Re: add stems to rests under a beam?

[N. Andrew Walsh]

PPS- okay, overriding stemlet length got it looking the way I want (overriding French beaming seems unnecessary in this use case), but with one tweak: I'd prefer to keep the position of the rests as close to unchanged (ie where they would otherwise appear, were they not under a beam) as I can. Obviously this will force all the stems to be considerably longer than normal, but I'd rather that than have the rests suddenly drop towards the bottom of the staff.

Thanks for the help!

A

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:25 PM, N. Andrew Walsh <address@hidden> wrote:

PS- obviously, that's a typo in the first paragraph of my last message: it should read "16th note with a secondary BEAM" (not stem). Anyway, here attached is a (really terrible freehand GIMP-made) drawing of what I want to see.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:12 PM, N. Andrew Walsh <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi David/Andrew/'ponders,

actually, what I want is two things: that the stem extends downward from the beam, and that this stemlet is connected to the following 16th note with a secondary stem. As it is now, the secondary beam stops midway between the c16 and the r16.

In short, what I want to see is that the beams look exacty the same whether it's a note or a rest under them. Setting stem length with the \verride fixes the first part, but does it also achieve the latter?

Cheers,

A

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 12:57 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

"N. Andrew Walsh" <address@hidden> writes:

> So, I have the following:

> { c2~ c4 c8[ r16 c16] | c4 }
>
> in Lily, the r16 does not get a stem, nor a second beam, which looks …
> muddled. How do I change this behavior?

\override Stem.stemlet-length = #0.5

--
David Kastrup