Am Do., 4. Feb. 2021 um 17:08 Uhr schrieb Dimitris Marinakis
<dtsmari...@gmail.com>:
>
> I understand the reason behind the aesthetic choice of using a different type
> of tremolostem for beamed notes but the current implementation IMO doesn't
> work as good as the regular StemTremolo.
>
> • Slope is a simple rotation and not a real slope.
> • You can't tweak the space (length-fraction) of tremolo beams independently
> from the beam(s)
>
> Are there any methods of applying the default StemTremolo to all notes
> regardless of them being beamed or not?
>
> I'd like to avoid making custom stems because it will need a lot of manual
> adjustments for each stem length. Unless you have a good code that accounts
> for different stem lengths etc.
Hi,
you did not provide any code to test, thus I wrote my own test-code,
which may match your use-case or not ...
The default implementation uses several conditions where to print
rectangle or beam-like Tremolo.
Here some code to show default decisions:
{
\cadenzaOn
\autoBeamOff
<>^"Defaults"
\stemUp
c''1:32
c''4:32
c''8:32
c'8:32[
d''8:32]
c''8:32[
d'8:32]
\bar "||"
\stemDown
c''1:32
c''4:32
c''8:32
c'8:32[
d''8:32]
c''8:32[
d'8:32]
\bar "||"
}
Tbh, I can't think of a use-case where I would prefer the rectangles.
But you can override the behaviour to get _always_ rectangles or
beam-like tremolos:
\override StemTremolo.shape = #'rectangle
\override StemTremolo.shape = #'beam-like
Concerning the length-fraction:
I can't think of a use case where I'd want a different length-fraction
for the Beam and the StemTremolo at those beamed notes.
Could you elaborate?
Cheers,
Harm
