A modern looking score in 2018?

Have your scores reviewed by other users. Comment on old and new published scores and on publishers.
User avatar
odod
Posts: 133
Joined: 25 Nov 2015, 15:10

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by odod » 27 Jun 2018, 01:58

okay, i am about to give attempt with sans style .. here you go,
Paganini_0001.png
Paganini_0001.png (1.23 MiB) Viewed 572 times
LogicX, Cubase 5, MacMini i7, Macbook Pro 2015, PowerMac G5, Sibelius 8, Finale, Musescore, Reaper, Apogee Duet, Universal Audio Apollo Twin MKII, FontLab, tons of Faith and Prayers

Serenade Music Engraving Service

User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1082
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by OCTO » 27 Jun 2018, 03:47

A wonderful engraving odod! This is one of the few caprices I never performed, I didn't have patience, yet I could play the fast octaves on the next pahes. Igenious music...

About sans, ok, how about to change ALL fonts into sans? I mean all...
Last edited by OCTO on 27 Jun 2018, 11:21, edited 1 time in total.
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25 • Sibelius 8 • MuseScore 2 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 7)

User avatar
odod
Posts: 133
Joined: 25 Nov 2015, 15:10

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by odod » 27 Jun 2018, 10:22

edited
Sans_0001.png
Sans_0001.png (1.2 MiB) Viewed 538 times
Last edited by odod on 27 Jun 2018, 15:29, edited 2 times in total.
LogicX, Cubase 5, MacMini i7, Macbook Pro 2015, PowerMac G5, Sibelius 8, Finale, Musescore, Reaper, Apogee Duet, Universal Audio Apollo Twin MKII, FontLab, tons of Faith and Prayers

Serenade Music Engraving Service

User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1082
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by OCTO » 27 Jun 2018, 11:26

odod wrote:
27 Jun 2018, 10:22
it almost made me laugh all day long, changing these fonts .. OMG (please forgive me)
:) :)
You have forgotten to change 8va :)
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25 • Sibelius 8 • MuseScore 2 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 7)

User avatar
odod
Posts: 133
Joined: 25 Nov 2015, 15:10

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by odod » 28 Jun 2018, 02:01

done octo ! :D
LogicX, Cubase 5, MacMini i7, Macbook Pro 2015, PowerMac G5, Sibelius 8, Finale, Musescore, Reaper, Apogee Duet, Universal Audio Apollo Twin MKII, FontLab, tons of Faith and Prayers

Serenade Music Engraving Service

User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1082
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by OCTO » 28 Jun 2018, 04:37

Now, if we take these scores away to a reasonable distance, the first example is much more readable than the second one.
Simply said, the perception and the size is much more efficient with the stylised serif; one that ignore this fact is making just more trouble in engraving. One could say that sans is perfectly readable is maybe just having a placebo...
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25 • Sibelius 8 • MuseScore 2 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 7)

teacue
Posts: 12
Joined: 19 Dec 2017, 21:23

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by teacue » 28 Jun 2018, 10:40

@Odod
odod wrote:so i think, you do not need to worry about the font, engraving is an art, that is why sometimes artists don't follow the rules, the real artists were those who "invented their own stylistic art into a working ground rule every time they started a new one, and sometimes new things came after one and another". feel free to contact me personally if you are interested in developing music font together (i have tons of ideas)
Thank you for thoughts and your offer and I will contact you as soon as I make some progress with my font project :-)

Thank you also for your try with sans serif.
I like both try but I would not draw any conclusion about usability of sans only from these examples.
It is a difficult task.

OCTO wrote:Now, if we take these scores away to a reasonable distance, the first example is much more readable than the second one.
Simply said, the perception and the size is much more efficient with the stylised serif; one that ignore this fact is making just more trouble in engraving. One could say that sans is perfectly readable is maybe just having a placebo...
Maybe I am too touchy (not sure if this is the right word!) but I find this statement very categorical.
Could it be that readability depends on who is looking at the score and for what purpose?
Could it be that it also depends on the aesthetical taste of the observer?

The score from Vlastimir Trajkovic is for my eyes not really pleasant but I can imagine that it fullfills very practical purposes. In this score the instruments labels are very big as well as some instructions. There are moments during rehearsals where it is possibly more important to know who and when a musician plays than what he plays. In this case it can be then more important to clearly see these informations than the notes.
But if this choice was only an esthetical design choice, well I don't like it and I would say I also would not like such big labels with a serif font.

Schonbergian wrote:This is what I truly don't understand. You're trying to make something that's less ostentatious by searching for and/or creating symbols that will inherently catch the eye because of their striking difference to those used everywhere else in music. I must confess that I don't see the point in this.

There's certainly room for experimentation and different styles within music; I think what you propose is counter-productive to your aims.
If you mean with "everywhere else in music" you mean the vast majority of printed music scores then of course I agree completely with you that anything different from what is used everywhere will first look different and it can indeed lead to some people shouting "How on earth do you dare to change this sanctuary?"
But should this really matter?
I am glad that todays fashion for men does not dicate to wear a ruff like in the XVI-XVII century ;-)
I also do not really appreciate ties but well everybody should wear what he/she likes.
Fashion changes, art also and there is always someone who does not like the style of a new painter, of a new composer, the smell of a new perfume, a new dress, a new word, a new music font ...
Are these changes usefull?
I don't know, sometimes, sometimes not, and in fact I don't care as I find new colors, new smells, new forms, new music great and joy and fun and a nice looking new music font would be really great :-)
Honestly I can't understand that I even have to write this.
Things are changing, there is nothing wrong with this.

***
teacuemusic (Musicals)
youtube

teacue
Posts: 12
Joined: 19 Dec 2017, 21:23

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by teacue » 28 Jun 2018, 10:44

Examples are indeed interesting.
But of course it also depends on what one is trying to prove with an example.
On my side I try to search and find out what is possibly working.

