1
2
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Mike Shawaluk -Once you're aware of it it's not absurd, but maybe changing it to take care of the already present beams would be more intuitive.
In this optic, there is also the problem of manually lengthen the note stem to make room for the tremolo.
At least now it is easier to lengthen/shorten note stems on the fly, using Alt+Up/Down arrow.
3
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Flurmy -In this optic, there is also the problem of manually lengthen the note stem to make room for the tremolo.
4
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Mike Shawaluk -Does that make sense?
5
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by hmmueller -Elaine Gould implicitly, by examples and by implying that the notation is (also) used for "measured tremolos", implies the same on pp.222-225 of "Behind Bars".
H.M.
6
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Flurmy -I'll try looking at some books, unless someone else here already knows the answer.
Anyway, as I wrote, the thing is rational.
7
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Mike Shawaluk -I recently made the same discovery.
The fact is that the speed of the tremolo is computed by dividing the note duration by the number of beams of the tremolo.
So, if the note already has some beams...
Indeed, if you lengthen the note stem as you should to have something decent to show, the thing starts having sense.
I thought that this is how tremolos are supposed to work. If it is not, please explain how it should be, and I'll make the necessary fixes.
8
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Flurmy -The fact is that the speed of the tremolo is computed by dividing the note duration by the number of beams of the tremolo.
So, if the note already has some beams...
Indeed, if you lengthen the note stem as you should to have something decent to show, the thing starts having sense.
9
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by jonnotes -So good of you to persist in bothering with my little niggles...!
I now understand why I cannot have tremolo and legato on a split stave (though I still don't understand why it actually does happen at the beginning of bar 24...!). My preference has always been for avoiding layered staves, and to go with slighty imperfect effects/looks and tolerate them...!
During my further experimentation, I discovered the 'feature' that, as soon as the tremolo object finds a quaver (8th) or smaller note, it adds a spurious extra beam to the current note - not physically/visually, but in its operation. I am not a string player, but I'd like to bet that a violinist does not alter the rate of 'scrubbing' according to different note lengths! I attach a little file to demonstrate this. It can be overcome by patient and individual alteration of the beaming for the shorter notes - but not completely, since the object does not allow a number of beams smaller than 1.
As ever, very grateful for your patient attention to my ramblings...!
Jonathan
10
Object Plugins / Re: TremoloSingle.ms (2.1)
Last post by Mike Shawaluk -I expect I missed out years ago (again) on the explanation as to why the User object mutes the relevant notes, and why they nevertheless sound...
And that; is precisely the problem in your score. You don't have the tremolo notes muted, so they are sounding along with the tremolo playback. And NWC does not give us a way of muting only one side of a split chord. The way to fix this would be to use layered staves, with the tremolo notes on one staff and the slurred part on the other.