Hi all, >>> IMHO such a difference shouldn't exist for the default settings: if >>> we have a compound setting x + y, then the beam patterns for x + y >>> should be identical to the patterns of x and y concatenated. >> >> If I understand you, you are suggesting that LilyPond's default >> treatment of (A + B)/D should be changed to group/beam as Gould >> describes for (A/D) + (B/D). > > Yes, beaming patterns for the two different, IMHO identical compound > meter notations should be unified.
As a composer and arranger, and as a musical director who comes across various/curious time signatures, I agree. 1. (A+B)/D and (A/D) + (B/D) should be treated identically by default. 2. (A/C)(B/D), e.g. (6/8)(3/4) should not [!!] > In case my opinion is not shared by others – folks, please chime in! – > we have to improve the documentation, explicitly mentioning that > beaming patterns for (A + B)/D and (A/D) + (B/D) are handled > separately. For the particular case under discussion (#1 above): No explicit documentation is likely needed. For the additional case I brought up (#2 above): *IF* Lilypond automatically handles (A/C)(B/D), and handles it differently from (A/D)+(B/D) — which I believe it should — then it seems evident that explicit documentation is required. My 2¢. — Kieren __________________________________________________ My work day may look different than your work day. Please do not feel obligated to read or respond to this email outside of your normal working hours.
