Skip to main content
Topic: "Musical" bug + feature request (Read 11594 times) previous topic - next topic

"Musical" bug + feature request

Hi!

I think there is a sort of "musical" bug when having special endings and a time change inside the special ending.

As far as I know, you should have a double bar before a time change:

Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Key|Signature:C
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:Whole|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:0
|Bar
|Note|Dur:Half|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:Whole|Pos:0
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
The problem is that you cannot have it inside a special ending, because this is what happens:

Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Key|Signature:C
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatOpen
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0^
|Bar
|Ending|Endings:1
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|Ending|Endings:1|Visibility:Never
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatClose
|Ending|Endings:2
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
Got it?

No?

Look at the following message (due to only 2 NWC clips per message allowed...)

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #1
The tie doesn't extend to the 2nd ending (even if you change the single bar line before the first 1st ending into a double one...), unless you change it as follows:

Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Key|Signature:C
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatOpen
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0^
|Bar|Style:Double
|Ending|Endings:1
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatClose
|Ending|Endings:2
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
(Notice that you must delete the 1st ending before the time change, otherwise it doesn't work...)

Moreover, if you just try to delete the second 1st ending in my example without changing the bar line types like this:

Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Key|Signature:C
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatOpen
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0^
|Bar
|Ending|Endings:1
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:Double
|TimeSig|Signature:2/4
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatClose
|Ending|Endings:2
|TimeSig|Signature:4/4|Visibility:Never
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
|Note|Dur:4th|Pos:0
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
you end having a loop !!!

So, in the end you are not "allowed" to put the double bar line [abbr=i.e. immediately before the time change]where it should be[/abbr].

Why don't you make a special ending as property of a selection, instead of property of a measure? It would be really nice, also because now it is impossible to have a 1st ending sign spanning over more than 1 measure at a time (without layering, of course...).

Thank you!

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #2
Aure, that's a nice statement of the problem - your clips are very clear, and I observe the same behaviour on my system, i.e, the double bar within the special ending screws up the flow directions.  I think NWC is finishing the special ending behaviour when it encounters a double bar line, rather than at the next flow direction.  If it's just a matter of the double bar line being interpreted as a flow direction command in error, it shouldn't be too hard for Eric to fix.

I prefer the special ending not be a property of a selection.  SEs can be lengthy, and having to "paint" the coverage area in each part for a multipart score would be awfully tedious.

The horizontal line should extend past the first bar line.  I'm trying to recall if it always goes the end of the flow special ending, or just normally stops after two or three bars are spanned?  If the latter, some bars of the special ending would still be performed, just not covered by the line.

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #3
G'day Aure,
there has already been quite some discussion about how NWC handles special endings.  Including quite recently.

A couple of points to note:
  • In NWC an nth time bar is not a property for any or every bar that is part of the nth special anding.  It is a single object within a given bar.
  • Rightly or wrongly, NWC interprets any decorated barline as a termination of an nth special ending so any kind of signature change cannot be accompanied by a double barline within a special ending.
You and David are quite correct - technically the horizontal line should extend past the first bar in a special ending but NWC does not do this. [abbr=it may never, but I hope this is not the case]Yet...[/abbr]

These are things I think I can safely say that we would all like to see improved.

Some interesting related points are made in https://forum.noteworthycomposer.com/?topic=5172

Lawrie
I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #4
Hi David, hi Lawrie!

Thank you for your answers.

I wrote about the time change inside the special ending because that was my problem. Of course, the bug was not related to the time change, but to the double bar...

Actually, what I need is not a simple "quick fix", but a solution for a problem that I think is very common: why should the NWC interpret a decorated bar line as the end of an nth special ending? For the same reason, why shouldn't my special ending... end with a single bar line?

In all the printed sheet music I've seen until now, the special ending has always affected all the notes/measures between the special ending sign and the Master Repeat Close bar.

[abbr=...but what is "usual" in music ???]Usually[/abbr] the horizontal line of the nth repeat sign expands over only a couple of measures if there is a line break between the special ending sign and the Master Repeat Close, otherwise it spans over all the measures between the special ending sign and the Master Repeat Close.

After the last Master Repeat Close, the last nth repeat sign's horizontal line expands to the end of the [abbr=or whatever it is...]song[/abbr] if there isn't any other line break before the ending bar.

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #5
But do you really need a double bar before a change of time signature? I've seen a lot of concert band music which toggle between different time signatures, and they don't put a double bar all the time. I can agree that a double is common to prefix a change of key signature though. Someone who owns one of these marvellous books in how to score can look up what it says.

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #6
My marvellous book (whose name I can't remember is [abbr=or should it be "its"]it's[/abbr] not with me) says that single bar lines are correct for time changes within a section.  It also says that double bar lines are required for key signatures, and that we no longer use cancelling naturals when changing key signatures.

Since this agrees with what I usually see, and fits with my view of how-to-make-reading-easier-for-the-player, I choose to believe my marvellous book is correct!

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #7
What do you mean by cancelling naturals?

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #8
In the bad old days, if you changed key signature in the middle of a piece, it was the [abbr=yes, this is the correct form of the noun where I live; read "practise" if you need to]practice[/abbr] of putting the old key signature as naturals, to "cancel them out" immediately in front of the new key signature.  Sometimes this was left out if you were merely increasing the number of the same type of accidental. NWC works like this.

