[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Proposal: Changing tremolo beam gap implementation

From: Torsten Hämmerle
Subject: Re: Proposal: Changing tremolo beam gap implementation
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 13:56:31 -0700 (MST)

Noeck wrote
> You always show notes with the same pitch. It might
> make sense to look at slanted beams, too. But as there is no problem
> currently, I would not expect one due to the gap change.

Musically, two-note tremolos with twice the same note don't make any sense
at all, but for demonstrating the gap size behaviour, I nevertheless chose
these configurations.
And it was only by chance that I became aware of the unexpected gap size
implementation when experimenting with whole-note tremolos.

Noeck wrote
> Btw, how do you produce such a tremolo?
> I know these (depending on the notehead), but how to attach one beam and
> not the others?

These configurations with one beam attached came quite handy for the gap
comparisons (and you 
noticed the incorrect full beam in my example image, so it is good for
testing, too).

In your example, the black noteheads could be mistaken as quavers without
floating beams, but minims usually use full beams for tremolos.

But you can set the number of floating beams (i.e. gapped beams) using the
gap-count property:

  \repeat tremolo 8 { e''32 f'' }
  \override = #1
  \repeat tremolo 8 { e''32 f'' }
  \override = #2
  \repeat tremolo 8 { e''32 f'' }
  \override = #3
  \repeat tremolo 8 { e''32 f'' }




Sent from:

reply via email to

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