Re: Discussing typographical standards

[Urs Liska]

Am 25.03.2014 01:10, schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> Am 24.03.2014 13:33, schrieb Richard Shann:
> > An example of this, typeset using LilyPond is posted here:
> >
> > http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:ImagefromIndex/278632
> >
> > To do this I set tuplet timing around the entire bass part and used
> > doubled time signatures (one hidden IIRC)
> >
> > Richard
> The following is completely off-topic, but I'd like to share some
> observations I often make and thoughts I have and ask for your opinion:
> Looking at this score confirms me in my opinion that LilyPond default
> output alone is no guarantee for a good-looking result in accordance
> with typographical good use.

Let me throw in a few comments although many things have already been 
discussed.

Of course LilyPond's default output is no guarantee for a perfect 
result. Everybody is working towards it but there's still a long way to 
go. On the other hand I'd say that no competitor so far reaches a 
comparable level as LilyPond when it comes to the default output.

As have been discussed some of the issues you note are "user errors", 
but I'd really stress that there are things where you simply can have 
different styles/opinions or different solutions depending on the 
historical period of your music.
So I think having a program produce perfect results by default isn't 
completely achievable.

> This may be partly due to an older lilypond
> version used, but there are some basic issues I see with this:
>
> -- For what I know of best practice in typography, it is normally
> unnecessary to use slurs for indicating melismata. Beaming

It has been discussed but I'd like to repeat that this is a matter of 
historical style and personal preference (of 
composer/editor/engraver/publisher). Therefore a tool can't produce 
"perfect" results by default, the question is rather whether your tool 
provides convenient ways to realize what you chose to do. And LilyPond 
does this.

> -- The beginning of the first recitative is a good example where
> inserting a line break at half-measure would significantly improve the
> visual impression by a more even horizontal spacing. I found that it was
> common in traditional hand-engraved scores to do such mid-measure breaks
> (if measures aren't rather short), and thus I am often using \bar "" at
> half-measure. Sometimes I even use an extra voice for something like
> \repeat unfold 35 { s2 \bar "" s2 } and thus create more flexibility in
> line-breaking. The disadvantage is that there is no possibility to
> differ in likeliness between mid-measure and full-measure breaks, which
> would then be desirable.

This can be argued about. But I think it is good that LilyPond by 
default only breaks lines at barlines because when you start breaking 
mid-bar it becomes an aesthetically very complex issue.

What I would find useful is an option with that you can allow LilyPond 
to break mid-measure at certain points. For example that you say: "In 
4/4 time you may also break in the middle", or "In 9/8 time you may 
break also at the 4th and 7th quaver".
This would make it possible to have a more flexible breaking (on 
request, not by default) without having to write and include a dedicated 
extra voice.

> -- As always, the default margins are too small. This is already being
> discussed as issue 3808
> <http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3808> and will
> hopefully be changed soon. I once read a comprehensive article
> <http://www.dante.de/tex/Dokumente/KohmSatzspiegel.pdf> (in German) on
> this topic from the German Tex user group's magazine, and the author
> pointed out that in medieval manuscripts and renaissance prints an
> outstandingly pleasing appearance is achieved by page margins which
> cover up half of the page's space! This is luxury, of course, and
> usually unaffordable, but I find it evident that having "unusually"
> large margins (and simple ratios between the measurements of the page
> and margins, and the top-margin smaller than the bottom-margin and so
> on...) much improves the look of the page. It might necessitate to
> decrease staff size, though, but anyway 16 pt are no way too small.

As has been mentioned there are significant differences between text and 
music typesetting. In particular I'd like to add that the "Satzspiegel" 
discussion for text documents is very tightly tied to legibility issues 
that circle around the number of characters per line and the leading 
between them. The relation between these parameters is extremely 
important for how the eye moves from one line to the next. Therefore it 
is necessary to have large margins if the page is large and the font is 
small, as it is with nowadays default arrangement of A4 paper and 11-12 
point text fonts. It is more or less impossible to create "good" margins 
from the readability POV that don't look ridiculous on A4 paper.
But this is a completely different thing with music.

That said, I also find the default margins too small ;-)

> ...
>
> Using LilyPond unfortunately doesn't in itself guarantee "flawless"
> typography (as Denemo advertises itself). You need to use it correctly
> also, following the instructions in the manuals...

Of course! Using a helmet won't avoid having accidents either ;-)

Urs