On 11/08/2013 08:03 PM, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:
Hi Peter!
Thanks a lot for the scan. I would say that even though she doesn't
condemns
her example a), she still considers b) as bad and c) as the best
compromise.
My corrections above are all similar to her example c)
I interpret her as saying that a) is the best solution but c) is a
usable compromise if one want the angle as in b).
This issue came to me while showing one of my compositions to a friend of
mine who used to work at Bärenreiter. His opinions are exactly what I
reproduced on my question above. Also, looking at my G Henle Verlag
editions, I noticed that beams such as of type a) indeed do appear
from time
to time, but they are somehow rare. The majority of beams are: straight,
slightly angled but covering the staff lines or positioned above/below
the
staff lines (where any angle can take place).
Maybe this is a Bärenreiter house rule rather than a general convention!?
Best
Peter
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
