[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Horizontal Slurs (was Re: (no subject))
From: |
Urs Liska |
Subject: |
Re: Horizontal Slurs (was Re: (no subject)) |
Date: |
Tue, 24 Sep 2019 21:34:39 +0000 |
Hi Aaron,
thank you for looking into it. I think I'll get along with the suggestion in
the current score, but I'll also file a bug report because I think this should
not happen in the first place, and the notation is not terribly excentrly ...
Best
Urs
24. September 2019 19:23, "Aaron Hill" <address@hidden> schrieb:
> On 2019-09-24 9:35 am, Urs Liska wrote:
>
>> Is there any reason why the slrus in the attached example come out the
>> way they do (i.e. so horizontal, with the left edge being so far away
>> from the notehead)?
>
> Seems to be a combination of slurring identical pitches and the articulation
> on the one note. If
> you remove the staccato, the slur sits reasonably close. If you change either
> pitch, then the slur
> behaves more normally.
>
> %%%%
> \version "2.19.83"
>
> { a'8._( a'16_.) \bar "||"
> a'8._( a'16) b'8._( a'16_.) a'8._( b'16_.) }
> %%%%
>
>> What would be the best way to deal with that? Of course I could \shape
>> them individually, but there's a lot of them in the scores, so I'd
>> prefer a *setting* to be applied.
>
> Adjusting edge-attraction-factor seems to help, but be careful with too high
> a value as it collides
> with the articulation:
>
> %%%%
> \version "2.19.83"
>
> { \once \override Slur.details.edge-attraction-factor = #38
> a'8._( a'16_.)
> \once \override Slur.details.edge-attraction-factor = #48
> a'8._( a'16_.)
> \once \override Slur.details.edge-attraction-factor = #58
> a'8._( a'16_.) }
> %%%%
>
> -- Aaron Hill
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user