|
Well,
This example is almost identical to your first
example. A beamed note is broken by a bar and break and the beam is
broken. Lily doesn't know how to beam them. The 2 leftover notes are
beamed in both examples - again i don't know why, but it's quite
consistent behaviour and consistent with lily not knowing what you intend until
you tell her.
You could keep making odd examples of undefined
beaming until the cows come home, but surely it would be a lot quicker just to
beam manually???
--
Phil Holmes
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 12:30
PM
Subject: Re: weird de-beaming
behavior
Hi Phil,
I'm no expert on lily's beaming system.
However, in your second example you don't break an existing beam with a
bar/line break, so it's rather different from the first where the "correct"
beaming was broken.
Not knowing anything about how Lily works, I'm inclined to agree. in 3/4
(at least here) a measure comprising only 8th-notes will be beamed straight
through, thus (pseudo code):
e8[ e c' c c c c]
Whereas a 4/4 bar is beamed in two groups of four.
So you're correct, that there's something going on with default beaming
being broken up. In fact, with the following MWE (also in 4/4):
\version "2.19.80"
\relative c'' {
c e, g8 a
\bar "" \break
g e g16 a b8
}
the "g8 a" at the end of the first line is *also* broken into two
unbeamed 8th-notes, but the two that follow the break do not. Why would this
be?
Cheers,
A
|