Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: clef positions (Read 6270 times) previous topic - next topic

clef positions

I hadn't noticed this previously, but in at least the latest beta, when I place a courtesy clef before the barline at the end of a system it isn't tucked right up against the barline where it belongs, but is moved back into the measure by at least a full clef width. The same problem appears when I change clefs in the middle of a bar: the new clef leaves a full clef's width of space before the first note it applies to. This might not be a problem if the clef properties dialogue had a standard NWC2 "expression placement" tab on it (allowing the "best fit forward" or "at next note or bar" options to do their stuff), but it doesn't. Does this bother anyone else?

An "expression placement" tab on clefs would also allow the occasional use of oddball clefs created by moving a clef up or down the staff. This is usually done with C clefs, but I've seen G and F clefs moved as well, both in very old and very new music. Could we maybe have such a thing in NWC2?

Re: clef positions

Reply #1 –
I'm not getting the same result. It looks ok to me. See attached.

Re: clef positions

Reply #2 –
That's still showing excess spacing and could be tightened up. Alfred's illustrates the clef as really quite close to the following note (as does ABRSM).

But the main problem with these clefs is that they should be much smaller. Alfred suggests 75% and that's surely not difficult to implement.

Re: clef positions

Reply #3 –
It's well known that NWC doesn't really support courtesy clefs.  No one really cares, as you can simply make a text clef.  It also needs much less space.  (See attached.)
The only problem is that at the end of the line, you would have to put an actual clef, and right after the barline, like
Code: [Select · Download]
!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Bar|SysBreak:Y
|Clef|Type:Bass
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End
About custom clefs, they would be nice for those who transcribe old music.  However, you cannot get them, even if you put a "Pos:x" in the NWCC code.

Re: clef positions

Reply #4 –
Well, yeah, for courtesy clefs you can just grab a clef from the NWC2 standard font and stick it in as a text expression. I haven't actually tried that, but it should work....and there are other fonts you can use, if you can find a good style match. But that doesn't work for clef changes in the middle of a bar, and anyway, it misses the point: the clefs should be positioned properly by the program.

And custom clefs are often found in 20th-21st century music, especially in the music of the serialists and the experimentalists. I've never had occasion to use one, but I've seen them in scores. A text clef and a layered staff, properly transposed, will take care of the matter; but, again, why? It seems a simple thing for the program to take care of itself.

Re: clef positions

Reply #5 –
Particularly since it seems that Eric put in code to prevent it.
After all, we can only get |Chord|Dur:4th|Pos:2|Dur2:4th,Grace|Pos2:0 from manually coding it in Notepad, but it appears.
Yes, custom clefs would be nice for music not written between the 17th and 19th centuries.

Re: clef positions

Reply #6 –
Quote
for courtesy clefs you can just grab a clef from the NWC2 standard font and stick it in as a text expression.
The vertical positioning is not correct, though, no matter how it's sized.

Re: clef positions

Reply #7 –
Quote from: K.A.T. –
The vertical positioning is not correct, though, no matter how it's sized.
User Font size = System Font size is quite acceptable to me, both as to size and vertical position. The annoyance is that you must set a hard break somewhere after it and put in a visible clef. The design decision to have automatic signature items follow the visiblilty of manual items is dubious.

Even if NWC2 automatically used a smaller Clef, this would not get the horizontal position correct. In piano music, small clef positiona are more a matter of visual art than anything a computer is likely to comprehend.
Registered user since 1996

Re: clef positions

Reply #8 –
What I mean by "the vertical positioning is not correct" is I cannot get an F clef to line up with the F line passing between the two dots of the clef.  One of the dots always touches a staff line.  The same (relative) problem exists for each clef (although I gottas admit, the C clef is much closer to being acceptable for some reason...)
 

Re: clef positions

Reply #9 –
Quote from: K.A.T. –
I cannot get an F clef to line up with the F line passing between the two dots of the clef. 

Check the attachment. If you keep User 1 and the System Font the same even size, vertical alignment is correct.
Registered user since 1996