We have exactly the same problem.
Your solution assumes that musicians are good computer scientists.
We've found that this is definitely not the case. Some musicians, moreover, don't like digitization, and you can't tell an excellent musician "it's that or nothing"... Try it with a Diva...
I would like to offer two or three constructive comments and questions:
You manage the tonalized music by separate pieces: that's one approach, but it would be better if they were files of the same piece. However, for the moment, MS lacks a file filter option based on "Ut", "Bb", etc. MS should be able to provide a permanent filter individually.
1) If "Bb", the others disappear from view.
2) If "nothing", it's "Ut",
3) If "*", all the scores are displayed.
This solves three situations:
1. The musician makes a choice,
2. They forget,
3. They are the conductor.
![[Image: attachment.php?aid=3573]](https://www.zubersoft.com/mobilesheets/forum/attachment.php?aid=3573)
Above picture : "UT" and "Bb" are not tonality, in this case the tonality is Gmin, "UT" speak about "singer sheet", "Bb" speak to "Sax" and "Tx" is displaying "texte", it says the singer should have TWO sheets "UT" and "Tx"... This small difficulty could be solve easyly by filterint "Content" so UT and Ty content the "T", for others musicians, don't need more than one translation
By importing files into different libraries in the same directory, you run the risk of accidental overwriting, and the musician will tell you, "I'm not an expert" (GEEK)... So you're asking for an additional complication, but the cause lies elsewhere. In addition, theyre is to many "prompt" options in MS
The library absolutely must be in a separate directory. In band's AutumnLeaves_UT.PDF file can perfectly well exist in two versions in "UT," but one will be without "Maj7" chords because it's intended for a New Orlean's band, and the other for a classical jazz group. Both are in UT, both are identical, but some chords change... Two conductors can't call each other to agree on file names, and I'm not even talking about bad intentions or simply forget or confuse...
This additional option turns MS into a hellish machine instead of returning to basics: Using paper sheets, a conductor has a " paper binder " with "Master," "UT," "Bb," etc. sheets, and the next conductor has another " paper binder " with paper copies of the scores he's organizing. They must never meet...
MS should follow the exact processus used wit peper sheets... I know it is a big gap betwint musicians, som ar Geek, other are fully analogique and do not whant to change.
A word to the wise.
Sincerely,
Your solution assumes that musicians are good computer scientists.
We've found that this is definitely not the case. Some musicians, moreover, don't like digitization, and you can't tell an excellent musician "it's that or nothing"... Try it with a Diva...
I would like to offer two or three constructive comments and questions:
You manage the tonalized music by separate pieces: that's one approach, but it would be better if they were files of the same piece. However, for the moment, MS lacks a file filter option based on "Ut", "Bb", etc. MS should be able to provide a permanent filter individually.
1) If "Bb", the others disappear from view.
2) If "nothing", it's "Ut",
3) If "*", all the scores are displayed.
This solves three situations:
1. The musician makes a choice,
2. They forget,
3. They are the conductor.
Above picture : "UT" and "Bb" are not tonality, in this case the tonality is Gmin, "UT" speak about "singer sheet", "Bb" speak to "Sax" and "Tx" is displaying "texte", it says the singer should have TWO sheets "UT" and "Tx"... This small difficulty could be solve easyly by filterint "Content" so UT and Ty content the "T", for others musicians, don't need more than one translation
By importing files into different libraries in the same directory, you run the risk of accidental overwriting, and the musician will tell you, "I'm not an expert" (GEEK)... So you're asking for an additional complication, but the cause lies elsewhere. In addition, theyre is to many "prompt" options in MS
The library absolutely must be in a separate directory. In band's AutumnLeaves_UT.PDF file can perfectly well exist in two versions in "UT," but one will be without "Maj7" chords because it's intended for a New Orlean's band, and the other for a classical jazz group. Both are in UT, both are identical, but some chords change... Two conductors can't call each other to agree on file names, and I'm not even talking about bad intentions or simply forget or confuse...
This additional option turns MS into a hellish machine instead of returning to basics: Using paper sheets, a conductor has a " paper binder " with "Master," "UT," "Bb," etc. sheets, and the next conductor has another " paper binder " with paper copies of the scores he's organizing. They must never meet...
MS should follow the exact processus used wit peper sheets... I know it is a big gap betwint musicians, som ar Geek, other are fully analogique and do not whant to change.
A word to the wise.
Sincerely,