On 6/26/17 4:53 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Abraham Lee" <lilypond-devel-bounces+c_sorensen=byu....@gnu.org on behalf of tisimst.lilyp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Greetings, Devs! > >I have always wondered why dashed slurs look the way they do, especially >when compared to the Barenreiter snippets found in the essay. The current >dashes look better than they used to, but I still think they look a bit >odd >compared to the fairly uniform thickness of the hand-engraved Barenreiter >ones. Is there any historical reason they don't look that way? I'd be >curious to know if there is because I very much like the look of the >hand-engraved dashed slurs over the current LP dashed slurs. I think I'm to blame for the current slur dash code. I think it is as it is because it makes half-dashed slurs look much better. > >In any case, I'm wondering what the right way to go about changing them to >look more like the Barenreiter ones is. I've cobbled together some PS code >that takes the Tie/Slur/PhrasingSlur control points and then generates a >separate stencil using those, but with a single dashed curve. This seems >to >work just fine, but I'm wondering if there's a better internal way of >getting the same dashed curve without resorting to pure PS code? It's very simple. Just set the 'thickness property of the slur to 0; the 'thickness property of the slur defines the amount of expansion between the ends and middle of the slur. The 'line-thickness property sets the thickness at the ends of the slur. \score{ { \slurDashPattern #0.7 #0.75 c'4( e' g'2) \once \override Slur.thickness=0 c'4( e' g'2) }} HTH, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel