Update for Gootville and Jazzy beta for testers

• Dec 4, 2015 - 11:56

Hi there

The update for the Gootville font - 1.4 - will be released shortly - 18th December (+/- two days).
Jazzy beta for testers - I'm hopefully the font will be released this year.

Greetings for everyone,
Gootector

Comments

• Jan 5, 2016 - 14:38

Thomas - I've an one question/suggestion:
I downloaded the latest nightly build and this compilation doesn't contain a new treble clef (I don't remember the name of this) and additional percussion clef. Why?
If you need the update for Gootville on "now", I can "compress" and release update as soon as possible.

Reply

• Jan 5, 2016 - 18:10

Hi Gootector and happy new year to you too.
Since today, the nightlies come in two flavours "master" and "2.0.3". Only the master branch has the new clefs. I will make a longer post about this, I guess you were too quick.
No hurry on the font. Take your time to make it beautiful and the way you want it.

Reply

• Jan 8, 2016 - 14:28

Hi, Thomas

The license is the same as Gootville.
The complete version = all glyphs in the JazzyBasic template + JazzyBasicText.
The extended version of Jazzy font isn't in my plans - at this moment, of course.
Term plan? - the end of January*. But I don't think so. Anyway - "more likely" term is February*.

Greetings,
Gootector

    • this year :P

Reply

• Jan 19, 2016 - 12:12

Ok, thanks.
JazzyBasicText is compilated from the JazzyBasic font.
It's version 0.3, no 1.0.
Font are named:
- JazzyBasic
- JazzyBasicText
Glyphlist = all glyphs from the JazzyBasic.sfd file. No more, no less.

Greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 24, 2016 - 10:58

Version 0.8 is available. For more information, please read readme file. SFD file only.
Sorry, but I haven't time to compile OTF files.
In version 0.9 will be:
- added 16th note flags - two last missing glyphs,
- prepared glyphnames.json,
- compiled OTF files to tests.
The version 0.9 will come very soon.

Thanks and greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 24, 2016 - 11:53

Again, without OFT there's no need nor much use to update the PR, so would need to wait for 0.9

I found some more glyphs missing, in Gootville (presumably in Jazzy too?), also seems we're still waiting for the long announced Gootville 1.4?

Needed for #109136: Accent staccatos and marcato staccatos: Need playback property:
AccentStaccato,
MarcatoStaccato,

Needed for #108616: Add Tick Mark to Breath Marks in palette:
breathMarkSalzedo,
breathMarkTick,
breathMarkUpbow,
caesuraShort,
caesuraThick

Needed for #108206: Add Neutral-Sharp and Neutral-Flat to accidentals palette:
accidentalNaturalSharp
accidentalNaturalFlat

Bravura has them, Emmentaler AKA MScore is missing them too

Reply

• Aug 7, 2016 - 05:58

Version 0.85 is available. SFD file only.
Sorry for 0.85, but I don't created 32nd rest and glyphnames.json yet.
Changes:
- added 16th noteflags
- added 32nd noteflags
- added slot for 32nd rest (16th rest glyph, at this moment)
- changed design of 16th rest

Thanks and greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 7, 2017 - 13:26
  1. I want a view to my fonts from your site and I want that you send me my fonts from your site on my e-mail address, the best in a popular font format.
  2. I reserve the right to change design glyphs/properties of my fonts in the future. You will have to update my fonts.
  3. My OneDrive is the source of my fonts:
    https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=2CA050E53852F58F%213426&authkey=%…
  4. The shapes of glyphs in my fonts can not change. You are using "as is".
  5. You can not derive material benefits. Never.

...and your comment is a SPAM.

Greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 7, 2017 - 14:50

I'm freezing here... :P First - think. Second - do. And read readme files, goal512. ...from time to time...
I think that goal512 is Jan Angermüller from Elbsound.studio. I wrote to him a few sweetwords. I think he was offended. Dear Mr Copy-Paste - don't worry and I'm sorry.

