Comment #8 on issue 1817 by [email protected]: Bug in autobeaming 3/4
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1817
Adding yet another view on Comment 5:
Bertrand quotes Gerou that we should have r4 r8 a a a beamed as r4 r8 a [a
a] in 3/4 timing, and I consider this correct. The crazy thing is,
however, that I would _still_ have r4. a8 a a beamed as r4. [a8 a a] !
The reason is that in the second case, the start of the second beat
goes "unmentioned", and that makes it a bad idea to mention its off-beat
separately. However, if the second beat _explicitly_ gets mentioned at its
start, then it does not make sense to merge its off-beat into the following
beat.
So if a rest or a beam starts at beat 2, off-beat 2+ should not get its
beam merged into beat 3.
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
