[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Stem lenghts
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: Stem lenghts |
Date: |
Sun, 10 May 2009 23:26:08 +0200 (CEST) |
> LilyPond does not use a hardcoded set of rules; rather, it tries to
> score different configurations, and pick the one with the best
> scores. This is a technique that works much better than hardcoding
> different rules, but in some cases there are small divergences with
> the 'prescribed' quants. We even have a regtest for it, see
> input/regression/beam-quant-standard.ly
>
> It might be possible to tune the scoring parameters to copy Ross
> exactly, but probably some other configurations will fall over.
I can imagine that after the scoring there's a second pass to
fine-tune the result, for example, to `snap' various parts of the beam
to the staff lines where possible.
Werner
- Stem lenghts, Pekka Siponen, 2009/05/10
- Re: Stem lenghts, Mark Polesky, 2009/05/10
- Re: Stem lenghts, Pekka Siponen, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Werner LEMBERG, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Mark Polesky, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Pekka Siponen, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Werner LEMBERG, 2009/05/11
- Re: Stem lenghts, Pekka Siponen, 2009/05/11