Sagittal symbol size wrong
I've shared a score I created using MuseScore on the Sagittal forum (http://forum.sagittal.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=426) and a co-creator of Sagittal, Dave Keenan, says that the symbols are too small:
"It looks as though the sagittals are not quite scaled correctly relative to your staves. When a sagittal is on a space, the tail end of its shaft (e.g. the lower end of an upward sagittal), should overlap a staff line by half the thickness of the staff line, but I see some gaps between shaft and staff line in some on-space cases. It looks like they might all need to be scaled up by 10% to 15%. The final scale factor should be a simple ratio, in fact I don't really understand why it wouldn't be 100%."
Unfortunately symbols in MuseScore cannot be resized. Please update the symbols in MuseScore to be the correct size.
Of course I would also love it if Sagittal symbols were treated as first-class accidentals.
It would also be great if the different Sagittal symbol sets were sorted together in the symbols list.
Comments
Can you attach your score here?
My guess is the symbols you are using come from the Bravura font, in which case the issue would need to be reported to Steinberg, the develop of the font.
In reply to Can you attach your score… by Marc Sabatella
Thank you for your attention to this Marc.
I am using the symbols by dragging them in from the Symbols panel, not by typing them in the Bravura font. (though I could imagine they arrive in the Symbols panel via the Bravura font).
In reply to Thank you for your attention… by cmloegcmluin
Yes, these symbols come from Bravura when added via the Symbols palette. Even if you explicitly try to set the dialog to use Emmentaler or another font, Bravua is used as the fallback for symbols like this that aren't generally present in other fonts. So, as far as I can tell, it's an issue to report to Steinberg.
In reply to Thank you for your attention… by cmloegcmluin
Like reporting at https://github.com/steinbergmedia/bravura/issues
In reply to Like reporting at https:/… by Jojo-Schmitz
Thank you. I am currently working on some changes to Bravura anyway and will be submitting an update to Steinberg soon, so if I need to scale the characters I can do it myself. I will do some testing against other notation software just in case.
In reply to Thank you for your attention… by cmloegcmluin
Okay, upon further inspection, the Sagittal symbols are the correct size. We were just a bit surprised by the thickness of the staff lines. Scaling those up from 0.08 to 0.12 and things look just as we'd expect. Thank you for your assistance!
In reply to Okay, upon further… by cmloegcmluin
Great! So, are you involved with Bravura development? Are there other reasons staff lines should default to 0.12 when using Bravura? We have some ability to automatically update style settings when you change fonts for the score in Format / Style / Score. Right now if you change the overall score font to Bravura, the staff line thickness automatically increases to 0.13, but maybe that's too far? Or did you come up with 0.12 just by eyeballing it?
In reply to Great! So, are you involved… by Marc Sabatella
I am just an active user of the Sagittal notation system who is volunteering to submit to Steinberg some updates to the Sagittal symbols.
I came up with 0.12 because I was told by Dave Keenan, a co-creator of Sagittal, that the Sagittal symbols were designed assuming staff lines were 1/8 the size of staff spaces, but that a screenshot I sent from MuseScore showed the staff lines as 1/12 that size. So I just scaled them up by three halves. Maybe 0.13 would have been the exact correct amount if that 0.08 was rounded, or I've got my proportions math wrong (often trips me up).
I did not notice the feature to change the Style -> Score -> Musical Symbols Font to Bravura. It had been in Emmantaler. You are right that it automatically switches and looks as expected. Thanks again!!
In reply to I am just an active user of… by cmloegcmluin
Ah, OK, thanks. 1/8 is 0.125, so, somewhere between 0.12 and 0.13, I guess we're good keeping 0.13 (for all I know internally int might really be 0.125 anyhow).
Meanwhile, though, it seems a shame that the design of these symbols are so sensitive to staff line thickness. I can't think of any other symbols that would be adversely affected by this. But maybe it's just an aesthetic detail unlikely to be noticed by anyone but Dave, as opposed to something that actually changes the meaning of the symbol?
In reply to Ah, OK, thanks. 1/8 is 0… by Marc Sabatella
It does not affect the meaning of the symbols or the ability to differentiate them from each other, no. Just a minor aesthetic detail.