Is it still safe to use Musescore 3.6? MU4 is yet missing much features...

• Feb 24, 2024 - 14:14

Is it still safe to use Musescore 3.6? Is there still support? Can new Windows updates cause conflicts and corrupt files, leading to unexpected crashes in Musescore 3.6?

After 1 year of the release of Musescore 4, there are still many regressions in essential features that existed in 3.6 and worked very well there, which either disappeared in version 4 or are not functioning properly.

Some examples:

  1. Custom lines cannot be drawn diagonally.
  2. Line texts cannot be configured in detail, as options for font size, italic, bold are missing in the PROPERTIES menu.
  3. SMUFL codes for symbols are no longer revealed and cannot be copied from the Master Palette.
  4. The capture tool is missing.
  5. Horizontal scroll does not move pages but rather the selection of elements.
  6. Distance between beams is limited to two options, making it impossible to configure beam thickness.

These functions, and some others, already existed in Musescore 3.6. Some are being reimplemented, but I couldn't find information about others in the forum.

If the use of 3.6 is no longer recommended due to lack of support, unfortunately, I will have to go back to Sibelius or Finale and wait for new updates to Musescore 4.

Regardless, while acknowledging the great merit of the Musescore team for the excellent work over the years, the question remains: how can a new version be released by removing numerous features that were already available in the previous version without providing alternative and improved tools for these functions? Is it responsible to launch a new product when these existing features cannot yet be re-implemented?

Switching software again after investing so much in Musescore is genuinely disheartening. I hope that 3.6 can still be used without compromising ongoing professional projects.

Thank you!


You can use the version that suits your needs. There are those that use version 2.
As to your list:
1. I don't know about this.
2. I'm not sure what a line text is. But any text I've been able to add has been able to be modified as you suggest.
3. Can you explain why you need the codes and not just the symbols?
4. True.
5. Moves pages for me.
6. Beam thickness is adjustable directly without changing the distance between them.

We all have different needs. Some people don't like Version 3. There are those that hate Sibelius. MU4 is far from perfect. There are reasons some things were left out. Perhaps not all will return. Frankly, I have no use for MU3. At all. But that's me.

In reply to by bobjp

Hi Bob

  1. A text inserted either on the start or end tip of a line. I mean specially the difficult to draw for example an arrowed line to indicate progressive changing of timbric states (fltz -> ord) or different levels of vibrato, etc. In MS3 we have fine control over the text inserted, in MU4 one can barely insert the text, with no controlling over size, style, alignement, etc.

  2. I need the symbols' codes to do the item 2 above, for example, as I substitute an end tip text for a glyph within frame. Without the glyph SMUFL code I can't do that.

  3. That's the problem: if too thick than no space betwen beams will rest... And I cannot control this.

I agree that some use this and some will prefer to use that. No problem at all! But it's not simply about " what I like most" as to engrave contemporary scores (which is my case, but not only MY case) those features are essential and were already well implemented on a previous version. I don't understand why launch a new version with too many objective (not a matter of taste) regressions.

All best!

> Is it still safe to use Musescore 3.6? Is there still support?
It will no longer be developed further, i.e. no more known bugs will be fixed and no more updates will be carried out, unless you use the fork of Jojo-Schmitz, version 3.7 Evolution.
And no further features will be added of course.

> Can new Windows updates cause conflicts and corrupt files, leading to unexpected crashes in Musescore 3.6?
I don't think anyone can say that for the future. There are people who use the current Windows 11 and they still work with MuS 3.6.2 or 3.7 without any problems. But we all don't know what will be changed in future Windows versions.

I use 3.7 as my main version as it has bug fixes and enhancements over 3.6.2 but there is always the possibility that it could become obsoleted by system dependencies, e.g. Windows updates or supported versions of QT. However, this potential issue is mitigated by the fact that MS4 can open MS3 files.

I am not ready to make the change to MS4 since there are things missing from it that I use in MS3 but in time I expect that MS4 will catch up and I'll across. I didn't want to through the learning curve from MS2 to MS3, (a few years ago), but now I wouldn't want to go back.

Another option to consider is to make an additional save of your MS files in MusicXML format. Then if MS was to completely disappear there would be other programs that could open your scores. Hopefully MS will be with us for many years to come but it doesn't hurt to have disaster recovery insurance, (MusicXML), just in case.

In reply to by Paulo Rios Filho

For my own education, I'm trying to understand your list. You don't have to respond if you don't want to.

I did find the text lines you mentioned. Indeed the text is not modifiable. there are ways to do this differently. Though maybe not as easy or dependable.

I can't draw any lines. But I can add a line and make it as long as needed, and make it any angle. Not the same. I can also put an arrow on the end. Both kind of tricky. Might not be worth the trouble. Yet doable.

Still not understanding the code problem. Are you trying to put a particular symbol at the end of a line? Does the code make it part of the text line?

Beam separation and thickness are adjustable in style. But it affect all beams.

Thanks for listening.

In reply to by bobjp

Hi bobjp

Of course. Here it goes:

1) Yes, there are ways to use staff text in the beginning or end of a line, but as you noticed, they will not be dependable and normal editing and layout or spacing chages may affect their relative position here and there. Sometimes that's just ok, sometimes not.

2) When I said to draw diagonal lines I was talking specifically of allowing lines to be diagonal. Some do that in MU4, but some don't. Simply is missing that box in the properties dock - and was not on MU3 inspector. I don't know how you make it any angle, as you said. Please, tell me how you are able to do that with a straight line, for example.

3) About the code thing: yes, that's it - to put a particular symbol at tha end of a line, as a text. You simply write CODE and have the glyph as a text in the start or end of a line. You can do that in MU4, but you can't resize the glyph (and they are always small by default), nor fixing it's position, and you don't know the exact code easily (in MU3 the code is shown together with the glyph name).

4) Yes, beam thickness is adjustable. What is not is the distance between them. I mean, you can adjust the distance, but only by two default amounts and not in a fine tune as MU3 does. Besides that, MU3 don't reset shortest stem settings when changing the distance between beams - what happens in MU4...


In reply to by Paulo Rios Filho

2. This only works with the regular line. Enter it into a score. Select it. It turns blue. There are tiny selection boxes at each end and in the middle. Select a box at one end to drag it up or down (or make it longer or shorter). Only that end will move. Select the middle box to move it where you want. In the attached image, I added an arrow. But any of these things might move if certain other changes are made. As you mentioned.
I understand and can confirm the other points.

I write simple orchestra scores for playback only. I use them in videos I make or just for my own use. I've never used the things you have pointed out. Thanks for taking the time to explain them.
MU3 allows us to do many things a certain way. For now MU4 does not quite allow those same things the same way. I get the frustration.
Personally, I have no use for MU3. I don't even have it on this computer. It is still on an older computer. But I don't need it.
Thanks again.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.