JW Change Beams>Resize Separation Problem

[John Ruggero]

I need to resize the beam separation in the following rhythmic pattern using the JW Change>Beams>Beam Separation but can't get it to work because one of the beam separations doesn't resize:

Resize beam separation 1.jpg (6.52 KiB) Viewed 7113 times

Experimenting, I find that:

1. Patterns that begin with 16ths followed by 8ths as at 1) work, but the reverse as at 2) do not except by adding the 8th group after the plugin has been applied to the 16ths as at 3).

2. Beamed patterns that begin with 32nds as at 4) and 32nds followed by 16ths as at 5) work fine, but the reverse as at 6) doesn't work, even by putting it together piecemeal as at 7)

Resize beam separation 2.jpg (72.87 KiB) Viewed 7113 times

What am I doing wrong? And if nothing, is there a workaround?

[zuill]

The plugin doesn't seem to work correctly. When unbeaming, it does work. However, you need to apply the plugin to both values at the same time. Then, when rebeaming, it looks right. Make sure the stems are in the same direction as the final look should be. Otherwise, the result may not come out as expected.

Zuill

[motet]

Or, do it by hand with the secondary beam angle tool.

[zuill]

Of course, but he probably has a similar situation as yours where there are a lot of them to do.

Zuill

[zuill]

If it's any consolation, in v25, the plugin doesn't seem to work for mixed beams at all, regardless of which comes first, so they need to be separated first, plugin applied, then reconnected, also making sure about beam direction.

Zuill

[N Grossingink]

Try the Patterson Beams plugin. It has settings for additional beam separation.

N.

[John Ruggero]

That was a great piece of trouble-shooting, Zuill. Thank you so much. I never tried unbeaming and then applying the plugin to both parts at the same time, which does the trick. I don't have that many to do, so this will work. And thanks Motet for the tip about the secondary beam angle tool, which I have never used and didn't realize would also do the job!

[John Ruggero]

N. I tried Patterson Beams on it, and it evens out the beams but doesn't preserve the reduction.

[Knut]

John,

may I ask, why would you want to do this? Normally, the distances between beams are global, and if anything the distance is increased to prevent wedges. Your edited beams however seems so tightly spaced that they almost meld, and even if this is what you want, I don't see why you would need to use this setting on only selected beams.

[John Ruggero]

Hi, Knut. I am using it for some esoteric Baroque beams the require slimming of the beam itself so that up and down stems will work on the same group in very tight quarters. With these narrow beams, the narrow space works is fine. And there are wilder things that I may post at Notat.io.

[Knut]

I see. In that case, wouldn't a combination of decreasing the beam width as well as the distance between them be a better solution? At least it would leave a more even visual impression.

[John Ruggero]

That's exactly what I am doing, Knut, "slimming" the beam width and reducing the distance. But wait until you see the wilder beams I promised!

Edit: I just realized what caused your suggestion: my example above. That was just to show what happens in a default situation in Finale, it isn't intended to look like what I am actually doing.

[Knut]

Thank you for clarifying, John. I'm looking forward to your beam bonanza!