Re: Enhancement: Take ‘master’ line thickness from a context property [was: Re: list of thicknesses…]

Hi Simon, > Thanks for that! Best, Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ bug-lilypond ma

Re: Multiple beams too close to noteheaD

> However, inferring from what she says about *two* beams and that a > third beam should be attached to the outside one would have to say > the "correct" distance would be to have the innermost beam *center* > on the line. That is: with the note a' the inner beam should center > around the topmos

Re: Multiple beams too close to noteheaD

Am 01.02.2016 um 10:15 schrieb Werner LEMBERG: >> Attached you'll find examples for three and four beams, and I expect >> this to continue with more beams. I have colored the ones too close >> in red and adjusted them (blue) to Gould's minimum distance. > Thanks for your analysis, to which I agr

Re: Multiple beams too close to noteheaD

> Attached you'll find examples for three and four beams, and I expect > this to continue with more beams. I have colored the ones too close > in red and adjusted them (blue) to Gould's minimum distance. Thanks for your analysis, to which I agree in general. However, I consider some of your bea

Multiple beams too close to notehead

Hi all, I've always found that beams with three or more beams look too tight, but now reading Gould, p. 19 confirms that, and I consider this a type-ugly bug: According to Gould outer beams starting with the third should move away from the notehead, and "beams should never be closer to the notehe

Multiple beams too close to noteheaD

Hi all, I've always found that beams with three or more beams look too tight, but now reading Gould, p. 19 confirms that, and I consider this a type-ugly bug: According to Gould outer beams starting with the third should move away from the notehead, and "beams should never be closer to the notehe