Am Sa., 25. Jan. 2020 um 08:58 Uhr schrieb Kevin Barry barrykp@gmail.com:
The minimum length of the stem of the middle note is forcing the beams down.
Not here. It's more the relevant value of
beamed-extreme-minimum-free-lengths. See:
\relative c'' {
r16 f d f
\override Stem.details.beamed-extreme-minimum-free-lengths =
#'(2.0 0.8) %% original: '(2.0 1.25)
\override Stem.french-beaming = ##t
r16 f d f
}
Cheers,
Harm
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Anonymous
-
2020-01-25
On 25/01/2020 09:43, Malte Meyn wrote:
Another problem that has to do with stem lengths in french beaming: articulations use the shorter beam length for positioning, resulting in collisions:
Both beam and articulation positions should be the same for default and french beams. Probably the easiest solution would be to have shorter stem stencils without decreasing the stems’ Y extents.
Last edit: Anonymous 2020-01-25
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
tuplet-number.cc has a workaround for a similar issue but I think instead of workarounds for other grobs we need a solution coming from the stems/beams themselves.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As it is a complete re-design of LilyPond's French beaming implementation, this new approach should be able to solve all the various problems caused by current French beaming, because all grob positioning behaviour will exacly match the standard beaming case without the need for any distiction between French and stanard beaming cases.
Everything now is exactly identical, and only at the very end and only in the ly:stem::print stencil, the (printed) stem length will be shortened by the appropriate french-correction value.
For all the other objects and, of course, the beams, even French stems will be treated as standard-length stems (property "Length" will always keep the standard stem length value), so that all positioning calculations of anything will automatically be correct (in the sense of: identical to standard beaming).
Please have a look! --- Especially at the two old/new comparison PDFs attached there.
For that reason, I'll set this issue to "shelved" for the time being, waiting for the general solution that will also cover this issue.
Cheers,
Torsten
Last edit: Torsten Hämmerle 2020-02-24
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
On 25/01/2020 08:27, Thomas Morley wrote:
On 25/01/2020 09:43, Malte Meyn wrote:
Another problem that has to do with stem lengths in french beaming: articulations use the shorter beam length for positioning, resulting in collisions:
Last edit: Anonymous 2020-01-25
tuplet-number.cc has a workaround for a similar issue but I think instead of workarounds for other grobs we need a solution coming from the stems/beams themselves.
Done.
I've created a new ticket Issue 5788 - New French Beaming Approach
Must be a long standing issue, I could follow it back to the oldest running version on my machine, i.e. 2.12.3. Maybe even older
In the quest for a better, much more straight-forward general solution, I've created the ticket
Issue 5788 - New French Beaming Approach.
As it is a complete re-design of LilyPond's French beaming implementation, this new approach should be able to solve all the various problems caused by current French beaming, because all grob positioning behaviour will exacly match the standard beaming case without the need for any distiction between French and stanard beaming cases.
Everything now is exactly identical, and only at the very end and only in the ly:stem::print stencil, the (printed) stem length will be shortened by the appropriate french-correction value.
For all the other objects and, of course, the beams, even French stems will be treated as standard-length stems (property "Length" will always keep the standard stem length value), so that all positioning calculations of anything will automatically be correct (in the sense of: identical to standard beaming).
Please have a look! --- Especially at the two old/new comparison PDFs attached there.
For that reason, I'll set this issue to "shelved" for the time being, waiting for the general solution that will also cover this issue.
Cheers,
Torsten
Last edit: Torsten Hämmerle 2020-02-24
Solved by more general
Issue 5788: New French Beamimg Approach
Set to Duplicate for that reason.