David:
I know that those A-R are older versions using older software applications for the engraving; and I'm not "picking" on them at all, I'm making an observation that I have seen with OTHER editions as well. I do like the NMA paperback edition btw too, although they get a bit stingy on spacing I think. I know there are various agendas going on in engraving music.
1: the performers...
2: the conductors...
3: the scholars...
and college students who are photocopying ;)
so there's a lot to keep in mind when engraving a new score/performance part. But since my preferences and background experience comes from graphic design/ web design, and not music engraving per se--- I generally prefer open and airy layouts.
Thanks,
Kim Patrick Clow
On 5/11/06, David W. Fenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11 May 2006 at 13:55, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
> David Fenton provided some examples of engraving at
> http://www.dfenton.com/Editing/. . . .
Well, first of all, those weren't intended as examplars of good
engraving, or as representative of any particular style of engraving.
They were just some examples of the editorial approaches I was
wanting to discuss.
They are also VERY OLD examples of computer engraving (2 from 1980
and 1 from 1989). The 1989 example has *much* looser spacing than the
1980 example, BTW.
> . . . One thing I noticed: the extreme
> tightness of spacing. In the day of when paper is relatively cheap:
> why are so many music engravings don't have much more open spacing in
> terms of layout?
>
> Surely it can't cost that much more to add three to six pages to a
> title and allow more spacing to make it easier to read. You could
> argue I suppose these are critical editions and not meant to be
> performed from, but still, you imagine people would read these scores
> for some lengths of time, and eye strain would be a factor.
I used to find the loose spacing of Bärenreiter's NMA editions
annoying, because I frequently found myself photocopying them, and
having to spend my pennies on such loosely engraved pages was a
problem for me.
But the paperback NMA works great with that spacing, since it's
substantially reduced from the original size. This makes it *very*
readable as a miniature score.
> I know a lot of this is preferences of the publisher; and the engraver
> has no say in the matter, but I know in terms of regular typography
> for books, etc: things are much more readable with wide spaces, and
> opened margins etc.
I don't see why you're choosing those A-R prints as your starting
point. I would guess that A-R does not use that same kind of layout
today, since they've probably vastly improved their engraving program
since then, just as Finale and Sibelius have improved vastly over the
last 10 years.
--
David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com
David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
Kim Patrick Clow
"There's really only two types of music: good and bad." ~ Rossini
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
