On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:10 PM, David Rogers <davidandrewrog...@gmail.com>wrote:
> James Harkins <jamshar...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Aug 5, 2013 2:59 PM, "James Harkins" <jamshar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I appreciate the thought, but I'm not quite interested in that > > particular flavor of Kool-aid. I'll go with my eye on this. I don't > > like how it looks, and I get something that is easier to read by > > fussing with the line breaks. I'm satisfied with that -- the attached > > *does* look perfect to me. > > > Looks good to me too. If I was going to quibble I would say the over-all > horizontal spacing might be a bit tight - but maybe the whole score > looks good just as it is, and having a tight spot here is worth it. > > > Maybe drifting off topic... > > > I just skimmed through a thick volume of the vocal works with piano by > R. Strauss (mostly from Universal Edition and other good German-speaking > publishers of that time). I didn't find any tied-note examples that > would help - but what I did find was impressively wide spacing during > the voice part, and a big easy-to-read text font. In some of the songs, > the piano introductions or interludes have very compressed horizontal > spacing, but as soon as the voice enters, BOOM! luxuriously wide > spacing. That has to help with issues like this. (Also you're clearly > correct that this "anticipatory-tie" situation just doesn't happen that > often in older music.) These scores "look right" overall, with perhaps > an impression of "let's waste some paper and make it perfect". :) > > Baerenreiter's (or Schott's?) early-80's setting of Schubert songs - > tight musical spacing with a small thin-ish text font. Looks very good > but the text might get hard to read if the singer's eyes aren't in good > shape. Again, the overall look is consistent with itself, even though > it's quite different from the above. Instead of sacrificing paper (as > above), they sacrificed some text readability. > > Peters's well-known old print of the songs of Schumann (and their > Schubert scores look about the same) (no date given, but the editor died > in the 1930s) - the music is fairly tightly spaced, and the lyric font > is dark and perhaps compressed horizontally. Very easy to read IMO, but > maybe I'm just used to that style. This one looks right/consistent to me > as well. In particular, the lyrics are easy to read, while visually > harmonizing with the music - the blackness of the text and the blackness > of the notes are subjectively about even, making it easier to shift my > glance from one to the other without needing to re-focus. (- I > think. I'm not an optometrist.) The sacrifice here is that the whole > thing can turn out too tight, crammed onto the page. I guess if I was > printing a very large collection of short songs I might settle for > cramped spacing as well. > > BUT (for example) if I were to take the big, wide-open text font from > the Strauss score and use it in the 1980s Schubert score, I suspect the > words wouldn't even fit in the lines. Each publisher found an effective > working setup that looks good, but they each solved the problems in > different ways. > I'm curious...did you happen to notice any examples where the engraver chose to split the measure that might be indicative of an approach? If I were to have done something like this for a hymnal/songbook, I would have split the measure and would have kept the entire lyrical phrase on a single system. Carl
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
