Single-note tremolos
Dave Higgins noted that for notes outside of the staff, tremolo indications collided with ledger lines. In reviewing Gould (p. 222), I found several defaults in LilyPond that go against Gould's recommendations. 1) The tremolo lines are too wide (they should be only as wide as a crotchet note head). 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than beams, but in LilyPond they are the same thickness). 3) The tremolo lines collide with ledger lines (they should lie entirely within the staff). 4) For notes on a staff line, the tremolo line closest to the heads centered on a staff space. This is allowed in Gould, but not recommended. The recommendation is that single tremolo strokes should center on a staff line. The closest stroke and the single stroke are in the same position in LilyPond, so I think it is best to move them to a staff line. I have created changes to the semibreve single-note tremolo spacing code to fix all of these issues. I've attached pdf output from the current code as well as the improved code, along with my test file. Please review the changes and let me know if you think this is worth committing to LilyPond. Thanks, Carl tremolo-test.pdf Description: tremolo-test.pdf tremolo-test.ly Description: tremolo-test.ly tremolo-test-improved.pdf Description: tremolo-test-improved.pdf ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Single-note tremolos
Dave Higgins noted that for notes outside of the staff, tremolo indications collided with ledger lines. In reviewing Gould (p. 222), I found several defaults in LilyPond that go against Gould's recommendations. 1) The tremolo lines are too wide (they should be only as wide as a crotchet note head). 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than beams, but in LilyPond they are the same thickness). 3) The tremolo lines collide with ledger lines (they should lie entirely within the staff). 4) For notes on a staff line, the tremolo line closest to the heads centered on a staff space. This is allowed in Gould, but not recommended. The recommendation is that single tremolo strokes should center on a staff line. The closest stroke and the single stroke are in the same position in LilyPond, so I think it is best to move them to a staff line. I have created changes to the semibreve single-note tremolo spacing code to fix all of these issues. I've attached pdf output from the current code as well as the improved code, along with my test file. Please review the changes and let me know if you think this is worth committing to LilyPond. Thanks, Carl tremolo-test.pdf Description: tremolo-test.pdf tremolo-test.ly Description: tremolo-test.ly tremolo-test-improved.pdf Description: tremolo-test-improved.pdf ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
Am 16.05.2016 um 01:23 schrieb Carl Sorensen: 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than beams, but in LilyPond they are the same thickness). IMO your variant isn’t much better: The tremolo beams look *very* slim now. Two ideas: 1. Does Gould say something about *how much* thinner they should be? 2. Shouldn’t the space between the beams be reduced at the same or at least similar amount? 4) For notes on a staff line, the tremolo line closest to the heads centered on a staff space. This is allowed in Gould, but not recommended. The recommendation is that single tremolo strokes should center on a staff line. The closest stroke and the single stroke are in the same position in LilyPond, so I think it is best to move them to a staff line. This thread from August 2015 might be related: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2015-08/msg00175.html I posted a bug and an imperfect workaround there. I also reported the bug here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2015-07/msg00067.html But I don’t think it’s been added to the tracker yet (IMO it’s different from issue 3143, explanation see this thread). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
Am 16.05.2016 um 21:20 schrieb Malte Meyn: IMO your variant isn’t much better: I should have first thanked you to work on this topic at all (and your changes 1 and 3 are indeed worth to be included into LilyPond; 2 with some further changes, I have no opinion on 4 but these thoughts let me think of the other thread I mentioned). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
> In reviewing Gould (p. 222), I found several defaults in LilyPond > that go against Gould's recommendations. > > 1) The tremolo lines are too wide (they should be only as wide as a >crotchet note head). This is a matter of taste, it seems. I have seen scores where the width of tremolos is wider, especially at small sizes. > 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than >beams, but in LilyPond they are the same thickness). The same. For my taste, your new settings are too thin. > 3) The tremolo lines collide with ledger lines (they should lie >entirely within the staff). This looks OK. Have you done some real world comparisons? Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
