errata: more note flat = more not flat On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:06 AM, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2011, at 5:32 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > >> There are lots of broken beams in Scriabin's first prelude >> <http://imslp.org/wiki/24_Preludes,_Op.11_(Scriabin,_Aleksandr)> >> The original publisher makes no attempt at consistent slopes. >> Peters Edition prints nearly-equal slopes across the line-breaks, but >> lets the beam height >> >> There is a Lilypond version at >> <http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=1779> >> Applying consistent-broken-slope = #t (beware the error in this thread >> subject line) produces output with distractingly strange stem lengths. >> >> The patch at <http://codereview.appspot.com/5293060> >> seems to help. The odd stem lengths, required to match the vertical >> position of the beam across the line-break, are still distracting. >> >> Consistent slopes seem to help readability somewhat. >> > > Hey Keith, > > Thanks for the suggestion! > I've uploaded a new patch set that brings my work closer to the Peters. > > A few thoughts: > > 1) For hardcore contemporary music, I actually like the aesthetic of > completely consistent slopes. I'll code a property for that once I've gotten > comments on the newest version of this patch. > > 2) I get the sense from the Peters that the rule seems to be "the OKness of > slope modifications is directly proportional to the absolute value of the > slope." That is, for flat slopes breaking across lines, a change in slope > seems very bad, whereas for slopes that are @ 20ish degrees, a change in > slope seems OK. Although I don't know anything about human > psychology/cognition, my gut tells me that this corresponds to the way we > perceive slopes: if something goes from flat to not flat it sticks out, but > if something goes from not flat to more note flat it sticks out less. > > 3) Aside from what I mention in (2), are there any other criteria that, in > your opinion, seem to govern slope breaking? Could these criteria vary from > work to work, edition to edition, style to style? Does Elaine Gould have > anything to say on the subject? I can change the name of > consistent-broken-slope to slope-style (with styles like > 'hardcore-contemporary, 'peters-fin-de-siecle, 'break-without-unifying, > etc.). But it'd be good to do this now before I have to start dealing with > convert-ly rules (uggghhhhh :). > > I know beam-quanting.cc pretty well now, so any changes to the scorer > wouldn't take me a long time. What is most important is that we brainstorm > this thing correctly so that we can get as much right as possible with this > patch. > > Cheers, > MS > _______________________________________________ > bug-lilypond mailing list > bug-lilypond@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
