Christian Mondrup wrote:
> I don't completely agree. Below is a small four part mtx example with the
> same little melody in all parts but with different beam directions and slpoe
> resp. The two upper staves contain Don's/Werner's 16'th note figure in the
> original octave while it is an octave lower in two lower parts. In parts 2
> and 4 I have inverted the slope from that obtained by pmx200's behaviour. In
> the case with stems down I definitely prefer the corrected beaming slope but
> I'm not quite so sure that I also do in stems up case.
You used a somewhat unfair example. Check the result when the movement
continues like (I did not adjust the heights of the following beams):
Meter: C
Style: Solo
S4: Voices S1 S2 S3 S4; Clefs G G G G
Style: S4
c4+ c c a1 f+ e d | [ c b a g ][ f e d c ] e4 g | c2 b | a0
c4+ c c [-1+4 a1 f+ e d ] | c b a g f e d c e4 g | c2 b | a0
c4 c c a1 f+ e d | c d e f g a b c g8 a g b | c2 b | a0
c4 c c [-2+4 a1 f+ e d ] | c d e f g a b c g8 a g b | c2 b | a0
