Re: Slanted Beams thickness

[Simon Albrecht]

Hi everyone,

On 25/03/2022 01:44, Valentin Petzel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
> thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing sides
> of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams getting
> optically thinner and closer the higher the slope is. But we can very easily
> factor this out by adjusting the thickness to the slope. In fact if we want to
> achieve a real thickness theta the adjusted thickness would need to be
> theta·sqrt(1 + slope²). See attached an experimental example.
>
> Cheers,
> Valentin


I think this is a great idea. IMO, the way to think about it should be: 
slanted beams shouldn’t appear any less weighty than horizontal ones. 
It’s not easy to find very obvious examples, but I attach four versions 
of a bar from Grieg in which both beams seem equally thick.

I agree with others that the distances between multiple beams don’t seem 
good in your mockup. It’s certainly important to preserve the qualities 
of the beam quanting that Lily does, but I don’t know how the 
intricacies of that would play out.

Best, Simon

grieg-43-6-cfischer-1912.png
Description: PNG image

grieg-43-6-peters-1902.png
Description: PNG image

grieg-43-6-peters-1977.png
Description: PNG image

grieg-43-6-schirmer-1903.png
Description: PNG image