[WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Have your scores reviewed by other users. Comment on old and new published scores and on publishers.
User avatar
JoeBass
Posts: 5
Joined: 22 Jun 2016, 11:11

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by JoeBass »

Thanks, I look forward to checking it out.
User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 2453
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by John Ruggero »

Here is a comparison of the dynamic size in six fonts from my meager collection. The last two are by forum member Wess.

Gould's and Ross's guidelines seem to be only very roughly carried out:

1. None of the fonts have a :piano of two spaces. They are all mostly about 1.66 spaces. A :piano of two spaces seems much too large to me. Of the six, I prefer the size and shape of the Vintage GMHA because it is not overpowering but distinct.

2. The first two (Finale) fonts have a :forte of 2.5 spaces and maybe even overflowing that. Fravura barely makes 2.5, and the last three seem around 2.25 spaces. To me, the Maestro and Vintage GMHA have the best shape with beautiful thick and thin balance, but I would prefer something between them in height and substance (width).

3. The modifier m, however, is generally very close to 1 space in height. I prefer the ones that are not larger than this.
Dynamics size.jpg
Dynamics size.jpg (194.45 KiB) Viewed 14821 times
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: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by Knut »

Thank you for this comparison, John.

For me, the key here, as it is with any music font in it's entirety, is balance of weight. It's a bit hard to tell from such a limited context, but based on these examples I think Maestro, Engraver, Fravura and Vintage EPC1 fares pretty well in terms of balance with the clef and time signature. The last two, on the other hand, seem pretty unbalanced to me.

This is much more important to me than the exact size, but I prefer a relatively large x-hight for dynamics symbols, and of course, uniformity is crucial. While none of the above are perfect, I think I prefer the Bravura dynamics.
User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 2453
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by John Ruggero »

You are most welcome, Knut. I obviously need to add more fonts to my collection, such as yours when it is available!

Different strokes for different folks. I like many of the qualities of the Fravura (Bravura): it is the right height and general substance but for me it is a little too thick in the middle and in its thinnest places. I would like delicacy as well as strength so the symbol isn't too black.

I also like the difference in weight between the :me and then :piano in the Vintage GMHA.
Last edited by John Ruggero on 24 Jun 2016, 11:07, edited 1 time in total.
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
User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 2453
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by John Ruggero »

And thank you, Knut and Joe, for your kind words about my commentary!
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
User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1742
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by OCTO »

How does these fonts look in vivo?
A page of Brahms would help!
Anders Hedelin
Posts: 274
Joined: 16 Aug 2017, 16:36
Location: Sweden

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by Anders Hedelin »

Knut wrote: 20 Apr 2016, 09:36 Attached is my initial re-engraving of Brahms Op. 119, No. 1
I'm new to this forum and might have missed where to find your initially attached file, Knut. I would very much like to be able to follow this very interesting discussion.
Anders
Finale 26, 27 on Windows 10
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by Knut »

I'm sorry Anders. I had to remove all these documents to protect the copyright of the font I was using (long story). I can send you the last version I posted via PM if you are interested. The differences between my submitted versions here were relatively minor anyway.
User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1742
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by OCTO »

An alternative to do it, as you know Knut - but as a general tip, is to create a jpg or tiff picture of the score or to outline all fonts in pdf making thus just a vector file.

Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk

Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 27.3 • Sibelius 2023.5• MuseScore 4+ • Logic Pro X+ • Ableton Live 11+ • Digital Performer 10+ /// MacOS Monterey (secondary in use systems: Fedora 35, Windows 10)
Knut
Posts: 867
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 18:07
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: [WORKBENCH] Brahms Op. 119, No. 1

Post by Knut »

OCTO wrote: 17 Aug 2017, 07:57 An alternative to do it, as you know Knut - but as a general tip, is to create a jpg or tiff picture of the score or to outline all fonts in pdf making thus just a vector file.

Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
Yep, I think I may do that instead. It was a good thread, so it's kind of a shame that you can't see all the results anymore.

Edit: FYI, I've now replaced all (I think) my missing pdf uploads with jpegs.
Post Reply