; the piece is in the key of C, and no accidentals either in the noted measure or the previous or next.  Hmm, wonder why they never taught us about that in music theory class?  At least, I don't think they did.  It was a looooong time ago. Like more than 55 years.
General Discussion / What is this?
What does the symbol after the first note in the upper clef mean, and how can it be reproduced?
Does any of this address arpeggios that go across two staves?
Oops, getting "Noteworthy Software" and "Noteworthy Composer" mixed up.  Anyway, whatever I click on, it goes to the parent forum.
Hi Susanna, FWIW I just tried it and went to the right place.  I'm using FireFox 29.0.1 (30 offered itself when I checked so I'm about to upgrade(?))...

I get auto-updates from FireFox, so I'm probably on 30 right now.  But if I go to the "jump to" box, select "General Discussion" and click on go, it goes to the level above.  Same thing happened today, I tried it from Back Stage, but it took me "back" to Noteworthy Composer level.
At the top and bottom of this topic is:If you want to go to 'General Discussion', click on 'General Discussion'. If you want to go to its parent, click on the parent.
You can also use the 'Jump to:' bar at the bottom of each topic to go to the forum or board of your choice.
It's the "jump to" that doesn't work correctly.  I click on "jump to" General Discussion, and get "Noteworthy Software."

Sorry, I said "goto" on the other post, because that's the term used on another forum I frequent - it's the same as "jump to."
I think that is the behavior I would expect. I think the icon is for "new posts since last visit," not "unread posts exist." If I visit a forum and read a few posts, should the forum still show "new posts" until I read all of the hundreds of posts on that forum?
It doesn't that way on other forums.  There is one that I frequent, and as long as there are posts that I haven't read in a specific subforum, it still shows that there are unread posts.  If you don't want to read them all, you can read the ones you choose, and then mark the forum as read.

And I still think that when I click on "goto" for the Discussion Forum, it should go to the Discussion Forum, not its parent.
Thanks for the response, Mike. I'm not unfamiliar with this problem - I went through it with a piece of shareware I put together back in the DOS days. (It never really went anyplace, it's been abandonedware for years, and I haven't done any programming for a couple of decades. But I do remember wrestling with the order of development.) However, it doesn't change my point: this is a notation program, and the first emphasis should be on getting the notation right. I can praise NWC to the skies to my musician friends - and I do - but when they try it out, and they try to write an 8va section (extremely common, for God's sake!) and they come to me and complain, all I can say is ...uh...

I like to think of NWC as a better, cheaper version of Finale or Sibelius. But it's not going to really compete well with those two notational icons - or even with MuseScore - until and unless it gets things like 8va and cue notes and slurs right. Let's not worry too much about new customers in countries whose languages require unicode until we've got it right for the ones who don't.
I'm inclined to agree with you.  Another problem - I haven't seen any evidence of its being addressed yet - if you put in an accidental, the "same" note at another octave on the same staff will be affected.  You have to do some messy-looking stuff to make it come out right.  In a specific case, you have a d# just above middle C.  This carries throughout the entire measure. But the d an octave up should not be affected by that accidental, but it is. To fix it, I had to rebuild the chord with a natural on the higher octave, only to discover I had to "reinstate" the # on the lower octave on the next cgird.  Looks kind-of messy.  I suppose I could hide the second & third accidentals, but I had no idea that you could do that when I did the fix.  Anyway, it shouldn't have to have been done.
It will probably take me a while to figure out how to incorporate that, but I'll get it some time.  I guess I just put the change (with "octave down") at the beginning of the staff.  Since there are two parts, the top one with stem up and the bottom with stem down, I created the file on individual staves and layered them.  I presume I have to put the change on both staves?
Nothing. Lawrie used the wrong tag. It is easy to use the wrong tag. Perhaps he will correct it.

