Re: Cross Staff Beaming

[Jonathan Wilkes]

--- On Tue, 8/11/09, Mark Polesky <address@hidden> wrote:

> From: Mark Polesky <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: Cross Staff Beaming
> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 7:45 AM
> Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
> 
> >   I'm trying to do some cross-staff
> beams in the middle of a piano staff. 
> > They seem to work pretty well, but I think the beaming
> is wrong.
> > 
> > In beat 2, the 6-tuplet starts in the
> right-hand.  I don't have the 
> > Kurt Stone book on modern notation in front of me, but
> if I remember 
> > correctly, the staff of the first note sets the
> reference for the beams. 
> > That would mean the a-sharp 32nd-note should connect
> at the bottom beam, 
> > not the top one.  
> 
> No, that's wrong. But I admit, these rules are sometimes
> confusing
> (I had to open the Stone book to make sure). And as strange
> as
> these beams might look, LilyPond gets them right. One thing
> Stone
> is clear about is that the priority is to avoid what he
> calls "beam
> corners" (exposed right-angles). Ideally a beam group has
> only two
> beam corners (the unavoidable ones at the beginning and
> end). If
> you connect said A-sharp 32-note to the lowest beam of the
> 6-tuplet
> you'd get a beam corner at the top-right of the 6-tuplet.
> 
> And the last beat sure looks weird, but some note-patterns
> are
> simply incorrigible WRT beaming*, and I think that's the
> case here.
> You could try breaking the last beat into two beam groups,
> and/or
> adding \set stemRightBeamCount = #1 just before the last
> note of
> each triplet, or you could just lean back with the smug
> feeling
> that you write music that challenges the rules of
> notation...

If the beams look strange, it must be worthwhile music, right? :)

I tried adding the tweak you mentioned-- it looks a little funky.  
But given the guideline about avoiding "beam corners," I can see 
how the beam in beat 3 makes sense.

Thanks for the explanation.

-Jonathan