On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Carl Sorensen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 10/12/09 1:41 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Attached is the output of LilyPond 2.7, which was benchmarked as a >> near match against Baerenreiter BA320. The current beam positions do >> not match: the stems are now shorter, on average. (The third measure >> also has a beaming error of another kind: the first two beats should >> be grouped separately from each other.) > > I cannot see where the stems are shorter on average. I can see that the > beamlets are a little bit shorter, but every stem I check between the two > appears to me to be the same length (except the difference caused by the > beaming error).
Hmm, I think you're right. I'll do some more research on this one. > The beaming error in measure 3 is the result of a known bug; the autobeamer > can't look ahead to see the 1/16 notes on the second beat and end the beam > after the first beat. > > See issue 638 > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=638 > Thanks for the info! I'm glad to know it's not an error in my input. Andrew _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