If the code block opens into NotePad, just copy everything from NotePad and then 'Paste as New File' into NWC.
OK, thanks.  Worked just fine.
I tried to download that script, and it will only open with notepad.  What am I doing wrong?  I can't even open it with noteworthy in the download.  I've done these things before, so I don't know what went wrong.
In the pull-down menu from a given topic, I will click on "goto General Discussion", and it will take me to the next forum level up (Noteworthy Software).  Is there a setting in board software to correct this?  Also, when I read one topic in a given forum, that forum shows as having been read, while there are still unread topics there.
There are a couple of ways, probably the easiest is to place a hidden octave shifted clef at the start of the 8va section and another non-shifted clef at the end.  The other alternative, arguably the better one, is to place a hidden instrument patch with a 12 semitone shift at the start of the 8va section and another with a 0 shift at the end to restore things.

Code: [Select · Download]
|Instrument|Name:"Acoustic Grand Piano"|Patch:0|Bank:0,0|Trans:0|DynVel:10,30,45,60,75,92,108,127|Pos:11
|Clef|Type:Treble|OctaveShift:Octave Up|Visibility:Never
|Instrument|Name:"Acoustic Grand Piano"|Patch:0|Bank:0,0|Trans:12|DynVel:10,30,45,60,75,92,108,127|Pos:11
|Instrument|Name:"Acoustic Grand Piano"|Patch:0|Bank:0,0|Trans:0|DynVel:10,30,45,60,75,92,108,127|Pos:11
This looks like it might work in reverse for the guitar notations I mentioned a couple of weeks ago.
Thank you for answering this.  I'm going to have to teach myself how to do this....Noteworthy seems to have a lot of hidden capabilities out there.  One question though....since I haven't done it and don't anything about layering....yet.  Does this alter the way the music prints out or is it invisible?  Will I need two versions of the for printing (piano music) and one for playback?  Thanks for your help.
I have been a member of this site for several years (not very active, to be sure), and I've played around with Noteworthy Software off and on during that time, and I am just starting to learn many of those hidden things.  I'm starting to learn how to look for them, too.  The people here are very helpful!
OK, I didn't look hard enough - started looking more closely at the stuff Rich did, and I've figured out at least some of it.
I thought if I looked hard enough, I could figure this out for myself, but I simply can't locate the tools to do it.  Rich explained to me how he modified something I did using hidden staves and symbols.  I came up with the exact same issue on another piece, and I thought I could use his information to fix it - but I can't unless I know how to "hide" them (the staves, at least).
I wouldn't worry about it, Susanna.  NoteWorthy Composer will be fine with just the correct suffix. And if you ever want to edit them, you'll be able to by just a double click.
Thanks!  So many people on this site are so helpful, even when I can't find what is right in front of my eyes!
Thanks for all your help!  I have a little problem, though - I opened the ITree file with wordpad, didn't notice if it said "always open with this program", probably did, and now it shows it as a wordpad file - which means that any such file I may create in the future will appear as a wordpad file.  Is this a problem?  Must it be changed, or will the suffix be enough to know that it is an NWC ITree file?  I'm not sure I will ever get into that - I'm just a rank amateur here, but I'd rather have everything correct just in case.
I wasn't trying to create chords; there is just a melody line, and a single note "accompaniment" line.  To make them look right, I had to do them on separate staffs, then layer them; the melody line must be all stem-up, and and the accompaniment stem down.  While working on it, I realized that the upper line had the left hand markings (fret notations), and the lower line had the right hand markings.  It was all "thumb", so not a lot to do there (except, since it was an Italian piece of sheet music, the thumb indicators were all "p").

I find it a bit frustrating, though, because guitar music is written an octave higher than it sounds, and I suppose there's no way for Noteworthy to know that when you select "guitar" for the instrument, it should be played back an octave lower.
Hi Susanna,
in the text dialogue you should have a "Placement" tab - if you don't then go to | Tools | Options | Editor (tab) and remove the tick from "Smart Properties Insert".

In any case, you can always select the text and move it up or down with <Ctrl> + <Shift> + <Up/Dn Arrow>
Thanks, fixed it.  I thought I'd had it before, but that must have been before I upgraded to 2.5 (done just in the last few days).