Clef design comparision

Music notation symbols, fonts, font sources and font creation, SmuFL.
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Knut »

Octo, just so I am sure I understand your reservations, how about this one?
Menuet G-clef Mod.png
Menuet G-clef Mod.png (534.15 KiB) Viewed 10824 times
I've made it upright and tuned the center swirl.
You also mentioned that the diagonal strokes were disproportionally bold and thin. I haven't made any changes to this, as the strokes need to match those of other clefs. Change one, and you need to change them all. Also, There is actually an even bigger difference in width of the same strokes in Engraver's :t, but it's also wider (to wide for my taste), and therefor comes across as less bold.
User avatar
Fred G. Unn
Posts: 438
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:24
Location: NYCish

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Fred G. Unn »

I suppose most have figured it out by now, but the fonts are, from L to R:
Maestro, Engraver, Petrucci, Opus, Sonata, Helsinki, Bravura
Vaughan
Posts: 53
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 12:37

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Vaughan »

Sorry for chiming in just to agree with what's already been said, but by the time I read these posts, my opinions have pretty much been expressed by the other contributors. It is kind of confirming! Octo's last contribution is handy. I agree that the difference between the thick (red & orange) and thin lines (green) in Knut's treble clef is too great, and I also prefer that the blue line be more vertical and not leaning to the right. That's what I like about nr. 2 (Engraver) and nr. 5 (Sonata): the verticalness as well as a good balance between thick and thin lines. Engraver's upper loop might be seen to be a bit too wide and its dot at the bottom a bit too heavy. Sonata's treble clef has the best balance, in my opinion, although it's perhaps slightly too small. I find Knut's other clefs very beautiful!
User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 2462
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by John Ruggero »

Knut, OCTO's blue line shows the clockwise rotation that you were describing. Did you actually design the clef with the blue line vertical and then rotate the symbol, or simply start with that angle and design the clef around it? I did rotate your clef and like it better that way.

I agree with OCTO that the orange and red parts are perhaps a little heavy; for me it is in relation to the width of the clef itself.

Edit: Oops, you did the same rotation while I was writing this post.
M1 Mac mini (OS 12.4), Dorico, Finale 25.5, GPO 4, Affinity Publisher 2, SmartScore 64 Pro, JW Plug-ins, TG Tools, Keyboard maestro

http://www.cantilenapress.com
trekkspillmannen
Posts: 1
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:43

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by trekkspillmannen »

How is your font project evolving, Knut? It would be great to see a demo page or two when you reach that point!
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Knut »

John Ruggero wrote:Did you actually design the clef with the blue line vertical and then rotate the symbol, or simply start with that angle and design the clef around it?
Yes, the clef was designed upright and rotated afterwards. The rotation is simply a nod to plate engraved scores.
John Ruggero wrote:For me it is in relation to the width of the clef itself.
I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?
Trekkspillmannen wrote:How is your font project evolving, Knut? It would be great to see a demo page or two when you reach that point!
Still working on it, but it's definitely coming along. The project got much bigger when I decided to make the font SMuFL compliant. I'll post a new demo when the initial glyph designs are finished.
User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 2462
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by John Ruggero »

Knut: I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?
Yes, for me, it seems better upright. As far as the actual shape, we are now discussing minute differences. It would be interesting to see the clef a little less bold and/or a little wider to compare. As I said, for me treble clefs seem to fall into two categories: big but ugly, pretty but too slight. Yours would fall into the second category.
M1 Mac mini (OS 12.4), Dorico, Finale 25.5, GPO 4, Affinity Publisher 2, SmartScore 64 Pro, JW Plug-ins, TG Tools, Keyboard maestro

http://www.cantilenapress.com
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Knut »

John Ruggero wrote:
Knut: I see. So, the second one is better, but still to bold?
Yes, for me, it seems better upright. As far as the actual shape, we are now discussing minute differences. It would be interesting to see the clef a little less bold and/or a little wider to compare. As I said, for me treble clefs seem to fall into two categories: big but ugly, pretty but too slight. Yours would fall into the second category.
Well then, at least it's pretty. :)

I agree that the shape isn't perfect, and although we may not see exactly eye to eye on what constitutes the perfect :t, your feedback is nonetheless very valuable to me. I'll experiment a bit and post a new version soon.
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by Knut »

Here's a slightly less bold version with the bass clef for comparison.
Skjermbilde 2015-10-10 kl. 19.47.15.png
Skjermbilde 2015-10-10 kl. 19.47.15.png (40.95 KiB) Viewed 10767 times
Don't know if you can tell the difference, but it's pretty much what's possible without altering all the other clefs as well.
User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1756
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: Clef design comparision

Post by OCTO »

It looks much better for my eyes.
I think that some width should be added on :t but remaining the boldness... Possible?
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 27.5 • Sibelius 2024.3• MuseScore 4+ • Logic Pro X+ • Ableton Live 11+ • Digital Performer 11 /// MacOS Monterey (secondary in use systems: Fedora 35, Windows 10)
Post Reply