(Integrating LaTeX and
[lilypond.git] / input / regression / beam-concave.ly
blob52d66c107d9841844e1fb7ed5fc19e57b42433bf
1 \version "1.7.18"
2 \header{
4 texidoc = "Concave beams should be horizontal. informally spoken,
5 concave refers to the shape of the notes that are opposite a
6 beam. If an up-beam has high notes on its center stems, then we call
7 it concave. This example shows borderline cases. Only the beams
8 that are marked `horiz' should be printed horizontally. " }
12 However, what exactly
13 it is that makes a beam concave is still unclear.
15 Beams 1 and 3 should be sloped, 2 and 4 should be horizontal. Two
16 sane attempts of calculating concaveness of a beam fail to distinguish
17 beams this way."
21 \score{
22 \notes\relative c'{
24 %% This case seems easy: second beam should be horizontal.
26 %% SCS-I Menuet I, m15
27 %% sloped
28 %% slope = -0.5ss
29 %% concaveness: 0.06
30 \clef bass
31 \time 3/4
32 \key g\major
33 a8 g fis e b dis
35 %% SCS-I Menuet II, m20
36 %% horizontal
37 %% slope = 0
38 %% concaveness: 0.09
39 \key f\major
40 fis,^"horiz." a c es d c
42 %%% Sarabande: the first beam, obviously more concave, is not horizontal,
43 %%% but is matched with the next beam in the piece: context.
45 %% Sarabande: m24
46 %% sloped
47 %% concaveness: 0.00
48 \stemUp
49 d,16-[ a' b cis]
51 %% Sarabande: m25
52 %% horizontal
53 %% concaveness:a: 0.12
54 a'16-[^"horiz." b c b]
56 % Hmm. Concaveness of both: 1.75
57 % %% SCS-VI Prelude, m81
58 % %% slope = 0.0
59 % \stemBoth
60 % \key d\major
61 % e,8-[ cis a']
63 % %% SCS-VI Prelude, m82
64 % %% slope = 0.1ss (possibly b.o. context?)
65 % g,-[ e' cis]
68 %%% Han-Wen: this should be concave
69 a,16-[^"horiz." a' a a]
71 \clef treble
73 %%%% This should not be concave (hwn)
74 [\stemUp bes8 \stemDown d'8 bes8]
76 \paper{
77 raggedright = ##t
81 %% Local variables:
82 %% LilyPond-indent-level:2
83 %% End:
84 %% new-chords-done %%