Re: Jazz notation

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

address@hidden writes:
> typographically "awful" fonts that so offend Eric. (Personally, I find 
> those awful fonts extremely readable. Maybe it's just a bad habit of 
> mine. But there's something to be said for how bold and articulated 
> those fonts are when you're sight-reading in a dimly lit venue.)

Just yesterday, a Jazz musician explained to me that it is the
classical musicians that need to read everything from paper, while for
the modern musicians, paper is just a simple reminder and often is a
hindrance for getting a good performance . Given the complexities of a
modern symphonic orchestral part relative to a Jazz parts, I tend to
agree that ease of (sight-)reading is much more important for
classical music.

If you think that LilyPond output is lacking in terms of readability,
then we should focus on improving that. OTOH, I find it hard to
believe that there are any music fonts out there that look bolder and
more articulated than feta.

> Is there any way for Lilypond to use its superior engine to make 
> standard leadsheets better, while keeping their handwritten look?

Undoubtedly. You could start with designing a handwritten music font.

-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   address@hidden   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen