Re: Henle piano template

[David Rogers]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 06.08.2013 19:46, schrieb David Rogers:

>> Some very significant reasons IMO that the old Henle score looks
>> "Henle":
>>
>> - the notehead shapes
>>
>> - the stem thickness (to my eyes, thinner relative to noteheads than LP)
>>
>> - the notehead size relative to staff size (Henle's noteheads are
>>    subjectively "fat" or "slightly over-sized" compared to LP; just my
>>    opinion, I didn't measure. Maybe it's tight spacing fooling my
>>    eyes...)
>>
>> - the staff-space relative to page size (relatively large I think)
>>
>> - the default-staff-staff-spacing (relatively smaller than LP default, I
>>    think)
>>
>> - the horizontal spacing algorithms (a big one IMO, doesn't sound easy)
>>
>> - the clef styles
>>
>>
>> ... and if I wanted to make my score look "Henle", I would think at
>> least some of those things would have to be first on the list. They
>> might be regarded as "just cosmetic", but this whole exercise is about
>> the cosmetic, isn't it?
>>
>>
>> For example, without the Henle notehead shapes/sizes, staff-space
>> adjustments, and stem thicknesses, I think everything else in a Henle
>> template will (should!) look "off" until they are brought in. Am I
>> totally off track?
>>
> Not totally off track, I'd say. It's all correct what you write. But
> did you actually compile Kieren's files and have a look at them? I
> find them fascinatingly close in their general appearance (not
> counting of course a number of details that still have to be tweaked).
> It looks so Henle-like that I can't really imagine how one would tweak
> LilyPond to mimick the scores of other publishers ...


I just printed it and compared them side-by-side at the
piano. Unfortunately I have to guess a little bit about absolute sizes,
because I don't have any paper in the house except "Letter" size. With
all due respect for Kieren's skill and work, which I cannot hope even to
match let alone improve on, I really believe (taking the stated goals of
Kieren's project literally) that only detail tweaks have so far been
accomplished, and the general basic appearance is still very very
LilyPond. What I notice is stuff that (to me) sounds like a mixture of
easy things and difficult things:

- The whole notation font needs to be replaced with a
  Henle-look-alike. At the very least, LP's notehead size is much too
  small for Henle; but everything else (quarter rests, fermatas, sharps
  & flats, and clefs stand out in this example) looks "very LilyPond" as
  well.

- The staff lines, ledger lines, and note stems need to be lightened a
  lot.

- The beams may need to be darkened. (Or maybe they already match, after
  lightening the staff lines and stems.)

- Slurs need to be thinner at the ends and thicker in the middle.

- The accidentals need to be significantly closer to their
  noteheads. (I'm on version 2.17.22 - did something change? I'm getting
  excessive white-space between each accidental and its note, in this
  template.)

- Staccato dots in this Henle Beethoven score are horizontally aligned
  with the notehead, even when printed on the stem side of the note.

- Two or three of the items above may affect the horizontal spacing,
  which might then have to be tweaked again.

- If one is really in a mood to "go crazy", is there a freely-available
  text font that looks like Bodoni?

(Hmm... a bit of a theme there - just about everything in the Henle
score has higher contrast between thick and thin than is shown in the
LilyPond score.)


I guess part of the question is how far it's worth going in pursuit of
this. It seems to me that the really hard parts can unfortunately be the
parts that count, when talking about appearance.

-- 
David R