Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Karlin High]

Good going! I have the Bravura font working on Windows 10 Pro 1909 and 
Lilypond 2.21.1. But in the project I tried, I asked for Aiken head 
notes and didn't get them.




Small example attached. Does anyone know if Bravura has Aiken head 
notes? Or what font viewer could be used to check, since the Windows one 
only shows text and not music symbols.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA
\version "2.21.1"
\paper{
  #(define fonts
(set-global-fonts
  #:music "BMusicFont"
  #:brace "profondo"
  #:roman "Academico"
  ))
}

\include "bmusicdefinitions.ily"

\header{
  title = "Aiken Bravura Test"
  composer = "me"
  poet = "also me"
}

\score {

  {
\aikenHeads
c'4 d' e' f' |
g'2 a' |
b'1 |
c''1
  }

  \layout {
\context { \Score \bravuraOn } 

  }
}

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Craig Dabelstein]

All looks good! Thanks Daniel.

On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 06:06, Daniel Benjamin Miller 
wrote:

> I've updated the fonts and support to correct the issue. Download the new
> version (at the same GitHub link) and you'll see the issue resolved. Thanks
> for the report!
> On 6/27/20 3:39 PM, Craig Dabelstein wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thanks for all your work on this. I've followed all your instructions and
> it is all working perfectly, however, now my hairpins that start or end on
> a dynamic are not centered on the opening or closing dynamic. Any idea why
> this would happen?
>
> All the best,
>
> Craig
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:23, Daniel Benjamin Miller <
> dbmil...@dbmiller.org> wrote:
>
>> I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important.
>> Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch user of
>> what is free and open-source (in large part because I want *anyone* to
>> be able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a bit saddened that he
>> moved to proprietary fonts. You will notice that I use his (still OFL,
>> though old) Profondo brace font (a conversion of Bravura; I replaced his
>> Profondo music font because it was out of date, being based on an early
>> pre-release of Bravura).
>>
>> Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by a lot.
>> Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to create the
>> proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that LilyPond can
>> actually use them. And most fonts are not METAFONT-designed like
>> Emmentaler, so the accessible infrastructure for font building for LilyPond
>> is abysmal. So to me the advantage of SMuFL is not only that we'll be able
>> to use fonts from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts becomes orders of
>> magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for developing SMuFL fonts are
>> in place).
>>
>> Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release Bravura,
>> and the existing Bravura support that had been put together before, this is
>> not the first time that Bravura was made to be used in LilyPond. But I
>> think it's finally ready for actual publication-quality usage now! So while
>> Owen does his work on SMuFL support, we have another good choice for the
>> present!
>> On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
>>
>> Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
>> Miller:
>>
>> You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.
>>
>> I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is;
>>
>> I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
>> I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box
>> scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
>> the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).
>>
>> But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
>> option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
>> shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
>> the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
>> alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
>> fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
>> work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
>> choice even more fundmental.
>>
>> Urs
>>
>>
>> I don't
>> like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I
>> actually feel the same about Gonville: 
>> https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed
>> it
>> because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
>> it
>> to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
>> not
>> like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
>> like
>> strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
>> like
>> music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)
>>
>> But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
>> I
>> also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music
>> typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
>> into
>> creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its
>> fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
>> not
>> that seriously taken.
>>
>> LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
>> its
>> defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
>> fonts,
>> in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
>> expanded
>> as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and
>> improvements are all well and good).
>>
>> On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'd like to share something: https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts
>> I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and
>> there'd been
>>
>> Thanks for this, I am going to try it for s

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Daniel Benjamin Miller]

I've updated the fonts and support to correct the issue. Download the 
new version (at the same GitHub link) and you'll see the issue resolved. 
Thanks for the report!


On 6/27/20 3:39 PM, Craig Dabelstein wrote:

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for all your work on this. I've followed all your instructions 
and it is all working perfectly, however, now my hairpins that start 
or end on a dynamic are not centered on the opening or closing 
dynamic. Any idea why this would happen?


All the best,

Craig


On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:23, Daniel Benjamin Miller 
mailto:dbmil...@dbmiller.org>> wrote:


I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important.
Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch
user of what is free and open-source (in large part because I want
/anyone/ to be able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a
bit saddened that he moved to proprietary fonts. You will notice
that I use his (still OFL, though old) Profondo brace font (a
conversion of Bravura; I replaced his Profondo music font because
it was out of date, being based on an early pre-release of Bravura).

Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by
a lot. Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to
create the proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that
LilyPond can actually use them. And most fonts are not
METAFONT-designed like Emmentaler, so the accessible
infrastructure for font building for LilyPond is abysmal. So to me
the advantage of SMuFL is not only that we'll be able to use fonts
from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts becomes orders of
magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for developing SMuFL
fonts are in place).

Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release
Bravura, and the existing Bravura support that had been put
together before, this is not the first time that Bravura was made
to be used in LilyPond. But I think it's finally ready for actual
publication-quality usage now! So while Owen does his work on
SMuFL support, we have another good choice for the present!

On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote:

Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
Miller:

You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.

I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is;

I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box
scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).

But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
choice even more fundmental.

Urs


I don't
like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I
actually feel the same about Gonville:
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/  
  - "I designed
it
because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
it
to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
not
like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
like
strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
like
music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)

But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
I
also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music
typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
into
creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its
fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
not
that seriously taken.

LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
its
defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
fonts,
in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
expanded
as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and
improvements are all well and good).

On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:


I'd like to share something:
https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts  

I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and
there'd b

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Daniel Benjamin Miller]

It has something to do with using the text font for dynamics instead of 
the music-type font. Give me a few and I'll upload a fixed version.


On 6/27/20 3:39 PM, Craig Dabelstein wrote:

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for all your work on this. I've followed all your instructions 
and it is all working perfectly, however, now my hairpins that start 
or end on a dynamic are not centered on the opening or closing 
dynamic. Any idea why this would happen?


All the best,

Craig


On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:23, Daniel Benjamin Miller 
mailto:dbmil...@dbmiller.org>> wrote:


I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important.
Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch
user of what is free and open-source (in large part because I want
/anyone/ to be able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a
bit saddened that he moved to proprietary fonts. You will notice
that I use his (still OFL, though old) Profondo brace font (a
conversion of Bravura; I replaced his Profondo music font because
it was out of date, being based on an early pre-release of Bravura).

Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by
a lot. Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to
create the proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that
LilyPond can actually use them. And most fonts are not
METAFONT-designed like Emmentaler, so the accessible
infrastructure for font building for LilyPond is abysmal. So to me
the advantage of SMuFL is not only that we'll be able to use fonts
from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts becomes orders of
magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for developing SMuFL
fonts are in place).

Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release
Bravura, and the existing Bravura support that had been put
together before, this is not the first time that Bravura was made
to be used in LilyPond. But I think it's finally ready for actual
publication-quality usage now! So while Owen does his work on
SMuFL support, we have another good choice for the present!

On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote:

Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
Miller:

You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.

I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is;

I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box
scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).

But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
choice even more fundmental.

Urs


I don't
like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I
actually feel the same about Gonville:
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/  
  - "I designed
it
because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
it
to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
not
like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
like
strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
like
music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)

But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
I
also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music
typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
into
creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its
fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
not
that seriously taken.

LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
its
defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
fonts,
in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
expanded
as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and
improvements are all well and good).

On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:


I'd like to share something:
https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts  

I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and
there'd been

Thanks for this, I

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Craig Dabelstein]

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for all your work on this. I've followed all your instructions and
it is all working perfectly, however, now my hairpins that start or end on
a dynamic are not centered on the opening or closing dynamic. Any idea why
this would happen?

All the best,

Craig


On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 19:23, Daniel Benjamin Miller 
wrote:

> I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important.
> Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch user of
> what is free and open-source (in large part because I want *anyone* to be
> able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a bit saddened that he moved
> to proprietary fonts. You will notice that I use his (still OFL, though
> old) Profondo brace font (a conversion of Bravura; I replaced his Profondo
> music font because it was out of date, being based on an early pre-release
> of Bravura).
>
> Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by a lot.
> Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to create the
> proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that LilyPond can
> actually use them. And most fonts are not METAFONT-designed like
> Emmentaler, so the accessible infrastructure for font building for LilyPond
> is abysmal. So to me the advantage of SMuFL is not only that we'll be able
> to use fonts from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts becomes orders of
> magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for developing SMuFL fonts are
> in place).
>
> Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release Bravura,
> and the existing Bravura support that had been put together before, this is
> not the first time that Bravura was made to be used in LilyPond. But I
> think it's finally ready for actual publication-quality usage now! So while
> Owen does his work on SMuFL support, we have another good choice for the
> present!
> On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
> Miller:
>
> You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.
>
> I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is;
>
> I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
> I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box
> scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
> the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).
>
> But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
> option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
> shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
> the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
> alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
> fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
> work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
> choice even more fundmental.
>
> Urs
>
>
> I don't
> like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I
> actually feel the same about Gonville: 
> https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed
> it
> because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
> it
> to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
> not
> like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
> like
> strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
> like
> music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)
>
> But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
> I
> also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music
> typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
> into
> creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its
> fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
> not
> that seriously taken.
>
> LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
> its
> defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
> fonts,
> in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
> expanded
> as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and
> improvements are all well and good).
>
> On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:
>
>
> I'd like to share something: https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts
> I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and
> there'd been
>
> Thanks for this, I am going to try it for sure. I like Dorico's
> output, and this will sort of give a similar result for LilyPond if
> I
> understand correctly?
>
> Which leads to a more philosophic question. Do we want LilyPond
> scores
> to have an immediately recognizable "personality" or are we slowly
> moving to a situation where everyone, including LilyPond, is trying
> to
> look the same (when using default settings), and it will be hard
> to
> see if a score was typeset in LilyPond, Mus

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Daniel Benjamin Miller]

I agree. Having choice in this respect is wonderful and important. 
Abraham's work in this regard was great, though, as I am a staunch user 
of what is free and open-source (in large part because I want /anyone/ 
to be able to modify and re-compile my scores), I am a bit saddened that 
he moved to proprietary fonts. You will notice that I use his (still 
OFL, though old) Profondo brace font (a conversion of Bravura; I 
replaced his Profondo music font because it was out of date, being based 
on an early pre-release of Bravura).


Adding SMuFL support will enhance our ability to add new fonts by a lot. 
Right now a big issue is that it is extremely difficult to create the 
proper special tables (LILY and so on) in fonts so that LilyPond can 
actually use them. And most fonts are not METAFONT-designed like 
Emmentaler, so the accessible infrastructure for font building for 
LilyPond is abysmal. So to me the advantage of SMuFL is not only that 
we'll be able to use fonts from elsewhere, but the creation of fonts 
becomes orders of magnitude less difficult too (as the tools for 
developing SMuFL fonts are in place).


Of course, between Abraham Lee's conversion of the pre-release Bravura, 
and the existing Bravura support that had been put together before, this 
is not the first time that Bravura was made to be used in LilyPond. But 
I think it's finally ready for actual publication-quality usage now! So 
while Owen does his work on SMuFL support, we have another good choice 
for the present!


On 6/25/20 5:16 AM, Urs Liska wrote:

Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
Miller:

You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.

I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is;

I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box
scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).

But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
choice even more fundmental.

Urs


I don't
like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I
actually feel the same about Gonville:
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed
it
because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
it
to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
not
like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
like
strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
like
music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)

But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
I
also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music
typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
into
creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its
fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
not
that seriously taken.

LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
its
defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
fonts,
in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
expanded
as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and
improvements are all well and good).

On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:


I'd like to share something:
https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts
I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and
there'd been

Thanks for this, I am going to try it for sure. I like Dorico's
output, and this will sort of give a similar result for LilyPond if
I
understand correctly?

Which leads to a more philosophic question. Do we want LilyPond
scores
to have an immediately recognizable "personality" or are we slowly
moving to a situation where everyone, including LilyPond, is trying
to
look the same (when using default settings), and it will be hard
to
see if a score was typeset in LilyPond, MuseScore, Dorico, Finale,
or
Sibelius?

I hope LilyPond will always try to keep a distinct personality in
the
default output, which is not a static thing but can be discussed
in
the Lilypond user and developers community, changed, and improved
continuously. But let not all our efforts go to looking as much as
possible like "the other ones".

I know LilyPond is (almost) flexible and tweakable enough to have
it
all, but what I am talking about is the default output.

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Urs Liska]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.06.2020, 04:37 -0400 schrieb Daniel Benjamin
Miller:
> You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.
> 
> I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is; 

I think what you suggested with this wasn't to change the defaults. But
I really like the idea of having choice. It is good that out-of-the-box 
scores are immediately recognizble (although I have the impression that
the *text* font is even more notable in this respect).

But people shouldn't be limited to that "personality" but have the
option to tweak the output to what they like. Generally speaking scores
shouldn't necessarily have the personality of the program but that of
the author/editor/publisher. Abraham Lee's efforts in making
alternative fonts properly available at all, and his collection of
fonts, was a huge step forware IMHO, and I really hope that Owen Lamb's
work of making LilyPond SMuFL-compliant will make that possibility of
choice even more fundmental.