Here are some examples of the same score each using different fonts.
(Edit: for some unknown reasons after uploading the pictures have been cropped to the right and at the bottom, if someone knows why please tell me! Ok this was a user error, it is now solved)

"dorico-default"
This is almost the default output of Dorico with Bravura and Academico.
I like it a lot and if I was not looking for something new I probably could imagine to use it as it is for this particular score.

01-default-dorico.jpg
01-default-dorico.jpg (343.46 KiB) Viewed 501 times

"garamond"
This uses MTF Cadence and a Garamond condensed font.
A condensed font suits my needs much better for a very practical reason: I have a lot of lyrics and chord symbols in my scores and very often both can be very wide.
A condensed font helps a lot and as I prefer to keep the same look for a work consisting of several pieces I use a condensed font even if it is not absolutely necessary like in this example.
A condensed font for title and other texts is also not necessary but I find it not easy to mix condensed font with wider fonts.
BTW this is how I engrave my works at the moment and I enjoy it a lot.

02-garamond.jpg
02-garamond.jpg (322.47 KiB) Viewed 501 times

Each of the next three examples "futura", "humanist" and "swiss" uses a sans serif condensed font.
My preference goes to the Swiss font but to me all are readable.
I worked many years as a chor conductor using my scores/songbooks printed with the Swiss font and it was always very good readable.
In my last working years I printed and worked with the Garamond font and curiously this was a tad harder for me to read.
But maybe it was because of my old eyes ;-)

From an aesthetical point of view I find Futura a bit too hard and Humanist a bit too special.
I like the Swiss font very much and I find it pleasant to the eyes.
Maybe the fact that it is less condensed than the two others makes it softer.

(BTW Dorico seems to have problems with some fonts and it did not print the bar numbers in italic and did not print the title bold)
If I decide to use sans serif only I will probably use the Swiss font.


"Futura"

03-futura.jpg
03-futura.jpg (314.92 KiB) Viewed 501 times

"Humanist"

04-humanist.jpg
04-humanist.jpg (325.79 KiB) Viewed 501 times

"Swiss"

05-swiss.jpg
05-swiss.jpg (324.68 KiB) Viewed 501 times

mix
This example combines a semi serif font for title, chord symbols and bar numbers and a sans serif fonts (one condensed and one less condensed) for the other text elements.

The reasons why I would eventually mix fonts and width are:
1. I prefer a softer font for titles but it should not be as baroque as a traditional serif: a semi serif could fullfil this.

2. Subtitles, labels for composer and so on do not need to be condensed, I choosed then a less condensed font from the same type.

3. I stated earlier that chord symbols need to be narrow, on the other side I find that chord symbols build a category in themselves and can be distinct from other text elements. There are like a very distinct voice.
Also using the same semi serif font for title and chord symbols could possibly unify (I am absolutely not sure that it does this!) So if the font is not too wide it can possibly fit.
To also unify numbers I use the same font for bar numbers.

4. As previously mentioned lyrics in my scores have to be condensed even if this is not really visible in this score.
I find a serif condensed font less readable than a condensed sans serif this is why I choose a sans serif.

I am not completely convinced with this example of combined fonts and I am not sure why.

06-mix.jpg
06-mix.jpg (322.53 KiB) Viewed 501 times

Some other conclusions
Without a notation font more towards a sans serif style (which unfortunately does not exist at the moment) the use of a sans serif font is not really easy and most of the time a serif font seems to work better and seems to be more pleasant to the eyes.
But to me this is only from an aesthetical point of view and this is not about readability.

I also begin to think that my approach focussing on fonts is too one-sided and I should better look and study other design elements that can lead to a modern aspect.

I will do two things in the next time:
1. Continue to learn and sharp my eyes to better engrave independently of a "style"
2. Continue to design a hand written font in the hope that it will also teach me a few things about engraving
Last edited by teacue on 28 Jun 2018, 11:50, edited 2 times in total.
teacuemusic (Musicals)
youtube

User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1082
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by OCTO » 28 Jun 2018, 11:28

teacue wrote:
28 Jun 2018, 10:40
OCTO wrote:Now, if we take these scores away to a reasonable distance, the first example is much more readable than the second one.
Simply said, the perception and the size is much more efficient with the stylised serif; one that ignore this fact is making just more trouble in engraving. One could say that sans is perfectly readable is maybe just having a placebo...
Maybe I am too touchy (not sure if this is the right word!) but I find this statement very categorical.
Could it be that readability depends on who is looking at the score and for what purpose?
Could it be that it also depends on the aesthetical taste of the observer?
You can make a simple test. Just print out these two pages and put it on the music stand. Than, take a step back, try to read. Go further back slowly, and see at what point one of the scores is not readable any more.
The second test is to print these two pages and give it to two students. After some rehearsal in the class, swap the scores and ask what is easier to read. (<-- this I did numerous times). Don't warn them in advance that you will make any test.

Trying to many fonts is like working at a perfume store. After some time you can't truly feel any perfume and distinguish it clearly.
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25 • Sibelius 8 • MuseScore 2 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 7)

teacue
Posts: 12
Joined: 19 Dec 2017, 21:23

Re: A modern looking score in 2018?

Post by teacue » 28 Jun 2018, 11:53

OCTO wrote:
28 Jun 2018, 11:28
Trying to many fonts is like working at a perfume store. After some time you can't truly feel any perfume and distinguish it clearly.
Now with this I completely agree with you :-)
But I sometimes just wonder how do the professionals are working?
They must surely work longer than a few minutes :grin:
BTW I love perfumes!
teacuemusic (Musicals)
youtube

Post Reply