Re: Subdividing beams

[Urs Liska]

Hi William,

27. Juli 2019 22:38, "William Zeitler" <address@hidden> schrieb:

> How would I subdivide tuplets, so the triples are grouped together like:
> 
> ===-===-===

You would do that manually, by setting the beamlet count for all affected 
positions :-(

Unfortunately LilyPond's handling of beam subdivisions is broken (or rather: 
has never been done correctly). We have had this as a suggestion for a Google 
Summer of Code-project for several years, and I had invested signficant time 
analyzing the issue (see this entry 
http://lilypond.org/google-summer-of-code.html#Fix-Beaming-Patterns_002fBeam-Subdivisions-and-Tuplets
 and the PDF document linked from there). To my great dismay this has never 
been tackled so far ...

But with a current version of LilyPond *this* does seem to work:

version "2.19.82"

\relative {
  \set subdivideBeams = ##t
  \set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1/8)
  \cadenzaOn
  \tuplet 3/2 { c'16 [ d c b c b a b c] }
  \cadenzaOff
  d1
  d1
}

This works because 3/16 in the triplet amount to 1/8 in real time - and that is 
(unfortunately) what LilyPond takes into account for its subdivision decision. 
This is semantically wrong, but has the effect you want in this case. So I'd 
consider it an ugly hack ....

> 
> (I want to do this inside a cadenza if that makes a difference)

In fact it *only* works in a cadenza because here you can tweak the music's 
"stretch" so it matches the real-time subdivision points.

If at some point someone would finally fix the issue such a workaround would 
very likely be broken ...

HTH in some way
Urs

> 
> \version "2.18.2"
> \relative c' {
> \time 1/4
> \cadenzaOn
> \tuplet 9/8 { c'16[ d c b c b a b a] }
> \cadenzaOff
> }
> 
> Many thanks!
> 
> William Zeitler
> 
> On 7/27/19 12:44, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
>> David Wright <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> On Sat 27 Jul 2019 at 18:57:35 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
>> 
>> David Wright <address@hidden> writes:
>> On Sat 27 Jul 2019 at 11:32:58 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
>> On 26/07/19 12:23, Peter Toye wrote:
>> Thanks very much for all the suggestions. I had asked for an _easy_ way!
>> Also, I'm not 100% fussed about the exact layout as it's only for an
>> example.
>> Just a thought ... can't lily chuck out png's? I've never used it, but
>> if it can chuck out one png per line it'll cost a little bit of effort
>> to assemble it in your word processor of choice, but you could import
>> them, and then put the text between the lines.
>> I would advise against that because PNGs are rastered. The hint is in
>> the name: portable-Network-graphics.
>> Uh, what in the name indicates rasterisation?
>>> Perhaps I was a little oblique: "Network" indicates that the format is
>>> designed for transfer of images over the network, rather than between
>>> local applications.
>> 
>> PDF is a compressed and limited form of PostScript that also allows for
>> compressing whole objects. It supports vectorised as well as rasterised
>> objects comparatively effectively and is used a tiny bit on networks.
>> 
>>> I'm not overconcerned whether people see this as a hint not to use
>>> PNGs in this workflow. But I assume you're not supporting their use,
>>> are you.
>> 
>> I have no idea who "you" is supposed in that context and what "support"
>> is supposed to mean.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user