lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

RE: Drum parts and horizontal beams


From: Nick Payne
Subject: RE: Drum parts and horizontal beams
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:15:04 +1100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Kulp [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Wednesday, 22 October 2008 06:55
> To: Nick Payne
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Drum parts and horizontal beams
> 
> Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> >
> >
> > Nick Payne wrote:
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >
> >>>>
> >>> You must set the beam-damping to +inf.0
> >>>
> >>>  \override Beam #'damping = #+inf.0
> >>>
> >> Is it possible to do the reverse - give every beam a slight slope
> without
> >> explicitly setting the start and end position of every beam? I have
> a
> >> piece
> >> I'm engraving where because of the shape of the arpeggios (the whole
> >> piece
> >> is arpeggios), Lilypond engraves every beam as horizontal, but I
> actually
> >> think it would look better if every beam was slightly sloped. See
> the
> >> attached PNG, where I changed the slope of the first beam using
> \once
> >> \override Beam #'positions = #'(3 . 4), and the second beam uses the
> >> automatic placing. I'd like every beam to have the same slope as the
> 1st
> >> without having to add a beam position override for every bar. I
> played
> >> around with overriding the concaveness and damping beam properties
> >> without
> >> getting anything but horizontal beams.
> >>
> >> Nick
> >>
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> >>
> >
> > The Beam damping property is still probably what you want to adjust.
> If
> > you give it a value like 100000 you should get a slight tilt to the
> beam:
> >
> >          \override Beam #'damping = #100000
> >
> > If you make that -100000 it will make it tilt a bit the other way.
> >
> > Jon
> 
> Just experimenting a bit more with this, I discover that you get more
> noticeable results if you use much smaller numbers, like #1.5 or #3 or
> #-2.  I went with the 100000 number before b/c that used to be in a
> snippet in the fretted strings docs and that was the only example I
> had. :)
> 
>From my testing, using beam damping only has an effect if the beams would
automatically be sloped. It doesn't cause beams that are flat to gain a
slope. The only way I've found of doing that is to use \override Beam
#'positions = #'(x . y), but that means that every time the pitch of the top
note in the arpeggio changes I have to issue another \override command with
different x and y to keep the stem lengths the same. My test case is
attached. Uncomment the beam damping command and give it any value you like
and the beams are still flat.

Nick

Attachment: test.ly
Description: Text Data


reply via email to

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