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
