Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 10:38 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 14:04:21 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 07:40 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 09:40:30 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: > > > [...] > > > > style, but something like that

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 14:04:21 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 07:40 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 09:40:30 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: > > [...] > > > style, but something like that with no church rests, numerical time > > > > What are these? >

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 07:40 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 09:40:30 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: > [...] > > style, but something like that with no church rests, numerical time > > What are these?

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Fri 08 Apr 2016 at 09:40:30 (+0100), Richard Shann wrote: [...] > style, but something like that with no church rests, numerical time What are these? Misericords? Cheers, David. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 08.04.2016 02:42, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: May I be so bold as to inquire, how does the beaming "clearly indicate" nothing more than distribution of notes between hands? 1) It makes a lot of sense to play it that way 2) It was very common to indicate distribution of notes between hands

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Thu, 2016-04-07 at 19:09 -0600, Karen S. Billings wrote: > From an engineering standpoint, I would expect the "default" settings > of an application to adequately address the "majority" of cases, which would lead to endless arguments about which these are, and worse, inconsistency when the

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

hemiola might deny some of Bach's > playfulness. > > Regards, > > Mark > > -Original Message- > From: Simon Albrecht [mailto:simon.albre...@mail.de] > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 1:47 PM > To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com>; 'Martin

RE: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

...@ca.rr.com>; 'Martin Neubauer' <mrtn...@gmail.com>; 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' <lilypond-user@gnu.org> Subject: Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly? On 07.04.2016 04:21, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > > Martin, > > Hemiola? > > Cf. WTC I 3 Prelude, measures 97 - 104. >

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Please ignore this e-mail. I’ve been having problems with my Internet connection and it seemed like the previous one had failed to arrive. Sorry. On 08.04.2016 00:05, Simon Albrecht wrote: On 07.04.2016 04:21, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: Martin, Hemiola? Cf. WTC I 3 Prelude, measures 97 –

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 07.04.2016 04:21, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: Martin, Hemiola? Cf. WTC I 3 Prelude, measures 97 – 104. I don’t quite know how this is related to the current discussion, since this example is clearly a case for manual beaming. What’s more, it’s nothing to do with a hemiola. A hemiola

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 07.04.2016 04:21, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: Martin, Hemiola? Cf. WTC I 3 Prelude, measures 97 – 104. The Neue Bach-Ausgabe has the semiquavers beamed three and three only in m. 97 & 98, and this clearly indicates primarily the distribution to the hands: first three notes sinistra,

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org > [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of > Martin Neubauer > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 6:59 PM > To: Lilypond-User Mailing List <lilypond-user@gnu.org> > Subject: Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly? &

RE: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

<lilypond-user@gnu.org> Subject: Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly? On 6 April 2016 at 01:51, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de <mailto:simon.albre...@mail.de> > wrote: That would be unnecessary. Better use the beamHalfMeasure context property, which is also explained

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Hi Kieren, my naive thinking for a 3/4 measure (or all n/4 measures) was 3 (or n) groups of length 1/4. So I am a bit reassured by your mail that this is not completely ignorant. But of course the beamHalfMeasure is there for a reason and some say, almost every beaming in a 3/4 measure is

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Tue 05 Apr 2016 at 22:16:40 (-0400), Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 9:58 PM, Martin Neubauer wrote: > > I was wondering how often the odd half measure beam really leads to > > ambiguity between 3/4 and 6/8 time in properly typeset music. Apart

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On Wed 06 Apr 2016 at 13:34:01 (+0200), Martin Neubauer wrote: > On 6 April 2016 at 13:23, Kieren MacMillan > wrote: > > > Hi Martin, > > > > > when I explored the effect of that setting, I wasn't sure the outcome is > > really that desirable > > > > Wait… is your

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Original-Nachricht Hi Martin, when I explored the effect of that setting, I wasn't sure the outcome is really that desirable Wait… is your example **actually** what happens with Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f? It’s awful. That should DEFINITELY not be the default. In 3/4

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 6 April 2016 at 13:23, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Martin, > > > when I explored the effect of that setting, I wasn't sure the outcome is > really that desirable > > Wait… is your example **actually** what happens with > Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f? > At least

