Re: MF fonts

[Tim Sheasby]

Carl,
I agree perhaps the mi and do could be a smidgeon wider for optical equivalence 
with the sol.
I am using an include file for my hymn book with a line that redefines 
\aikenHeads to use my modified mi so if this becomes the default I simply have 
to drop that definition from the include file.

-------------------8<-------------------8<-------------------

%       -- Change to shaped noteheads
aikenHeads = { \set shapeNoteStyles = #'#(do re miNarrow fa #f la ti) }

-------------------8<-------------------8<-------------------

On 01 Mar 2011, at 12:55 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote:

> On 2/28/11 3:32 AM, "Tim Sheasby" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks again for all the suggestions for the alternative mi
>> I have successfully compiled the new font with a miNarrow character. This
>> character has been horizontally scaled back to 100% and vertically scaled
>> 110%. Will submit the update for approval later. Here is a png showing both
>> versions of the mi in practice.
> 
> Tim, 
> 
> This is great work!  Thanks for jumping in to it.
> 
> In looking at your images, it seems to me that the narrow head should be the
> default used for shape notes, rather than the wide head.  The wide head may
> have the advantage of looking more optically equivalent, but I think the
> stacking problem as demonstrated in your example is reqlly quite ugly.
> 
> If we're going to continue to use a wide mi head, we should probably widen
> the do head a bit too.
> 
> Before accepting this patch, I'd like to see if the shape note community
> thinks we ought to make Tim's work the default (maybe only) mi head.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Carl
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Tim Sheasby
address@hidden