Repeated tone abbreviations Part 2

[MJCube]

No, Sib doesn’t handle parallel slashes any more easily than Finale — or I certainly would have done them that way for this kind of figure. Thus the little caveat in my first post about “(looking most like #2)”. I haven’t heard of a workaround, but I know the best plugin writers …

[edit] I have looked into the situation, and found a workaround that looks good and is not too difficult to do, but it is totally dependent on the layout being fixed, and the beam angles not changing. One can attach short, thick lines to each stem (the default thick line for faking beams works well) and angle them to match the beam. But their vertical position is relative to the staff, not the beam, so if a beam moves, they have to be repositioned.

The other advantage to Sib’s built-in tremolos is that they play back correctly, and of course this line method would not.

[John Ruggero]

Finale can do the same workaround and with the same limitations. I just discovered the following system and suggested it to mbhaub at the MM Forum:

Smart Shape>Smart Shape Options>Settings>Line Thickness: .5 spaces, Dash Length 1.25 spaces, Dash Space: 5 spaces

Now use the Dashed Line Tool on the Smart Shape Palette to draw in each slash after all your formatting has been done. The result will be slashes of a constant length that you can position exactly as you wish. Adroit use of copying might add efficiency. The result will not be flawless because the ends of the slashes will not be perpendicular to the staff lines, but that would probably not be obvious when printed.

[OCTO]

Actually, I like more B/Fravura, exactly because it is NOT so slanted. It is very similar to SCORE/Vienna.
Finale's font Engraver is very slanted and in a way thin, and I dislike it somehow.
But this is a personal opinion just.

[John Ruggero]

OCTO, as I mentioned at first, I share your opinion of the Bravura vs. Maestro slashes.

There seems to be an issue with the Bravura slashes when used in Finale. Two symbols must be created: one for down stems and one for up stems. The default slashes (there are several in the Bravura font) work well on the down-stemmed notes, but the setting:

Articulation Designer>Handle Positioning>Offset from Handle>Main Symbol: H = 1.2 spaces

must be used to center the symbol on the stem of the up-stemmed notes.

[Knut]

There seems to be an issue with the Bravura slashes when used in Finale. Two symbols must be created: one for down stems and one for up stems. The default slashes (there are several in the Bravura font) work well on the down-stemmed notes, but the setting:

Articulation Designer>Handle Positioning>Offset from Handle>Main Symbol: H = 1.2 spaces

must be used to center the symbol on the stem of the up-stemmed notes.

The tremolo glyphs in Bravura are horizontally centered around the left side bearing, according to the SMuFL guidelines for glyphs intended to be centered on the stem. This means that the articulation handle in Finale will be at the center of the articulation, not on the left side as per usual, and requires you to select different values for horizontal offset on upstem and downstem notes. There is no need to create separate articulations, though. Just make sure that both Main and Flipped symbols are selected in the dialog before adjusting the settings.

This discussion makes me wonder if parallel tremolos could be handled with a dedicated tremolo font. The practicality of such a solution would depend greatly on the number of angles needed, which again would depend on the beam slant used. If someone would be willing to do some testing to determine the scope of such a font, I'd me more than happy to provide a OSL font for this purpose. For the sake of usability, I would recommend doing tests based on Ted Ross' recommendations for beam slants, which can be easily reproduced in Finale with the Patterson Beams plug-in.

[erelievonen]

This discussion makes me wonder if parallel tremolos could be handled with a dedicated tremolo font. The practicality of such a solution would depend greatly on the number of angles needed, which again would depend on the beam slant used. If someone would be willing to do some testing to determine the scope of such a font, I'd me more than happy to provide a OSL font for this purpose. For the sake of usability, I would recommend doing tests based on Ted Ross' recommendations for beam slants, which can be easily reproduced in Finale with the Patterson Beams plug-in.

A practical problem may arise if working with linked parts: sometimes beam angles will have to be different in the score and parts, and consequently the the score and part would need tremolo slashes with different angles, which would be tedious to accomplish with linked parts (even though not entirely impossible).

[Knut]

This discussion makes me wonder if parallel tremolos could be handled with a dedicated tremolo font. The practicality of such a solution would depend greatly on the number of angles needed, which again would depend on the beam slant used. If someone would be willing to do some testing to determine the scope of such a font, I'd me more than happy to provide a OSL font for this purpose. For the sake of usability, I would recommend doing tests based on Ted Ross' recommendations for beam slants, which can be easily reproduced in Finale with the Patterson Beams plug-in.

A practical problem may arise if working with linked parts: sometimes beam angles will have to be different in the score and parts, and consequently the the score and part would need tremolo slashes with different angles, which would be tedious to accomplish with linked parts (even though not entirely impossible).

This is indeed a drawback, but linked parts already has quite a few limitations with regard to control, which makes it undesirable for many (including myself). Anyway, the problem you mention applies to all parts, linked or otherwise, since you would need to replace the characters either way if the beam angles should differ from those in the score. Needless to say, this is a method for those willing to put in the extra time.

I'm not sure, but it could perhaps have the benefit of simplifying a plug-in process, though, if any such developer should feel inclined to write one.

[John Ruggero]

Knut, thanks for the help with the Bravura. That works like a charm.

Bravura also has some steep slashes at 2719 etc. which would be helpful for some situations.

This is OT but maybe this will not interrupt the flow much. Why the various duplications of the glyphs in Bravura? I am using no.3195 for my single Bravura slash. But it is duplicated at no. 3198 and then there is a group starting at 741 which duplicates again at 746.

[Knut]

You're welcome, John!

This is OT but maybe this will not interrupt the flow much. Why the various duplications of the glyphs in Bravura? I am using no.3195 for my single Bravura slash. But it is duplicated at no. 3198 and then there is a group starting at 741 which duplicates again at 746.

See my explanation in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=86

[John Ruggero]

Thanks, Knut. Now I remember that thread. I guess it was not meaningful at the time because I had yet to deal with Bravura.

This discussion makes me wonder if parallel tremolos could be handled with a dedicated tremolo font. The practicality of such a solution would depend greatly on the number of angles needed, which again would depend on the beam slant used. If someone would be willing to do some testing to determine the scope of such a font, I'd me more than happy to provide a OSL font for this purpose. For the sake of usability, I would recommend doing tests based on Ted Ross' recommendations for beam slants, which can be easily reproduced in Finale with the Patterson Beams plug-in.

I asked the same question about the number of beam angles over at MM Forum. Looking at it very casually, it seemed that beams have approx. a 45 degree limit in both directions, which presents an approx. 90 degree scope. Wouldn't every angle need to be taken in to account = 90 glyphs?