Re: New fonts for chords

[Pekka Siponen]

Indeed it (suffix position) is a personal preference, and not correct 
most likely. I find that there is no standard for chord names, they have 
been around only for a short time historically, and mostly everything is 
based on personal preferences.. as are all traditions when you go back 
far enough. :P Usually the suffix is on the baseline, but it is beacause 
finale standard layout is that way. The publishers in finland usually 
only accept finale based work. For me the suffix is nice when top 
aligned. Also more compact.

Sharps and flats: sorry I can't point you to any authority that would 
say so, except basic typographical books. The sharps and flats look like 
they don't belong there. They should look like a natural part of the 
text, not something added later by a different program. =) No offence 
intended.

Alas, I am only proficient in using fonts, not making them. :(

The override is indeed simple, but for a novice user learning the 
override and the things behind it, is a big step (worth taking 
perhaps..). Also it is basic typographical thing to keep it simple with 
fonts; if there is no need to start mixing fonts, so why do it..?

I tried to make a fairly complex but simple chords-notes(with 
alternative repeats)-lyrics score. I found out everything that is 
needed, but still failed. One of the reasons was this typographical 
dilemma. It was getting too complicated, and I think would soon have 
required some programming (and font-making) knowledge.

I was very pleased with the spacing with the LilyPond, also some glyphs, 
especially the natural, received positive comments from the musicians: 
it was easily distinguished from the sharp.. it had a distinctive color. :)






Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
> On 4/25/09 12:52 PM, "Pekka Siponen" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>   
> > Here are some thoughts about the default chords in LilyPond:
> >
> > 1. The suffixes should not be scaled (see attachment). The weight of the
> > smaller character gets too light if it is simply scaled down from the
> > original font.
> >     
>
> Thanks for making a pdf that shows what you mean.  Perhaps we could make the
> 7 symbol bold as well as raising it.
>
>   
> > 2. The suffix should be top-aligned with the preceding characted.
> >     
>
> Is this an engraving standard or just a personal preference?  I'm not
> disagreeing with you, but we try to make changes to LilyPond only in
> response to music engraving standards.
>
> Every book I've been able to find in my (admittedly limited) collection just
> keeps everything on the same line -- no raising of suffixes.  I've read
> about different standards in different regions, but have no personal
> knowledge of that.
>
>   
> > 3. The sharps should be centered and the flats should be aligned with
> > the baseline. (Or something done in general, the sharps and flats look
> > out of place)
> >     
>
> Can you point us to an engraving standard that we could use to make this
> decision?
>
>   
> > So, maybe (typographically correct) new fonts for chords in the future..?
> >
> >     
>
> If you're willing to make new fonts for chords, I would guess that you could
> get them accepted as part of LilyPond, but I don't think there is a current
> developer who will be spending time doing that.  I understand that it is a
> big job to develop a new font.
>
>   
> > Also, it seems funny to me that the default font for chords is sans
> > serif, when the default font otherwise is serif. Why not use the default
> > roman font also for chords?
> >     
>
> I assume (maybe incorrectly) that it's because somebody early on thought
> that the sans fonts were better for chord names.  In my quick review of my
> books, it appears that the chord names and the lyrics generally share the
> same type face (sans or serif).
>
> It is a *very* simple override to change to the roman font.  Put the
> follwing in your ChordNames context:
>
> \override ChordName #'font-family = #'roman
>
> and you'll have your roman chord names.
>
> HTH,
>
> Carl
>
>