Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hi all, thanks for the replies!

@Noeck

> I am pretty sure that I read that this is done on purpose, that the flag
> can touch the note head and that the distance of the elements of a 16th,
> 32nd, etc. flag are derived from the distance of staff lines.

I personally think there is a difference between touching and overlapping
(colliding) with a note head. Even some of the examples in Gould's book show
flags basically touching note heads, but never colliding (i think); in my
opinion, the case of LilyPond's stemmed down e' is indeed quite extreme.
About distances, she writes on p. 16 that the stem of both eighth and
sixteenth notes should be 3.5 staff spaces (I think considering that the
stem starts in the half of a note head, so for instance a f' stem should
finish exactly at the top staff line), and the flags should be 3 and 3.25
staff spaces, respectively.

@Trevor

Thanks for the link, I will check that discussion out!

@Simon

> Of course it isn’t constant, because stem length isn’t constant, and
> shouldn’t be. The ‘easiest’ description I can think of is that in
> classical engraving there is a kind of ‘gravity’ towards the center of
> the staff, which among other things makes stem length depend on staff
> position (of the note head(s)). 

I just had found it suspicious that the stemmed down notes affected by
collisions are exactly the ones that would normally take stem ups (a' or
lower). I was not aware that was intentional.

> ‘Tails’? Really? I’ve never heard that word in engraving context. 

I actually have heard of tails before, though flags is certainly much more
common. But for instance, you will find in /The Hutchinson Concise
Dictionary of Music/ on p. 523: quaver, "US eighth note [...] it is written
as a filled black note-head with a stem and flag (tail)." Anyway, I think
this is just choice of vocabulary and so it shouldn't really matter.

Cheers!
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/flag-and-notehead-collision-with-certain-chords-tp195330p195356.html
Sent from the Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Simon Albrecht]

On 14.10.2016 20:11, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:

Hi Simon,

I think part of the problem is that the amount of collision is not even
constant for the cases above. Compare the very bottom system on the image I
posted, note how the flag barely touches the bottom note a' but completely
collides with the bottom e'.


Of course it isn’t constant, because stem length isn’t constant, and 
shouldn’t be. The ‘easiest’ description I can think of is that in 
classical engraving there is a kind of ‘gravity’ towards the center of 
the staff, which among other things makes stem length depend on staff 
position (of the note head(s)). Why? To save vertical space, to achieve 
a less jagged contour, and indeed I believe it eases reading.



At least you’d have to give very good evidence and convince a large
majority that it would be better to avoid this at the expense of longer
stems.

Or of shorter flags. Elaine Gould writes on p. 16 of her /Behind Bars/:
"[s]o that tails do not touch the noteheads of down-stemmed notes, some
editions shorten the tails while others lengthen the stems."


‘Tails’? Really? I’ve never heard that word in engraving context.


You can notice how inconsistent the distance between noteheads and flags is
in the top system of this example below:



Of course it is inconsistent and must be:

%%
\version "2.19.47"
\relative {
  \voiceTwo
  \autoBeamOff
  \time 7/8
  b8 c d e f g a
  b c d e f g a
  b c d e f g a
  b
}
%%
(output attached)

Best, Simon
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Trevor Daniels]

Gilberto Agostinho wrote Friday, October 14, 2016 7:11 PM

> I think part of the problem is that the amount of collision is not even
> constant for the cases above. Compare the very bottom system on the image I
> posted, note how the flag barely touches the bottom note a' but completely
> collides with the bottom e'. 
> 
>> At least you’d have to give very good evidence and convince a large
>> majority that it would be better to avoid this at the expense of longer
>> stems. 
> 
> Or of shorter flags. Elaine Gould writes on p. 16 of her /Behind Bars/:
> "[s]o that tails do not touch the noteheads of down-stemmed notes, some
> editions shorten the tails while others lengthen the stems."
> 
> You can notice how inconsistent is the distance between noteheads and flags
> in the top system of this example below:
> 
> Producing: 
> 
>  
> 
> I think it's clear that the distance of the flags to the noteheads of notes
> that are normally down stemmed (higher than and including b') is different
> than those that are normally stemmed up (lower than b'). In the bottom
> system, I simply forced the second case to be the same as the first, and the
> consistency and lack of collisions look much better to me.

Before Janek implemented shorter stems outside the staff there was a lot of
discussion about it, including the effect on flags and avoiding collisions with 
note heads.  

You can see much of it here:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/cgi-bin/namazu.cgi?query=flags%2C+beams+and+stem+length=Search%21=lilypond-devel=20=normal=date%3Aearly=0

Janek certainly devised new flags.  But I can't remember whether the revised 
flags were actually implemented.  Maybe they weren't, as the discussion
appears to peter out.

Trevor
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Noeck]

Hi,

I am pretty sure that I read that this is done on purpose, that the flag
can touch the note head and that the distance of the elements of a 16th,
32nd, etc. flag are derived from the distance of staff lines. But after
quite some searching I could not find the article I am talking about.

And I think there are rules how long the stem should be depending on the
position in the staff - not on the shape of the flag. In other words: If
the collision should be avoided, the flag glyph would be different, not
the stem length. But I may be wrong.

Cheers,
Joram

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hi Simon,

I think part of the problem is that the amount of collision is not even
constant for the cases above. Compare the very bottom system on the image I
posted, note how the flag barely touches the bottom note a' but completely
collides with the bottom e'. 

> At least you’d have to give very good evidence and convince a large
> majority that it would be better to avoid this at the expense of longer
> stems. 

Or of shorter flags. Elaine Gould writes on p. 16 of her /Behind Bars/:
"[s]o that tails do not touch the noteheads of down-stemmed notes, some
editions shorten the tails while others lengthen the stems."

You can notice how inconsistent is the distance between noteheads and flags
in the top system of this example below:



Producing: 

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n195333/01.png> 

I think it's clear that the distance of the flags to the noteheads of notes
that are normally down stemmed (higher than and including b') is different
than those that are normally stemmed up (lower than b'). In the bottom
system, I simply forced the second case to be the same as the first, and the
consistency and lack of collisions look much better to me.

Take care,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/flag-and-notehead-collision-with-certain-chords-tp195330p195333.html
Sent from the Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Simon Albrecht]

On 14.10.2016 17:28, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:

Hello all,

Recently I realized that some eighth note chords have their flags either too
close to the noteheads or sometimes even colliding with them.


I’m pretty sure that this is not a bug, but fully intentional. I like it.
At least you’d have to give very good evidence and convince a large 
majority that it would be better to avoid this at the expense of longer 
stems.


Best, Simon

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

flag and notehead collision with certain chords

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hello all,

Recently I realized that some eighth note chords have their flags either too
close to the noteheads or sometimes even colliding with them. Below is a
code to show that (collisions are marked with an asterisk). See:



Producing:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n195330/13.png> 

Cheers,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/flag-and-notehead-collision-with-certain-chords-tp195330.html
Sent from the Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond