Search found 421 matches
- 21 Feb 2023, 00:23
- Forum: Problems and Solutions (Help)
- Topic: Tie collisions
- Replies: 19
- Views: 38546
Re: Tie collisions
Off topic, I find it curious how each application has determined an inconsistent number of augmentation dots to use for each chord cluster... sometimes 4, 5, 6, etc. Which is correct in each case? I think that's a question for another post.
- 20 Feb 2023, 21:41
- Forum: Problems and Solutions (Help)
- Topic: Tie collisions
- Replies: 19
- Views: 38546
Re: Tie collisions
Does Dorico have an option to position the tie ends on the other side of the augmentation dots like this: Yes, Dorico has a TON of settings for ties. The one that makes the most impact is the "Length of ties in chords" setting. This gives two options: Uniform or Allowed To vary (Default)....
- 20 Feb 2023, 04:43
- Forum: Problems and Solutions (Help)
- Topic: Tie collisions
- Replies: 19
- Views: 38546
Re: Tie collisions
Yes, even Dorico (4.3) has a slightly different approach, both to accidental stacking (can be changed to automatically match the others), chord stacking, and ties:
- 20 Feb 2023, 00:07
- Forum: Problems and Solutions (Help)
- Topic: Tie collisions
- Replies: 19
- Views: 38546
Re: Tie collisions
This is really a curious example of what apps will choose to do by default and what fixes might be required. Here's what MS4 does by default. Seems like it could do a bit better job balancing out the inter-tie spacing. No reason in my mind to have them appear in pairs. I do like the tighter nesting ...
- 14 Feb 2023, 03:35
- Forum: Problems and Solutions (Help)
- Topic: Tie collisions
- Replies: 19
- Views: 38546
Re: Tie collisions
Oh, yes, please correct this. The generally accepted result for almost any chord, if it’s the only “voice” on the staff, is to have the group of ties bend around the vertical middle of the chord, the top half of note ties bend up, the bottom half bend down. This would solve both cases quite nicely. ...
- 10 Feb 2023, 22:07
- Forum: Notation Rules and Standards
- Topic: Slurs Ugly or necessary?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 10029
Re: Slurs Ugly or necessary?
Scores with this format (i.e., hymnnals) do tend to bend the rules a bit on this, but for a couple of useful reasons. Most folks who sing these are not professionals and need less busy notation. Also, but kind of the same reason, since music like this is also what is used for the accompaniment, the ...
- 02 Jan 2023, 02:10
- Forum: Engraving Commentaries
- Topic: Slurs crashing with alterations
- Replies: 8
- Views: 16422
Re: Slurs crashing with alterations
Yep, as long as it’s still absolutely clear what the accidental is and what the symbol crossing through it is, I have no problem with the occasional crossing.
- 21 Dec 2022, 20:10
- Forum: Digital Notation Tools
- Topic: LilyPond 2.24.0 released
- Replies: 1
- Views: 5450
Re: LilyPond 2.24.0 released
Awesome work, LP dev team! This amazing tool just keeps getting better and better.
- 21 Dec 2022, 17:36
- Forum: Digital Notation Tools
- Topic: MuseScore 4 Beam Angles
- Replies: 13
- Views: 13689
Re: MuseScore 4 Beam Angles
Agreed, John. FWIW, here's what the same passage looks like with the staff lines hidden behind the beams, which I am really liking: beaming-with-staff-lines-removed-behind-beams.png In a way, since our eyes are getting more used to not beaming strategies that keep staff lines from appearing behind b...
- 21 Dec 2022, 14:21
- Forum: Digital Notation Tools
- Topic: MuseScore 4 Beam Angles
- Replies: 13
- Views: 13689
Re: MuseScore 4 Beam Angles
Great thoughts, John. I think your settings have one other advantage over some of these other defaults and that is thicker beams/smaller beam-gaps. I noticed the same thing in some older printed scores I saw last night. The slightly thicker beams seem to make the crossing staff lines to be less prom...