[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Slanted Beams thickness

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: Slanted Beams thickness
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:31:18 -0600

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 7:47 AM Valentin Petzel <> wrote:

> Are you sure about this? It is incredibly hard to cut diagonal lines with
> a
> chisel. As I mentioned half an hour ago this would have hardly any effect
> in
> the common cases anyway.

No, I'm not sure about this.  It was my understanding, but my understanding
could be wrong.

> And my intent is not to propose a new default, but to initiate some
> discussion. This should not affect common notation practise (unless you
> want to
> reproduce a style with very little distance between the Beam, in which
> case
> reasonable slopes do cause bad results), but might be relevant for some
> more
> modern stuff.
I think having options is good.  And it may be that there is a difference
between a single beam and multiple beams.  If there is a single beam that's
exceptionally steep, only one end will be on the staff, and we can fudge
the location of the beam (make it a straddle beam).  We don't have to worry
about what happens with adjacent beams.

If we have multiple beams, we have to make the inter-beam spacing work,
which may be a substantial challenge.

I think (especially in the case of multiple beams) there's much more to
properly changing the optical weight of a steep beam than just changing the
beam's thickness.



reply via email to

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