Urs

> I don't 
> like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I 
> actually feel the same about Gonville: 
> https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed
> it 
> because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found
> it 
> to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly
> not 
> like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me
> like 
> strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me
> like 
> music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)
> 
> But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But
> I 
> also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music 
> typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort
> into 
> creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its 
> fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly
> not 
> that seriously taken.
> 
> LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of
> its 
> defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default
> fonts, 
> in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being
> expanded 
> as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and 
> improvements are all well and good).
> 
> On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:
> > 
> > > I'd like to share something: 
> > > https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts
> > > I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and 
> > > there'd been
> > 
> > Thanks for this, I am going to try it for sure. I like Dorico's 
> > output, and this will sort of give a similar result for LilyPond if
> > I 
> > understand correctly?
> > 
> > Which leads to a more philosophic question. Do we want LilyPond
> > scores 
> > to have an immediately recognizable "personality" or are we slowly 
> > moving to a situation where everyone, including LilyPond, is trying
> > to 
> > look the same (when using default settings), and it will be hard
> > to 
> > see if a score was typeset in LilyPond, MuseScore, Dorico, Finale,
> > or 
> > Sibelius?
> > 
> > I hope LilyPond will always try to keep a distinct personality in
> > the 
> > default output, which is not a static thing but can be discussed
> > in 
> > the Lilypond user and developers community, changed, and improved 
> > continuously. But let not all our efforts go to looking as much as 
> > possible like "the other ones".
> > 
> > I know LilyPond is (almost) flexible and tweakable enough to have
> > it 
> > all, but what I am talking about is the default output.
> > 

Re: Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Daniel Benjamin Miller]

You're right, it does essentially replicate Dorico's style.

I don't think LilyPond should change what its default style is; I don't 
like the Emmentaler font myself (Simon Tatham put it best, though I 
actually feel the same about Gonville: 
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/gonville/ - "I designed it 
because Lilypond's standard font (Feta) was not to my taste: I found it 
to be (variously) over-ornate, strangely proportioned, and subtly not 
like the music I was used to reading. Music set in Feta looks to me like 
strangely stylised music; music set in Gonville just looks to me like 
music, so I can read it without being distracted so much.)


But I also think that we should not try to change the defaults. But I 
also think that almost nobody actually cares much about music 
typography, really: only LilyPond and Dorico have really put effort into 
creating their default fonts and appearances; MuseScore borrows its 
fonts from both, and Finale and Sibelius' fonts are really clearly not 
that seriously taken.


LilyPond is not static, but it should not really change in terms of its 
defaults either. Much like TeX, we should not change the default fonts, 
in my opinion (though of course Emmentaler and Feta are being expanded 
as new features are added to LilyPond, and slight tweaks and 
improvements are all well and good).


On 6/25/20 3:06 AM, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:



On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Benjamin Miller wrote:

I'd like to share something: 
https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts
I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and 
there'd been


Thanks for this, I am going to try it for sure. I like Dorico's 
output, and this will sort of give a similar result for LilyPond if I 
understand correctly?


Which leads to a more philosophic question. Do we want LilyPond scores 
to have an immediately recognizable "personality" or are we slowly 
moving to a situation where everyone, including LilyPond, is trying to 
look the same (when using default settings), and it will be hard to 
see if a score was typeset in LilyPond, MuseScore, Dorico, Finale, or 
Sibelius?


I hope LilyPond will always try to keep a distinct personality in the 
default output, which is not a static thing but can be discussed in 
the Lilypond user and developers community, changed, and improved 
continuously. But let not all our efforts go to looking as much as 
possible like "the other ones".


I know LilyPond is (almost) flexible and tweakable enough to have it 
all, but what I am talking about is the default output.

Better support for Bravura in LilyPond

[Daniel Benjamin Miller]

I'd like to share something: https://github.com/dbenjaminmiller/bmusicfonts

I personally prefer the Bravura design to Emmentaler/Feta, and there'd 
been some SMuFL support offered in the past (which was highly buggy and 
not really usable for professional scores in a few ways), as well as 
Profondo, a conversion of a pre-release version of Bravura into 
LilyPond's native font format (which also had some issues with dot 
placement). After much experimentation, I created some fonts and 
includeable files which allow for high-quality typesetting using 
Bravura. The SMuFL font is loaded for some stencils, and others come 
from a native LilyPond-format font (which is itself usable, though 
results will be better with the definitions file loaded).


Not all features of Bravura are currently supported (e.g., you can't use 
the built-in stylistic alternatives). Likely, that won't happen until 
SMuFL support comes to LilyPond (it's currently being worked on, I 
believe). But the output should already be pretty nice. It is for me 
(n.b., I use LilyPond principally at 17.82 size).


Note that this isn't a generalizeable method for all SMuFL fonts: the 
definitions file includes many specific tweaks for Bravura, which are 
easy to adapt, but the BMusicFont had to be put together largely 
manually, and this process is quite involved. I have little interest in 
adapting a second music font myself, but hopefully this work is useful 
to you.