[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
- **labels**: --> Fixed_2_21_0
- **status**: Started --> Fixed
- **Patch**: push -->
- **Comment**:
~~~
issue #1493: Problem with horizontal beams staging
author Torsten Hämmerle
Mon, 5 Feb 2018 20:20:16 + (21:20 +0100)
committer James Lowe
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:38:49 + (18:38 +)
commit 30a874a29b81dbb174a60d185fc3f28bba85604c
~~~
Thank you Torsten.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Fixed
**Labels:** Fixed_2_21_0
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:28 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
- **Patch**: countdown --> push
- **Comment**:
Patch counted down - please push. Torsten, if you do not have commit access
please create a git formatted patch against current master and I can push it
for you if you like.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Mon Feb 12, 2018 05:40 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
- **Patch**: review --> countdown
- **Comment**:
Patch on countdown for Feb 15th.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Sat Feb 10, 2018 06:59 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
- **Needs**: -->
- **Patch**: new --> review
- **Type**: --> Enhancement
- **Comment**:
Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Sat Feb 10, 2018 02:38 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
off-topic check for division by 0 added
http://codereview.appspot.com/337560043
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Sat Feb 10, 2018 02:38 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
- **Needs**: -->
- **Patch**: new --> review
- **Type**: --> Enhancement
- **Comment**:
Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:08 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
issue #1493: Problem with horizontal beams
file: lily/beam-quanting.cc
In spite of infinite damping, due to numeric precision problems
(rounding/adding) the resulting beams arbitrarily still had a
remaining non-zero slope, sometimes even in the "wrong" direction.
In good TeX manner and in line with concaveness (already implemented),
we'll use a threshold value of 1 for forcing horizontal beams.
http://codereview.appspot.com/337560043
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:08 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
Because you asked: I introduced `tanh` many, many years ago based on analyzing
stem damping data in Helene Wanske's book... This function fit best :-)
I favour solution (1). This looks very TeX-like, and I trust Knuth that he had
good reasons to design similar bounds for solving paragraph layout and the like.
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Thu Feb 08, 2018 03:50 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
I've spent a lot of time on thinking about what to write. On the one hand, I didn't want to write screeds and screeds, on the other hand I wanted to supply background information to underpin my favoured solution. For those not interested in the details, please skip to "Proposed solutions". # Numerical precision: rounding problem Starting off with a completely undamped beam, damping is implemented by raising one end and lowering the other end of the beam. Let dy be the vertical distance between left and right end of the completely undamped beam. With infinite damping, LilyPond will raise the lower end by dy/2 and raise the lower end by dy/2. Theoretically, this will lead to two end points with the exact same y value, i.e. a horizontal beam. **Problem:** due to limited numerical precision there may be tiny rounding problems when dividing by 2 and adding. Even the slightest vertical distance between the end points, however, will later be quantized (i.e. increased) to valid sit/straddle/hang positions and thus yield noticeable slopes. The numeric rounding issue may even overcompensate the slope so that the beam's direction flips. That's what happened when we see a raising beam that really should be descending (or, ideally, be horizontal). All these calculations are very sensitive to the slightest deviations and highly depend on beam slope, beam span, stave size, line width, indent, etc. **One solution would be to avoid the precision problem.** In the following list, DELTA unquanted_y is the remaining vertical distance (should be 0) of both ends of the beam. As you can see, even the original dy sign may flip and the numeric "error" is so small I had to use exponential notation: ~~~ original dy = -0.680277, DELTA unquanted_y = 5.5511e-17 original dy = -0.431074, DELTA unquanted_y = 2.7756e-17 original dy = 1.301622, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.680277, DELTA unquanted_y = -5.5511e-17 original dy = -0.431074, DELTA unquanted_y = 2.7756e-17 original dy = 1.301622, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = 1.303842, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.428570, DELTA unquanted_y = -2.7756e-17 original dy = -0.679738, DELTA unquanted_y = 5.5511e-17 original dy = 1.303842, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.428570, DELTA unquanted_y = 2.7756e-17 original dy = -0.679738, DELTA unquanted_y = 5.5511e-17 ~~~ The sligthest deviation between left and right beam end Y position will be drastically amplified by quanting to valid sit/straddle/hang positions later on. After avoiding the rounding problem, there are no unwanted DELTAs left in the case of infinite damping: ~~~ original dy = -0.680277, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.431074, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = 1.301622, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.680277, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.431074, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = 1.301622, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = 1.303842, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.428570, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.679738, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = 1.303842, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.428570, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 original dy = -0.679738, DELTA unquanted_y = 0.e+00 ~~~ # Damping mechanism Beam damping is needed because "beam angles should not deviate far from the horizontal" (Gould). Starting off with the slope of a straight line that links the outer noteheads of the beam, LilyPond applies a rather simple damping formula to the slope: **`slope = 0.6 * tanh (slope) / (damping + concaveness);`** Let's have a look a the numerator first: **Numerator** One may wonder about the hyperbolic tangent (tanh), but it turns out to be very suitable as a damping factor:  * It's symmetric to the origin and can be used both for positive and negative slopes * For small |x|, there is practically no damping at all * |tanh(x)| will never become greater than 1, however large x may be. * For values of |x| > 3, tanh(x) is practically 1. Consequently, the numerator of the damping term 0.6 * tanh(slope) an never exceed the value of 0.6 (i.e. an angle of 31°). **Denominator** damping has a default value of 1, concaveness is 0 for non-concave beams. Concave groups of notes should always have a horizontal beam - independent of damping.So S So that's a special case we'll set aside for the moment. By specifying damping values other than 1, we can increase damping (damping > 1) to get flatter beams From a purely mathematical point of view, damping and concaveness play a very similar role, because the tanh-damped numerator is divided by the sum of damping and concaveness. The idea of achieving horizontal beams by dividing a denominator (that can never becom greater than 0.6) by an infinite damp
[Lilypond-auto] [LilyIssues-auto] [testlilyissues:issues] #1493 Problem with horizontal beams
---
** [issues:#1493] Problem with horizontal beams**
**Status:** Started
**Created:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:21 PM UTC
**Owner:** Torsten Hämmerle
**Attachments:**
-
[beams.ly](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/beams.ly)
(807 Bytes; application/octet-stream)
-
[screenshot.png](https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/1493/attachment/screenshot.png)
(18.9 kB; image/png)
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:*
[ralphbug...@gmail.com](http://code.google.com/u/106131861630194758622/)
James Lowe :
There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
We have a snippet where we state that
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
However the simple example attached shows some odd inconsistencies.
\version "2.13.40"
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % all beams horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
\relative c'' \{
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
f16 g a b a c d g, a b a c d e f g, \break % 2nd and 4th group not
Horizontal
\}
Phil Holmes :
I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too. What do you reckon - adding
the commands
\override Beam \#'details \#'damping-direction-penalty = \#0
\override Beam \#'details \#'round-to-zero-slope = \#0
to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says "if
\override Beam \#'damping = \#+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the other
commands too, as shown here"?
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
testlilyissues-a...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
