NOTATIO

Hi everyone, first post here for me, and actually, I was just made aware of this lovely forum a few days ago. Don't know how I missed it all these years.

I got referred over here by some friends on the Dorico forum.

I recently printed out a rough draft of an ensemble piece of mine, to give to musicians for a test read through. And I was a bit surprised at how unsatisfied I was with how the score looked. It looked 'weak' and 'thin'. Unfortunately, I don't exactly know what I mean by this, if we are to talk in technical engraving terms. I am an experienced composer using notation software, with a keen design eye, but I seem to have an otter lack of technical terminology and understanding with regards to engraving.

I wonder, because my piece is slow, lots of whole notes, very un-dense, although it's modern it doesn't have a ton of fancy esoteric directions to fill up the page. It is minimal, information-wise. Because of this, maybe I need to adjust settings in my engraving, to make up for the prominence of white space?

Feldman's Rothko Chapel, is one of my faves, both musically and engraving. It also has very un-dense score, and my piece has a similar ensemble size.

My eyes are just not learned enough to see what is happening with Feldman's score, and try replicate it in Dorico. Any help in decoding this, engraving-wise, would be great. I'm not necessarily concerned about fonts, or choices of beaming, and hairpin lengths. I'm more lost when it comes to notehead sizes, rastral size, margins, or other baseline stuff like that.
Thanks.

Hello, and welcome! Would you post an excerpt from your piece so we can compare it with the Rothko Chapel vibes? (Being a percussionist I first thought Rothko Chapel was a vibraphone I hadn't heard of. Now I know a little more.)

Aside from Rothko, the "thin" appearance may have to do with some of the fonts you are using.

The following stands out to me:

1. The time signatures could use a bolder font. Yours don't stand out enough, particularly when on the staff and are at times a little hard to read.

2. The measure numbers are too tightly confined within the circles and are themselves perhaps a little small. I personally prefer measure numbers at the beginning of each system.

3. Some of the accidentals are too far from the note heads and have an inconsistent distance from the note heads.. This is not something one typically sees with computer engraving and I am wondering how the engraving was done.

4. The basic music font is OK, but perhaps on the "thin" side.

.

Hi John, thank you very much for taking the time to reply. Actually, the two pages I uploaded with initial post, are from Morton Feldman’s score for Rothko Chapel, published by Universal Edition. It is the score I am trying to emulate, I find it beautiful and balanced, and I want to cop some of it’s vibe. (sorry Magnus ). I want to try (with the help of you) to figure out, in terms, what is beautiful with this score.

As I mentioned in my initial post, Im not so worried with fonts, but more about some of the elements that I still can’t quite imagine their effect on the whole. Such as staff spacing, staff size, page margins, rastral size, and other things beyond my grasp.
Or maybe it’s none of those things.
Just trying to learn.



Thanks

John Ruggero wrote: 01 Jun 2026, 12:13 Aside from Rothko, the "thin" appearance may have to do with some of the fonts you are using.

The following stands out to me:

1. The time signatures could use a bolder font. Yours don't stand out enough, particularly when on the staff and are at times a little hard to read.

2. The measure numbers are too tightly confined within the circles and are themselves perhaps a little small. I personally prefer measure numbers at the beginning of each system.

3. Some of the accidentals are too far from the note heads and have an inconsistent distance from the note heads.. This is not something one typically sees with computer engraving and I am wondering how the engraving was done.

4. The basic music font is OK, but perhaps on the "thin" side.

Thanks for the input Fred. Yes, I knew this was coming. Feldman’s work has been pissing people off for 70 years. hehe. Clearly the score isn’t for you, I understand.
Interestingly though Fred, a number of people have commented about the balance between white and black was beautiful. Interesting how we all feel something different. Anyway, how does one achieve, in this example for you “too much white space” but for me and others “a nice balance”. Thats, what I’m curious about,

p.s. bracket scheme is delightful.

Fred G. Unn wrote: 01 Jun 2026, 12:32 The Feldman examples are ... fine ... but I wouldn't consider them the pinnacle of fine engraving. There generally is too much white space, the system dividers are anemic, I'm not a fan of always putting tuplet brackets above (instead of stem-side), there isn't enough right and left padding around the rehearsal number enclosures, etc. As a conductor, I hate the meter presentation. The time sig font is too close to the thickness of the staff lines making it difficult to read in the staff. The fact that the staves are almost all equidistant doesn't make for easy conducting either. There definitely should be additional white space between the two choirs to give them some separation in the score.

Bracket scheme is weird too:
1.png

Treble clef is sitting in a recliner, LOL. It's fine, but I would think this could easily be improved upon with modern notation software.

Thanks Magnus for the reply, sorry for the enigmatic title. I was also confused when I read your post, couldn't figure out what you were referring to, then it clicked. I will upload a selection of my score this evening.

Magnus Johansson wrote: 01 Jun 2026, 11:19 Hello, and welcome! Would you post an excerpt from your piece so we can compare it with the Rothko Chapel vibes? (Being a percussionist I first thought Rothko Chapel was a vibraphone I hadn't heard of. Now I know a little more.)

.

.

Thanks Fred, I love it! Keep it coming. Great stuff here.
All fine tips. I will be sure to add them to my score.

Thanks for the link, fortunately I have a lovely hardcopy of the score sitting in my lap right now.

Cheers

Fred G. Unn wrote: 01 Jun 2026, 13:17 BTW, there is a full perusal score here:
https://www.universaledition.com/en/Wor ... l/P0032205

Honestly, I find the beaming to be poorly done:
beaming.png

Both the start and endpoints of the G-Ab beam are "incorrect" and the start of the C-F# beam is "incorrect" as well.

Some beams are too thick so they fill with the staff line and end up taking up an entire space.
beaming2.png

I'm not sure why they are using a flat beam here either. Neither middle note is closer to the beam than the end note, so these beams should be slanted.