[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Dividing ties and adjusting ties in an arpeggiated chord

From: bruys .
Subject: Re: Dividing ties and adjusting ties in an arpeggiated chord
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:16:04 +1000

Hello James,

No, I never got around to trying the white-box method. It looks pretty
fiddly, but I also needed to change the shape of the ties, so I first
tried to separate the parts (believing this was necessary) and came to
a dead-end (see previous e-mails).

I am satisfied that it is possible to get the desired result using
Eluze's method (I've just got to update to the "unstable" version).
The use of dash-definition appears to be less fiddly than the white
box method. I'd still be interested in experimenting with the
white-box method, as it may be useful in other situations, but it
sounds, from your experience, like it is hard to get a good result.

Using \tieDown [sic], didn't produce a satisfactory result in this
situation, in my opinion.

I never got around to nutting out madMuze/David's method of
determining the X-offset of the right endpoint. I'm not really sure
how to use his snippet. If you have an example, that would be


On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:35 AM, James Lowe <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> The problem is that in this example, there is a collision with the
>>> tie, second from the top (d'') and the f# (fis''). Ms. Gould's
>>> solution is to "divide" the tie leaving a gap in the tie, so that it
>>> doesn't collide. How does one divide a tie with Lilypond?
> sorry for the delayed response. Did you try simply to make a White box and 
> then put it over the tie but behind the note?
> I looked at doing that for a piece recently. it worked but I thought it 
> looked awful. So I used \slurDown and that looked better. It was for some 
> single very high flute part, so didn't use chords or other voices.
> sorry if this was irrelevant.
> James

reply via email to

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