Reply

• Jun 7, 2017 - 22:39

Gootector, I feel your frustration in a big way, but don't accuse goal512 for being Jan. Having licensed both Gootville (which you derived from Gonville) and Jazzy under SIL OFL, there's little you can do from stopping others from using and deriving other fonts from those. Jan's not selling those fonts, so there's little you can do except ask nicely, which didn't work for me.

Reply

• Jun 11, 2017 - 14:07

As MuseScore hosts the Gootville font on GitHub, the makers should know that modifying the SIL OFL license as Gootector said he did is a breach of copyright of the SIL OFL license according to http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL-FAQ_web#96ba5916 Also because it removes the legal certainty that a user (like me) expects when he reads that a font "was published under SIL OFL": he must expect that this is indeed SIL OFL and not any sort of modification.
It is not allowed to modify the license and still call it SIL OFL like Gootector said he did with JazzyBasic and Gootville. Though I doubt the latter, because the SIL OFL license in his font files is unmodified and only other external files seem to mention a license restriction.

MuseScore should better remove all license restrictions that Gootector added (like "Inform Me" or "Don't Edit") from GitHub or to switch to another license. Otherwise you are not allowed to use SIL OFL.

And font designers, please, nobody forces you to select the SIL OFL license for your fonts.
There are many music fonts out which chose other more restriced licenses which seem to have fit better for your plans.
But you selected SIL OFL on your own.

It is a legal agreement which others (!) - including lawyers - have worked out in the past - for you!
Read about the creation process of SIL OFL and you will know.
So you keep using their work for yourself for free and seem to show no respect for it.
It even seems like you have never read the agreement.

And then you want to exclude others from contributing to what the main goal of SIL OFL is:
having other people (like me) contribute - for free!- to a font project by enriching it, sharing it, converting it to other platforms or standards etc. This is really schizophrenic.
Please respect the rules of SIL OFL, GNU GPL and all those other public licenses that create a rich community of contributing developers and designers.

BTW, I never received a mail of sweet words by Gootector, but only of swear words, shouting and contempt. He seemed to not have understood the SIL OFL license at all ... after five (!) mails I think I had finally convinced him, so everything ok by now. But I am very surprised to read the posts above on this topic.

Reply

• Jun 14, 2017 - 16:28

You are correct, of course, Elbsound.studio. We chose to use SIL OFL and to use it freely. Therefore, we must accept the consequences of that choice, one of which is to allow others to do as you have done.

Speaking only for myself, I did read it carefully and thoroughly before deciding to use it long ago. At the time, I had no intention of releasing my fonts commercially. By the time I did make the decision to go commercial out of some necessity, I immediately understood the implications of that original license choice and felt the weight of it, but it is what it is and I ask for no sympathy from anyone for my poor choice.

I will say this, though, and then be done. I had hoped that capable folks like yourself who know how small the music font market is to be understanding of my situation and the effort required to create and maintain these fonts, to respectfully honor my request to let me, the original creator, be the one to "enrich", "share", and "convert" my fonts for other platforms and standards. Is that really too much to ask? I, for one, would do that for you. Can we at least work together so you can be compensated for all your fantastic work, too? I would love to utilize your expert insight and find a way to appropriately compensate you for it. If you're interested, you know where to find me.

Reply

• Jun 15, 2017 - 09:58

Dear Elbsound.studio
In my opinion, you are a parasite who converts free and open-source fonts to the commercial software. Gootville and JazzyBasic are under SIL OFL license. The comment in the JazzyBasic readme file is instruction/info only, because the JazzyBasic is in the DEVELOPMENT. The official OTF files don't exist. The JazzyBasic is unfinished; the glyphs are unfinished! See your horrible convertion!
"BTW, I never received a mail of sweet words by Gootector, but only of swear words, shouting and contempt." - 'Sweetwords' read like 'swearwords', Mr Copy-Paste :/ Now is clear - you are goal512.
"It even seems like you have never read the agreement." - I have read many times and I agree with this license in 100%.
I have nothing more to say.

Greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 15, 2017 - 10:07

Hi Gootector, allow me to mediate. If someone is picking up your work and helps it to share it further, you may consider this as a testimony that somebody liked your work and has spend time/effort to make it available to a wider audience.

I understand you don't like your work to be used in closed source software. Unfortunately having picked the SIL OFL license, you are not able to prevent this from happening.

