Hi Andrew,
sorry that I was confused by your example (which actually was *not*
"minimal", with the excess information being actively misleading. The
keyword "breakable" in combination with the explicit beams made me
think you were after a broken beam, not also about the line break.)
OK: You can o
On 2020-08-01 9:03 pm, Andrew Bernard wrote:
Ah, is it to do with the tuplet not being breakable?
Nope. It's because there was no barline to break at.
Try: \bar "" \break
Remember that your \tuplet 7/8 is scaling note durations.
You could do this instead and see that you do not need to a
Ah, is it to do with the tuplet not being breakable?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 14:00, Andrew Bernard wrote:
>
> Sorry, but if you remove the explicit beam the same issue remains. I
> am stumped. I am unable to understand your comment about 'at note
> heads. Surely the break can only occur between not
Sorry, but if you remove the explicit beam the same issue remains. I
am stumped. I am unable to understand your comment about 'at note
heads. Surely the break can only occur between notes?
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 13:37, Urs Liska wrote:
>
> Ah no, much simpler: If you ask LilyPond to print an expli
Ah no, much simpler: If you ask LilyPond to print an explicit beam it
will print an explicit beam ;-)
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2020, 05:35 +0200 schrieb Urs Liska:
> Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2020, 13:32 +1000 schrieb Andrew Bernard:
> > \version "2.21.4"
> >
> >
> >
> > {
> >
> > \time 7/8
> >
>
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2020, 13:32 +1000 schrieb Andrew Bernard:
> \version "2.21.4"
>
>
>
> {
>
> \time 7/8
>
> \set Timing.measureLength = #(ly:make-moment 1/4)
>
> \override Beam.breakable = ##t
>
> \tuplet 7/8 {
>
> b'16[ b' b' b'
>
> \break
>
> c'' c'' c'']
>
>
Why won't this let me break the beam?
Andrew
%
\version "2.21.4"
{
\time 7/8
\set Timing.measureLength = #(ly:make-moment 1/4)
\override Beam.breakable = ##t
\tuplet 7/8 {
b'16[ b' b' b'
\break
c'' c'' c'']
} |
}
%
Hi Andrew,
I can't compile your example on the mobile, but you are most certainly
experiencing an issue where LilyPond doesn't behave according to its declared
intention. (Assuming that with "broken" you mean subdivided).
The proper handling of subdivisions under tuplets is on my agenda in rew
Hi List,
I have the following expression:
\version "2.19.36"
\relative c'' {
\set subdivideBeams = ##t
\set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1/8)
\set beatStructure = #'(2 2 2 2)
\time 4/8
\tuplet 3/2 { es,16\( f g } \tuplet 3/2 { a b cis\) } \tuplet 3/2 { dis\(
eis g } a32 b16.->\) |
}
On Monday 06 November 2006 12:59, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> Erik Sandberg wrote:
> > On Monday 06 November 2006 09:25, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> >
> > Mats, do you think it would be useful with an operator \newClone to clone
> > the current context? E.g.
> > \new Staff \with {\consists Foo_engraver bar
Erik Sandberg wrote:
On Monday 06 November 2006 09:25, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Victor Eijkhout wrote:
So, if you want a limited scope, you can explicitly create a short-lived
context.
Here's an example that uses smaller note heads for one measure:
\relative c'{ c d e f \new Voice {\tiny g f
On Monday 06 November 2006 09:25, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> Victor Eijkhout wrote:
> So, if you want a limited scope, you can explicitly create a short-lived
> context.
> Here's an example that uses smaller note heads for one measure:
>
> \relative c'{ c d e f \new Voice {\tiny g f e d } c d e d c1 }
Victor Eijkhout wrote:
Beam breaking is a visual operation, not a mathematical one. I want a
sixteenth beam broken at any beat boundary, no matter whether this is
in 4/4 time or in a 27 over 26 fragment.
I don't agree completely. Beam breaking is used to clarify the rhythmic
stru
bes } |
r4 g8 a16 bes a16 bes c8 |
}
\version "2.9.27"
Bad side effects.
But I think this approach points to a design error. Beam breaking is
a visual operation, not a mathematical one. I want a sixteenth beam
broken at any beat boundary, no matter whether this is in 4/4 time o
If you divide a 3/4 measure into 4 equal beats, then each beat will be
3/16 long. So, you can obtain what you want with
#(override-auto-beam-setting '(end * * * *) 3 16)
#(override-auto-beam-setting '(end * * * *) 6 16)
#(override-auto-beam-setting '(end * * * *) 9 16)
Since this is a fairly un
Is this a bug or a feature? (2.9.27, PPC)
\relative c'' {
\time 3/4
\times 3/4 { r4 g8 a16 bes a8 bes16 c d8 c16 bes } |
#(override-auto-beam-setting '(end 1 16 * *) 2 4)
r4 g8 a16 bes a8 bes16 c |
}
I was expecting the beam in the tuplet to be broken the same way as
in the measure after.
I
wondering if there's a way to break a beam at a barline which has a time
sig change, so the beam doesn't clash with the time sig. i still want
the visual sense of beaming over the barline, so want to end up with
"hanging" partial beams on either side, just like when you break a beam
over a line
On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 14:33:35 +
David Bobroff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the following example I want to reduce the beams between the first
> and second notes. According to the docs:
>
> \property Voice.subdivideBeams = ##t
>
> ..is what I need to use. It is having no effect. What am I
David Bobroff wrote:
In the following example I want to reduce the beams between the first
and second notes. According to the docs:
\property Voice.subdivideBeams = ##t
..is what I need to use. It is having no effect. What am I doing
wrong?
The docs say tgat subdivideBeams subdivides the beams
In the following example I want to reduce the beams between the first
and second notes. According to the docs:
\property Voice.subdivideBeams = ##t
..is what I need to use. It is having no effect. What am I doing
wrong?
-David Bobroff
Lilypond 1.7.20
\score {
\notes \relative c, {
20 matches
Mail list logo
