Re: Tie position with sharps
On 2020-07-23 4:38 pm, Aaron Hill wrote:
On 2020-07-23 3:14 pm, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote:
Hi,
consider:
\version "2.21.0"
\relative {
g'1~ \break
g^"normal tie"
}
\relative {
ges'1~ \break
ges^"low tie"
}
\relative {
gis'1~ \break
gis^"low tie"
}
I understand why the tie at the beginning of the second system of each
example has to sit a little bit lower if there is an accidental in the
way; but isn't the tie position in the third example (with sharp) a
trifle _too_ far down?
Attached is an image that compares the distance relative to the tie.
You can see the flat sits a little more snugly.
It would seem the tie is preferring to vertically align to staff
lines/positions. After manually overlaying the ties in my image
editor, the staff lines are perfectly overlapping as well, albeit one
staff space lower.
The sharp extends low enough forcing the tie down an entire staff
space. But this results in a slightly larger gap, because there is
slightly less than a staff space difference between the flat and
sharp's lower extent.
Now with the correct attachment. (I *hate* email... no ability to edit
without making noise.)
-- Aaron Hill
Re: Tie position with sharps
On 2020-07-23 3:14 pm, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote:
Hi,
consider:
\version "2.21.0"
\relative {
g'1~ \break
g^"normal tie"
}
\relative {
ges'1~ \break
ges^"low tie"
}
\relative {
gis'1~ \break
gis^"low tie"
}
I understand why the tie at the beginning of the second system of each
example has to sit a little bit lower if there is an accidental in the
way; but isn't the tie position in the third example (with sharp) a
trifle _too_ far down?
Attached is an image that compares the distance relative to the tie.
You can see the flat sits a little more snugly.
It would seem the tie is preferring to vertically align to staff
lines/positions. After manually overlaying the ties in my image editor,
the staff lines are perfectly overlapping as well, albeit one staff
space lower.
The sharp extends low enough forcing the tie down an entire staff space.
But this results in a slightly larger gap, because there is slightly
less than a staff space difference between the flat and sharp's lower
extent.
-- Aaron Hill
Tie position with sharps
Hi,
consider:
\version "2.21.0"
\relative {
g'1~ \break
g^"normal tie"
}
\relative {
ges'1~ \break
ges^"low tie"
}
\relative {
gis'1~ \break
gis^"low tie"
}
I understand why the tie at the beginning of the second system of each
example has to sit a little bit lower if there is an accidental in the
way; but isn't the tie position in the third example (with sharp) a
trifle _too_ far down?
Is that intended behaviour?
Lukas