In [abbr=thankfully, as it's dreadful to comprehend]really rare[/abbr] cases, only the extra new accidentals were shown.

For example. If a piece in D major changed to Eb major, then new key signature would be F-natural, C-natural, Bb, Eb, Ab.  Or the naturals might be the other way around.  A more readable version of this was to have the naturals before the double-bar line, and the new key signature after it.

From D major to B major would be the standard 5 sharps for B major, but in the very rare case, just G#D#, A#.  (At a quick glace, this is the pattern [high-low-higher] is easily mistaken for A Major, especially if you're reading a score with both tenor and treble clefs!)

The current system is that we just have the new key signature after the double bar line.  In NWC we can stop the cancelling accidentals appearing by adding an invisible C major key signature just before the new key signature.  I always put this invisible signature before the double bar as well, but you don't have to.

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #9
Sorry not to have responded earlier, I've been away since Monday.

Aure wrote: After the last Master Repeat Close, the last nth repeat sign's horizontal line expands to the end of the song if there isn't any other line break before the ending bar.

I think if we were to ask NWC to modify the horizontal line over the last endings, that line should extend to the earlier of:

a/  the end of the section
b/  the end of the system (i.e., no wrapping to next system)

Besides the obvious visual confusion that might be caused by having a sixth unmarked horizontal line on the second and subsequent systems (staffs), in concert band and theatre music, it is not uncommon to have special endings early in the piece.  In military band marches too, you'll often have the first section concluded with a first ending, repeat and a second ending, all to be followed by a "trio" section, which is also a repeated section with its own first and second endings.

Having a "rule" that extends the last time ending to the end of the song would create conflict when there are multiple repeated sections.

As I think about marches, often they have a special ending "to next strain," which I've just noticed isn't available.  That's one for the wish list, methinks.

Regarding the key signature changes, I like the flexibility created by Ewan's workaround.  I want the choice to cancel or not.  Sometimes [abbr=I think the rule is to use an apostrophe for the contraction of "it is," but not for "it," which is a possessive pronoun rather than a possessive noun]it's[/abbr] useful, other times it is just ugly, but if you're transcribing an old score that cancels the signature, you probably should do so as well.

Notation must communicate the composer's intentions to the musician as clearly as possible.  If there is a conventional presentation, it should be adhered to.  That's not to say that practices don't evolve, but one has to be careful in moving away from the norm, particularly where the repertoire is primarly conventional in style.

What I [abbr=NOT!]love[/abbr] is the old practice of not copying the key signature down the page, and suddenly encountering an accidental F# or Bb at the beginning of a line (grin).

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #10
I agree with David that the line must not automatically extend to the end of the song, for the reasons he has given.

I'd still prefer the first-time ending line to go all the way until the repeat sign;  I'd prefer it to wrap around.  (Perhaps there could be an option to switch this wrapping on or off?)  The line need not be so close to the staff that it causes confusion, but it gives a clearer indication of where the second-time bars are.  (Better practice would be to write out the music so there isn't such a long first-time ending.)

Could the "to next strain" version possibly be faked with invisible to-coda and coda signs, and text?  I think the main reason marches appear like this is so they can be printed in the small amount of space that appears on march-cards.  In a full-sized setting, they'd probably be laid out differently.

I find for theatre music [abbr=I agree: "it's" is short for "it is" or "it has" but probably not "it was".  Strictly, "its" is a genitive pronoun, but its/it's something about which only grammar police care.]it's[/abbr] better to stick to the "never turn back" rule.  It's easier to read - and thus much more secure - if the player never has to flip back pages.  Small repeats are okay, provided they fit on the same opening, especially if they prevent [abbr=and no-one likes a nasty turn!]nasty page-turns[/abbr].  It's quite easy now to copy and paste large sections.  Of course, this will create conflict with the conductor's score, which always has different repeats and strangely laid-out to-coda signs!

I too find the practice of putting key signatures [abbr=although it is more common for big-band charts, where I'm more easy with it]only on the top staff[/abbr] to be annoying.  Even worse is leaving out the clef.  You can often tell the key of a piece as you're playing it, but I've played a bassoon book once with the usual clef changes between bass and tenor.  Mix this with multi-bar rests and a few staves later you're no longer certain what you should be playing!  (I've also had the F#-accidental-or-is-it-G-major?-on-a-new-stave!  It only ever happens on hand-written parts, or the really early computer-printed parts).

Re: "Musical" bug + feature request

Reply #11
I agree the first ending horizontal line should always extend to the repeat, even if a wrap is needed.  Ditto 2nd, 3rd, etc., endings; all except the last one.

Where Ewan writes "I've also had the F#-accidental-or-is-it-G-major?-on-a-new-stave! It only ever happens on hand-written parts, or the really early computer-printed parts," I wish that were so.  I've encountered it a few times on commercially published concert band parts.

This of course brings us to the matter of modern composers and arrangers, who, unlike professional copyists, are more interested in the music than its presentation on paper.  Even with the more expensive/sophisticated notation processors, some of the results can be either wrongly presented or ugly.