Hi Daniel, Thanks for all your work on this. I've followed all your instructions and it is all working perfectly, however, now my hairpins that start or end on a dynamic are not centered on the opening or closing dynamic. Any idea why this would happen?
All the best, Craig On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:23, Daniel Benjamin Miller <dbmil...@dbmiller.org> wrote: > I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important. > Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch user of > what is free and open-source (in large part because I want *anyone* to be > able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a bit saddened that he moved > to proprietary fonts. You will notice that I use his (still OFL, though > old) Profondo brace font (a conversion of Bravura; I replaced his Profondo > music font because it was out of date, being based on an early pre-release > of Bravura). > > Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by a lot. > Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to create the > proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that LilyPond can > actually use them. And most fonts are not METAFONT-designed like > Emmentaler, so the accessible infrastructure for font building for LilyPond > is abysmal. So to me the advantage of SMuFL is not only that we'll be able > to use fonts from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts becomes orders of > magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for developing SMuFL fonts are > in place). > > Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release Bravura, > and the existing Bravura support that had been put together before, this is > not the first time that Bravura was made to be used in LilyPond. But I > think it's finally ready for actual publication-quality usage now! So while > Owen does his work on SMuFL support, we have another good choice for the > present! > On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin > Miller: > > You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style. > > I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is; > > I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But > I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box > scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that > the *text* font is even more notable in this respect). > > But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the > option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores > shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of > the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making > alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of > fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's > work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of > choice even more fundmental. > > Urs > > > I don't > like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I > actually feel the same about Gonville: > https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed > it > because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found > it > to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly > not > like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me > like > strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me > like > music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.) > > But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But > I > also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music > typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort > into > creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its > fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly > not > that seriously taken. > > LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of > its > defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default > fonts, > in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being > expanded > as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and > improvements are all well and good). > > On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > > On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote: > > > I'd like to share something: https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts > I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and > there'd been > > Thanks for this, I am going to try it for sure. I like Dorico's > output, and this will sort of give a similar result for LilyPond if > I > understand correctly? > > Which leads to a more philosophic question. Do we want LilyPond > scores > to have an immediately recognizable "personality" or are we slowly > moving to a situation where everyone, including LilyPond, is trying > to > look the same (when using default settings), and it will be hard > to > see if a score was typeset in LilyPond, MuseScore, Dorico, Finale, > or > Sibelius? > > I hope LilyPond will always try to keep a distinct personality in > the > default output, which is not a static thing but can be discussed > in > the Lilypond user and developers community, changed, and improved > continuously. But let not all our efforts go to looking as much as > possible like "the other ones". > > I know LilyPond is (almost) flexible and tweakable enough to have > it > all, but what I am talking about is the default output. > > > -- Craig Dabelstein Owner Maxime's Music M: 0404884173 A: 19 Twelfth Ave, Kedron QLD 4031, Australia W: concertbandmusicstore.com <https://concertbandmusicstore.com/>E: cr...@concertbandmusicstore.com <cr...@concertbandmusicstore.com> <https://www.facebook.com/maximesmusic.com.au> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/maximes-music> <https://www.designhill.com/email-signature-generator>