On 5/16/16 1:20 PM, "Malte Meyn" wrote: > >Am 16.05.2016 um 01:23 schrieb Carl Sorensen: >> 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than beams, >>but >> in LilyPond they are the same thickness). > >IMO your variant isn¹t much better: The tremolo beams look *very* slim >now. Two ideas: >1. Does Gould say something about *how much* thinner they should be? >2. Shouldn¹t the space between the beams be reduced at the same or at >least similar amount? Lilypond beams are 0.48 staff spaces by default, which is half of the space between staff lines. In the code I produced I reduced the thickness by about 25%, to 0.4 staff spaces. Harm had suggested even thinner lines, at 0.35 staff spaces. Gould is explicit that the separation for the tremolo lines is the same as the separation for beams, with one possible exception -- she suggests that when there are two tremolo lines, they should both be centered on adjacent staff lines. Beams should be hanging from the top, and centered on the bottom. At any rate, her explicit recommendation is that the spacing should *not* be reduced, and the reduction in line thickness increases the amount of white space between the lines. > >> 4) For notes on a staff line, the tremolo line closest to the heads >> centered on a staff space. This is allowed in Gould, but not >>recommended. >> The recommendation is that single tremolo strokes should center on a >>staff >> line. The closest stroke and the single stroke are in the same position >> in LilyPond, so I think it is best to move them to a staff line. > >This thread from August 2015 might be related: >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2015-08/msg00175.html >I posted a bug and an imperfect workaround there. I also reported the >bug here: >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2015-07/msg00067.html >But I don¹t think it¹s been added to the tracker yet (IMO it¹s different >from issue 3143, explanation see this thread). I have not yet worked on the code to change the slash placement on stemmed notes. The problems with the stemmed note slashes are more severe than on the whole note slashes. But the code for the whole notes was easier to work on for an initial patch. My plan was to handle the whole-note tremolos first, and make sure I got the spacing rules right, then figure out how to apply the spacing rules properly to the stemmed-note tremolos. Gould says that whole-note tremolos should be applied as if the note had a stem, so I'm comfortable doing the initial work on whole notes, then moving it to stemmed notes. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
Hi Carl, bringing this up and already offering a solution is really nice. Thank you for your work! I can only tell what my gut feeling is: 1) I like the wider tremolos more for whole notes 2) Again, I like the thick lines more 3) The tremolos inside the staff look much cleaner/better. 4) Can/Should the lines be separated by exactly one staff space? Would that make sense or is it too wide? Thanks again for taking care about such details! Best, Joram ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
2016-05-16 22:52 GMT+02:00 Carl Sorensen : > > > On 5/16/16 1:20 PM, "Malte Meyn" wrote: > >> >>Am 16.05.2016 um 01:23 schrieb Carl Sorensen: >>> 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than beams, >>>but >>> in LilyPond they are the same thickness). >> >>IMO your variant isn¹t much better: The tremolo beams look *very* slim >>now. Two ideas: >>1. Does Gould say something about *how much* thinner they should be? >>2. Shouldn¹t the space between the beams be reduced at the same or at >>least similar amount? > > Lilypond beams are 0.48 staff spaces by default, which is half of the > space between staff lines. > > In the code I produced I reduced the thickness by about 25%, to 0.4 staff > spaces. Harm had suggested even thinner lines, at 0.35 staff spaces. Tbh, I took 0,35 to make it obvious to everyone (and added "change to fit your needs" or something like that). That said, I _do_ like your changes, although I think I've seen a broad variety in printed editions. Thanks for doing this, Harm ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
Werner, Thanks for the feedback. On 5/16/16 1:35 PM, "Werner LEMBERG" wrote: > >> In reviewing Gould (p. 222), I found several defaults in LilyPond >> that go against Gould's recommendations. >> >> 1) The tremolo lines are too wide (they should be only as wide as a >>crotchet note head). > >This is a matter of taste, it seems. I have seen scores where the >width of tremolos is wider, especially at small sizes. OK. That is a parameter that the user can easily change (we should make sure to add an example to the docs. I'm currently looking for good defaults. > >> 2) The tremolo lines are too thick (they should be thinner than >>beams, but in LilyPond they are the same thickness). > >The same. For my taste, your new settings are too thin. OK > >Have you done some real world comparisons? I have not. I don't have a good collection of scores to check. I would welcome any real-world examples that could be provided. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Single-note tremolos
Hi Carl, Thank you for doing this. I believe all of these adjustments are improvements already. If you have [as you’ve suggested you will have] parameters for most of the settings, with reasonable defaults pre-set, this will be a nice step forward. Best, Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
