[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] Re: #5036 128

From: Auto mailings of changes to Lily Issues via Testlilyissues-auto
Subject: [Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] Re: #5036 128 beaming output not producing output as expected (?)
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 14:41:18 -0000

Haha, that's unfair... ;)

In this case, the only solution would be to widen the gap between the beams.

But, obviously, this is hardly readable because it very much obscures the stave-lines.
For that reason, Gould writes (Beams wit opposite stem directions, p. 26):
"... provided that [...] the top and bottom stave-lines remain clear of a beam"

That way, you'll have a maximum of only three "allowed" beams within the stave.

I don't know either how this should look, probably because nearly anything would be better than that solution. Beam outside even if it takes lots of space or split up the monster beam.

[issues:#5036] 128 beaming output not producing output as expected (?)

Status: Accepted
Created: Fri Jan 20, 2017 01:43 PM UTC by Palmer Ralph
Last Updated: Sun Apr 23, 2017 01:42 PM UTC
Owner: nobody

Noeck wrote :
is this a bug or done on purpose? The following snippet produces beams
of which the lowest beam does not touch the staff line below.

{ g128[ g] }

The small-gaps-fill-with-ink theory should avoid this. IMHO the output
would look better like this:

  \override Beam.positions = #'(2.7 . 2.7)
  g128[ g]

What do the experts think?

This has been discussed at some length on the user list.

Sent from because address@hidden is subscribed to

To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at Or, if this is a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]