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" <pekka.sipo...@bastu.net> 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
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
