"Carl D. Sorensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I set that exact line in LilyPond 2.11.64. I needed to do some manual
> beaming to get the same beaming as in the top line.
Interesting. When I try:
\relative c' {
\time 6/8
r4 a8 d e f | e d4 ~ d4. |
r4 r16 g,16 e'8 g e16 d | c8. ( a16 g8 ~ g8. ) r16 r8 |
}
the beaming comes out exactly as in the original sample.
> The note spacing in Johan's sample is dramatically different (worse)
> than in my LilyPond output.
This is a cut-out from a larger score, it was not typeset separately.
The notes have lyrics that account for the large gap between the
sixteenth and eighth notes. The Sibelius score (second line), also a
cut-out, did not have the lyrics.
> The staff lines in my LilyPond output are lighter [...] The slurs in
> my output are lighter [...] The noteheads in my output are heavier
This is *very* interesting... I see no difference in the noteheads,
but your lines are definitely thinner than mine.
I think I found an explanation. My score sample was typeset with
#(set-global-staff-size 14)
I'd expected the line thickness to scale accordingly, but apparently
this is not the case (4.2.1, Setting the staff size):
Each font is tuned for a different staff size: at a smaller size the
font becomes heavier, to match the relatively heavier staff lines.
"relatively heavier staff lines" seems to imply that the lines do not
get thinner when a smaller staff size is selected.
-- Johan
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
