[EPIC] Cross-staff notation issues
Issues relating to cross-staff notation:
#284682: Position offset when moving cross-beam notes with the mouse
#280531: Beam separates from stems when crossing staves.
#279182: Cross-staff slurs/ties trying to avoid note on wrong staff
#280969: Cross staff 8ths lose beam if all notes moved to staff above
#282443: Incorrect behavior of a cross-staff measure rest
#279736: Cross-staff note offset to align with note in original staff
#114141: Notes collide between cross-staff
#187891: Cross staff notation doesn't work, shows notes in wrong (origin) staff at wrong (same as target) position
#43936: Beam and stem of cross-staff notes don't flip
#118656: Cross-staff slur missing or incorrect when a part is created
#103681: Cross-staff slur is copied even when end anchor is not copied
#54366: Cross-staff notes ignore accidentals
#21990: Dragging stave with cross staff beaming produces remnants
#20836: Notes too close when crossing staves
Not all of these are regressions, nor even confirmed to still exist in 3.0 currently. But the issue with beams disappearing and slurs attaching incorrectly are real and critical.
FWIW, I didn't bother listing issues involving import of 1.3 scores into 2.x :-)
Some interesting suggestions for extending this facility:
#110611: Split chord across staves
#280156: Add a way to move elements other than notes cross-staff (or do it automatically when notes are moved)
#65806: Allow correct playback of cross-staff/voice arpeggios
#14687: Split chord across staves in cross-staff notation
#110906: beam across hidden staves of a grand staff
#40391: Stem direction of cross-staff notes incorrect
#285967: Extended Slur example from handbook doesn't work is another issue for thie EPIC
See https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/4814 and https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/pull/4817. These address the five highest priority issues here.
Top priority fixes are all in.
https://musescore.org/en/node/289471 seems a regression in 3.1 Beta 2 and latest master vs. 3.0.5
Relates to #311175: [EPIC] Engraving issues and suggestions
Try to avoid putting issues in both of these Epic issues.
If you have a 3-staff piano and make some beams on the top staff, you can move the notes down to the 2nd staff, but not farther down from there. They cannot move more than one staff up or down.
This is true, but you can put them on the middle staff and move some notes up and others down. See my score at https://musescore.com/user/6105546/scores/6325818 in m75 among others.
In reply to This is true, but you can… by mike320
What if I want notes across four staves?
You can't. And this here is not the place to request this or ask how to do it ;-)
Hi, I have a pb with cross-beams notation on a piano score : if I first write on the upper stave the phrase that has to be split on both and united by the cross-beam, then there is a rhythm pb on the lower stave : Musescore doesn't take into account the silences and pauses required to let me count the correct amount of beats on it. It just adds the notes from the cross-beam phrase, to the beats that are already there on the lower stave. For instance, on the lower stave, I can have 2 eights notes from the split phrase that also runs up, but the lower stave measure will have a full pause of 4 beats (in 4/4) + the 2 eights notes ! That makes a 4/4+1/2 measure !
How can I solve that ?
Tx 4 your help !
Nothing to be dealt with in thoe EPIC issue, which is meant to collect all related issues (whith cross-staff notation in this case)
Open a forum post first, with the score (Edit: I see you did in https://musescore.org/en/node/329334), and another issue possibly after that (i.e. if none of the links above already are about the same issue)
Here are a bunch of problems
All images: The 8va line applies to the notes in the lower staff
Second image: B's are Bb, Bn, B(n). Third one should be flat, second one doesn't need a natural
Third image: Now the second B is flat without an accidental
Fourth image: The key signature of the upper staff applies to notes of the lower staff. Should be: C7 Bb6 A6 C#6 B5 A5 B6 C7 but is C7 Bb6 A6 C7 Bb6 A6 B6 C7
In reply to Here are a bunch of problems… by Wilh3lm
The better (correct) way to do this, rather than reporting and discussing issues here is to create a separate issue for each problem and then cite this EPIC in each of those by enclosing the issue reference (look right at the top if this thread - in this case the reference is #285233) including the # in square brackets. That will create an entry in the "what links here" list It means that each issue can then be discussed separately but the EPIC exists to allow correlation and discovery of possible common causes. If all the issues were actually reported and discussed here, the thread would become very long and unwieldy and issues would get missed.
If you follow one of those "what links here" links you will see how it is done, which may be easier than following my instruction.
In reply to The better (correct) way to… by SteveBlower