Hi all,
Thanks for all your replies.
David Kastrup wrote
> You don't _need_ to override the whole list. You could just override
> single properties from it.
You are of course right, David, I can just use: \override
Stem.details.lengths = #'(3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 5.0 6.0)
Thanks for the tip.
Torste
Torsten Hämmerle writes:
> Any automatic interference (even if it's only in a special case like for
> flat-flag-style) could lead to unpredictable results and the user would lose
> part of the freedom and flexibility to set any desired value by modifying
> the details lists.
>
> For this very rea
Gilberto Agostinho wrote
> Wouldn't it be possible to add a conditional to check for those? If an
> user
> uses flat-flag then they certainly would also prefer these stem length
> settings that you posted. Having this automatized would be great.
Hmmm,
At first glance, that seems to be a good idea
Gilberto Agostinho wrote
> I noticed that the length of the stems in beamed
> notes changed considerably after I used your suggestion below, they are
> now
> much taller than before:
Hi Gilberto,
Oh, bummer, I had forgotten to set some values back to default after playing
around with them...
All
Hi Torsten,
Sorry to disturb you but I noticed that the length of the stems in beamed
notes changed considerably after I used your suggestion below, they are now
much taller than before:
Torsten Hämmerle wrote
> The modified Stem details are:
>
> \override Stem.details = #'((lengths 3.5 3.5 3
Hi Torsten,
Thanks a lot for your message and apologies for my late reply, for some
reason I did not receive a notification that someone had replied to my post.
Also, thank you very much for the modified Stem details, that indeed does
the trick. I will add that to all my scores.
> There is no c
Hi Torsten,
Thanks a lot for your message and apologies for my late reply, for some
reason I did not receive a notification that someone had replied to my post.
Also, thank you very much for the modified Stem details, that indeed does
the trick. I will add that to all my scores.
Torsten Hämmer
Gilberto Agostinho wrote
> I noticed that some of the 32nd-note flags in the flat-flag style seem to
> have a layout problem. The flat flags should always match the staff lines
> (just like beams do), but in a few cases they are located in between the
> staff lines, which looks quite bad. See the m
Hi all,
I noticed that some of the 32nd-note flags in the flat-flag style seem to
have a layout problem. The flat flags should always match the staff lines
(just like beams do), but in a few cases they are located in between the
staff lines, which looks quite bad. See the minimal example below and