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Hi Martin, > when I explored the effect of that setting, I wasn't sure the outcome is > really that desirable Wait… is your example **actually** what happens with Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f? It’s awful. That should DEFINITELY not be the default. In 3/4 time, my beaming is always in three

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 6 April 2016 at 09:10, Thomas Scharkowski wrote: > From the Notation Reference: > "In engraving from the Romantic and Classical periods, beams often begin > midway through the measure in 3/4 time, but modern practice is to avoid the > false impression of 6/8 time

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 06.04.2016 09:10, Thomas Scharkowski wrote: Even simpler (for the 3/4 case): /\set Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f/ From the Notation Reference: "In engraving from the Romantic and Classical periods, beams often begin midway through the measure in 3/4 time, but modern practice is to avoid the

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 06.04.2016 04:46, Martin Neubauer wrote: I was more curious about the existence of music that's strictly in 3/4 time and where the way of printing a three-quaver pickup would actually make a difference. There are hardly such cases before 1900, and that’s exactly why the convention

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Even simpler (for the 3/4 case): /\set Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f/ From the Notation Reference: "In engraving from the Romantic and Classical periods, beams often begin midway through the measure in 3/4 time, but modern practice is to avoid the false impression of 6/8 time (see Gould, p.

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Kieren, You hit the nail on the head! Living in the southwestern U.S., I find myself going nuts between 6/8 and 3/4 - WSS is the perfect example - except that here we go back and forth without any actual notational indication (except maybe a hasty pencil mark). My head hurts by the end of my

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 6 April 2016 at 04:16, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 9:58 PM, Martin Neubauer wrote: > > I was wondering how often the odd half measure beam really leads to > ambiguity between 3/4 and 6/8 time in properly

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Hi Martin, On Apr 5, 2016, at 9:58 PM, Martin Neubauer wrote: > I was wondering how often the odd half measure beam really leads to ambiguity > between 3/4 and 6/8 time in properly typeset music. In “West Side Story”, the half-measure beams in “America” indicate where the

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 6 April 2016 at 01:51, Simon Albrecht wrote: > That would be unnecessary. Better use the beamHalfMeasure context > property, which is also explained on that docs page. > Interesting. In my defence I can only say that this wasn't available back when I started out with

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Carl, Thanks for the additional detail - it was very helpful - at least for me. Unfortunately, it is probably a bit too much info for our young (second-year) viola student. I'm trying to keep his parts as "playable" as possibly. He needs to focus on tuning and confidence at the moment -

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 4/5/16 3:53 PM, "Karen Billings" wrote: >Hi All, > >I have encountered an auto-beaming problem (actually, the Violist for >whom I'm doing transcriptions brought it to my attention). > >When working in 3/4, Lilypond is autobeaming 8th notes in groups of 3 8th >notes per

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

On 06.04.2016 00:20, Martin Neubauer wrote: Hi Karen, When working in 3/4, Lilypond is autobeaming 8th notes in groups of 3 8th notes per pulse (as if it were 6/8) rather than in groups of 2 8th notes per pulse. That's not entirely accurate, in 3/4 time the autobeaming by default

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Even simpler (for the 3/4 case): /\set Timing.beamHalfMeasure = ##f/ -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/AutoBeam-Behaving-Properly-tp189326p189330.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Martin, Thank you so much - your recommendation worked like a charm! Karen On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 4:20 PM, Martin Neubauer wrote: Hi Karen,   When working in 3/4, Lilypond is autobeaming 8th notes in groups of 3 8th notes per pulse (as if it were 6/8) rather than

Re: AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Hi Karen, > When working in 3/4, Lilypond is autobeaming 8th notes in groups of 3 8th > notes per pulse (as if it were 6/8) rather than in groups of 2 8th notes > per pulse. > That's not entirely accurate, in 3/4 time the autobeaming by default creates a single beam for the whole measure. In

AutoBeam Behaving Properly?

Hi All, I have encountered an auto-beaming problem (actually, the Violist for whom I'm doing transcriptions brought it to my attention). When working in 3/4, Lilypond is autobeaming 8th notes in groups of 3 8th notes per pulse (as if it were 6/8) rather than in groups of 2 8th notes per pulse.