So try to see the positive effect of this event, and use it as opportunity to engage into communication.

This is my humble opinion which helped me to make MuseScore a success. You can take it or leave it. It's also the last thing I will say about it.

Good luck.

Reply

• Jun 15, 2017 - 10:32

Dear Thomas
My last e-mail to "Dear Mr Jan Angermüller

I don't have any objections to your work. Thank you for the attachments and remember - my OneDrive is the first, up-to-date and only source of my OFL fonts. I'll keeping you informed when a new fonts versions will be available.

Greetings,
Gootector"

So... What's going on? He made convertions. I was unhappy because he used my unfinished project. After releasese OTF files, "PLEASE DO NOT EDIT THIS FONT!!!" will be delete. Is it clear?

"I understand you don't like your work to be used in closed source software." - I think that 'closed source software' employs people and 'closed source software' is paying them for their work. In my opinion, the others forms of sourcing anything are parasitism.

Greetings,
Gootector

Reply

• Jun 15, 2017 - 16:31

Dear Gootector,

please respect the SIL OFL license. Any further restrictions like "Don't edit this font" are not possible under SIL OFL.

Elbsound.studio is not goal512 (and BTW, Elbsound.studio is a company name and not a person).

If you don't remember the swear words and shouting that you sent me via mail, here they are again:
"Delete my fonts from your website, parasite!"
"Are you blind or stupid?"
"I have ALL LAWS for this font, not you."
"I can change the license anytime because I am THE CREATOR."

These lines don't correspond neither with SIL OFL nor with Netiquette.

>See your horrible convertion!
As no original glyphs were changed the converted font can't be worse than the original font - it can only be identical. As I explained in two mails it is only a "metrics/boundary conversion" to a different font standard, not a glyph/symbol conversion, i.e. only the invisible boundaries or positioning of the symbols were changed to match the Finale standard.

I don't know what you mean with Elbsound.studio "converts to commercial software". Your converted font is still as free and uncommercial as it ever was. It is not even possible to make it "commercial software" under SIL OFL. But there are many benefits that were created with the new font: it runs now in Finale, Sibelius, and other compatible (and also free!) notation software which uses the font standard originally introduced with Adobe's Sonata font.
And it is possible for you to make your own conversion of the font to Finale by just copying the computationally created new metrics to your font and by copying the encoding. This will save you many, many days of hard work. And already many users can use the font which in my eyes is already in a pretty good shape and not as horrible as you describe.

I would be very interested to see if the two font examples that I created (1, 2) really look better in MuseScore with your original font. In Finale both fonts (your JazzyBasic and the converted JzBscFIN) look nearly the same: JazzyBasic and JzBscFIN in relation to the original document with the Maestro font.
BTW, it is also already possible (as example 1 shows) to use your original JazzyBasic as it is in Finale. So the conversion to JzBscFIN only optimizes these settings and simplifies the use of JazzyBasic - i.e. it is now only one click to use the font in Finale (and a few clicks in Sibelius).
As I said it is mainly the metrics that are different (i.e. the distances between accidentals and so on). So I doubt that there is a big difference in MuseScore that allows the Finale version to be called "horrible conversion."

Reply

• Jun 15, 2017 - 17:58

You're wasting my precious time, friend. You use it for free and you have many objections. I answered you in my last e-mail.
I don't care that it runs now in Finale, Sibelius etc. But I am unhappy. I'm not interested the partnership with you.
"I would be very interested to see if the two font examples that I created (1, 2) really look better in MuseScore with your original font. (...) Bla, bla, bla..." - I repeat: are you blind or stupid? The JazzyBasic is UNFINISHED! The OTF files for the last version have never been released. Copy that? Over?
I see three ways for you:
1. Use.
2. Don't use.
3. F... ly off.
In the fututre, please create own fonts, like me. You'll have no problems with licenses.
And please respect my time, friend.

Greetings and have a nice day,
Gootector

And one more thing:
The title of this topic is: "Update for Gootville and Jazzy beta for testers". FOR TESTERS. F-O-R T-E-S-T-E-R-S.

Reply

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.