Last post by David Palmquist -
NWC2 works well for me on Windows 11.
Still have a bit of a problem getting Win11 to associate NWC version 2 files with NWC2 instead of NWC1. I am reluctant to remove NWC1.75 from my system but it's a little annoying when song files created in the various NWC2 versions try and fail to open in NWC1.75. It's only a minor annoyance and if I didn't have 1.75 still on my system, wouldn't be problem. Hmm. Time for me to start another thread about which versions I have and which I'm running...
Now would be a good time to mention that BarLabel.ms primarily is used for rehearsal marks, which appear where the object is placed in the score, while the object BarCounter.nw will display bar numbers at the start of each staff, or optionally on every measure. And it has always had the option of starting the count at a specified number, relative to the position of the object in the score.
I've used BarCounter often and only discovered BarLabel the last time I did some notation. Like 'em both although I am so used to BoxMark2 for rehearsal marks it may take me a few "goes" to get used to BarLabel. I'm grateful to have the option.
Last post by Mike Shawaluk -
Now would be a good time to mention that BarLabel.ms primarily is used for rehearsal marks, which appear where the object is placed in the score, while the object BarCounter.nw will display bar numbers at the start of each staff, or optionally on every measure. And it has always had the option of starting the count at a specified number, relative to the position of the object in the score.
Last post by LeonardLimaBean -
Hi all. New guy here. Does NWC work with Windows 11? I couldn’t find anything in the FAQ or by searching the forum. Sorry if this has been asked here before.
I started using NWC in 1996 or so. My daughter is starting to experiment with writing stuff on the piano and she’s about the age I was when I started using NWC. I think she’d love it and I was considering getting her a laptop with Windows 11 on it.
Last post by David Palmquist -
Low reed parts for the 1914 march Colonel Bogey are good examples of what Lawrie described. What a nightmare it is to read on a marching band card, particulary if it's a fifth or sixth generation photocopy! However, the CB doesn't use bar numbers so isn't really relevant to this thread.
In modern writing, if the bars are numbered, they will only be numbered once. In the ten bar example, 1 to 9 followed by a first ending 10, and a second ending 11. If bars are not individually numbered but rehearsal marks are numbers, the rehearsal numbers don't count the repeat twice. I think it would be awfully confusing in an ensemble to have two numbers for the repeated bars.
Sometimes an engraver doesn't bother with a repeat sign for something like the Col. Bogey; the first melodic line is followed by a second melodic line in those parts where the repeated section is differs, but uses a repeat for the instruments where the bars aren't changed the second go-through. This can really throw a monkey wrench during rehearsals where, as in Col. Bogey last week, the conductor wanted to hear just the repeated section. When she said to take it from bar 5 we had to ask "x1 or x2?" It was difficult to explain why because she was conducting wirh a score or part that apparently didn't show the second time through was different.
Did I mention I like Colonel Bogy but hate playing it? Too hard on the eyes.
Last post by fathafluff -
Thanks, Mike. I thought of another use for this: If you are writing two parts within the same file, but not on separated staves, the second part could be restarted on measure 1
