[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th

From: Janek Warchoł
Subject: Re: shortened flags affair, part 7 - downstem full-length 64th and 128th flags
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:56:13 +0100

2011/3/18 Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
> In general I do agree with your approach of making our own decisions based
> on what's published, rather than just following it.  However, I do think the
> current flags are inconsistent if you compare the up-stem quaver with the
> semi-quaver.  The quaver's flag stops at the top of the notehead, whereas
> the semi-quaver (and all the shorter notes) runs down to the middle of the
> notehead or below.  I think it might be better if the quaver's flag was
> about 1/2 a space longer?

This can be easily checked, see attachment.
In my opinion making quaver flag longer is a bad idea - longer flag
looks too stretched (unless we would redesign it completely, but that
would perhaps result in creating a new font).
Concerning the inconsistency you pointed: instead of comparing the
dimensions of whole flags, try comparing individual hooks of each
flag. Semi-quaver flag consists of two "hooks" (similar but not
identical), each of them is about 2.5 ss high; the two hooks combined
give whole flag that is 3.5 ss high. Quaver flag consists of a single
hook; if we want this hook to be similar to semi-quaver flag hooks, we
shouldn't make it longer than 3 ss (and that's it current height).
This means that the quaver flag must be 3 ss high, since it consists
of only one hook.
Also, current quaver flag has the advantage that augmentation dot can
be placed closer to the quaver in some cases.


Attachment: bonk longer quaver flag.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]