Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/10 17:21:43, Malte Meyn wrote: > make slashturn 4% thinner at the center (instead of 10% thicker) IMHO that’s an improvement. Yes, I agree. > haydnturn 0% > thicker (instead of 10% thicker) I’m not sure whether this is, the glyph shouldn’t be too slim to match the overall style of the Feta font. You're probably right. I am a little confused as to my eye-sight - even after I checked that the glyph is completely symmetric, I "feel" that the \haydnturn's right part is "steeper". At one point I thought it might be an optical illusion triggered by the note head below, but that's not the case (as can be seen by deleting that note head). So it's probably best to forget my remark after all. Anyway, this was not influenced by your change of thickness, so you might just as well follow your judgement about what look of the symbol matches the Feta 'flavour'. https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/10 17:21:43, Malte Meyn wrote: make slashturn 4% thinner at the center (instead of 10% thicker) IMHO that’s an improvement. haydnturn 0% thicker (instead of 10% thicker) I’m not sure whether this is, the glyph shouldn’t be too slim to match the overall style of the Feta font. https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/10 09:47:31, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote:
This is gorgeous! Thanks very much!
Is the \haydnturn supposed to be symmetrical w.r.t. the stem? To me it
looks as
if it weighs slightly more on the left, but maybe I'm wrong? (And I'm
also not
sure if this would be a problem if I were right.)
The symbol is 100% symmetrical as I tested with the following code:
\markup \fill-line {
\fontsize #20 \overlay {
\rotate #180 \with-color #red \musicglyph "scripts.haydnturn"
\musicglyph "scripts.haydnturn"
}
}
But maybe it’s not well-balanced nethertheless?
(The Henle score that prompted me to ask in the first place - Haydn
Symphony Nr.
13 in Haydn, Werke, Reihe I, Band 3, ed. Braun/Gerlach - has a less
curly
version of the \haydnturn, but I like your design better.)
Yes, I don’t like the Henle (1972) version as well. I copied the fact
that it’s less bold than the turn and mordent but I made it a little but
more curly and centered the stem vertically (Henle makes the upper half
of the stem longer than the lower).
As for the \slashturn: I think the lenght of the stem is okay. But I
started to
wonder if the \slashturn should really be as "thick" at its waist as
the usual
\turn. Maybe there is a slight disbalance between the two parts (turn
vs.
slash).
You’re right. \turn and \reverseturn are 10% thicker at the very center
than at the “outer” thick parts. Making the \slashturn 4% thinner
instead looks good to me.
Maybe that’s also the reason for imbalance in the \haydnturn. Same
thickness instead of 10% thicker might look better.
I’ll make a patch set for slimmer center parts and attach the resulting
PDF to the sourceforge issue.
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
This is gorgeous! Thanks very much! Is the \haydnturn supposed to be symmetrical w.r.t. the stem? To me it looks as if it weighs slightly more on the left, but maybe I'm wrong? (And I'm also not sure if this would be a problem if I were right.) (The Henle score that prompted me to ask in the first place - Haydn Symphony Nr. 13 in Haydn, Werke, Reihe I, Band 3, ed. Braun/Gerlach - has a less curly version of the \haydnturn, but I like your design better.) As for the \slashturn: I think the lenght of the stem is okay. But I started to wonder if the \slashturn should really be as "thick" at its waist as the usual \turn. Maybe there is a slight disbalance between the two parts (turn vs. slash). Best Lukas https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/08 18:05:49, Dan Eble wrote: Having two symbols available does not necessarily require having unique commands for them. For example, LilyPond supports different styles of multi-measure rests, but they're all represented with R. I'm trying to understand whether these scripts are semantically distinct or just stylistically distinct. How would one make a single command that can use both styles? Maybe something like \override Script.haydnturn-style = #'turn % default #'wiggle ? It sounds like you're saying we don't know if they are semantically distinct, therefore we should implement commands as if they are. I have no objection to that; I just want to understand the intent and encourage an implementation that suits it. We don’t exactly know if \slashturn and \turn are semantically distinct either … As stated in my last post above it looks like many of these prall/mordent/turn/XXXturn symbols can replace each other in different editions. https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/08 17:43:36, simon.albrecht wrote: I’m not sure what exactly the difference in performing is, but that’s not for us to consider; it’s important for scholarly editing (of mid-to-late 18th century music, especially Haydn) to have this symbol available. Having two symbols available does not necessarily require having unique commands for them. For example, LilyPond supports different styles of multi-measure rests, but they're all represented with R. I'm trying to understand whether these scripts are semantically distinct or just stylistically distinct. It sounds like you're saying we don't know if they are semantically distinct, therefore we should implement commands as if they are. I have no objection to that; I just want to understand the intent and encourage an implementation that suits it. Regards, Dan https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 2018/04/08 17:08:42, Dan Eble wrote: Is there a performance difference between these two scripts? I read quickly through the thread referenced in the ticket, but I couldn't find the answer. I don’t know; I’m not even sure whether \haydnturn should be played as \mordent or as \turn. The 1972 Henle edition of the piano sonatas writes “The sign [\haydnturn] usually signifies [d32 c b c4]. In an appropriate musical context, however, it can be performed as a mordent [c16 b c4]”. After looking through different editions of some piano sonatas on IMSLP I’ve got the impression that nobody knows exactly. I’ve seen \trill and \prall in the same place, \prall and \mordent, \mordent and \haydnturn, \mordent and \turn, \prall and \reverseturn, \turn and \reverseturn, … But no \slashturn. I added the latter because it’s a form seen in SMuFL and here: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Requesting-an-addition-tp139819p139974.html https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
On 08.04.2018 19:08, nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a performance difference between these two scripts? I read quickly through the thread referenced in the ticket, but I couldn't find the answer. I’m not sure what exactly the difference in performing is, but that’s not for us to consider; it’s important for scholarly editing (of mid-to-late 18th century music, especially Haydn) to have this symbol available. Best, Simon ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
Is there a performance difference between these two scripts? I read quickly through the thread referenced in the ticket, but I couldn't find the answer. https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Issue 3128: add Haydn-style turns to Feta (issue 340660043 by lilyp...@maltemeyn.de)
Very nice! LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf
File mf/feta-scripts.mf (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf#newcode757
mf/feta-scripts.mf:757: set_char_box (wd# / 2, wd# / 2, ht# / 2 *
height_factor, ht# / 2 * height_factor);
Please avoid lines longer than 78 characters.
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf#newcode840
mf/feta-scripts.mf:840: set_char_box (wd# / 2, wd# / 2, ht# / 2 *
height_factor, ht# / 2 * height_factor);
Ditto.
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/diff/1/mf/feta-scripts.mf#newcode861
mf/feta-scripts.mf:861: .. z3l{dir(60)}
Please use a space after `dir' to be in sync with the remaining code.
https://codereview.appspot.com/340660043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
