I regard the “always contracting” tuplet rule as a 20th century academic idea. 7:8 is closer to the original note value, and I think it’s better for new music.
Now I got some beats to go check out! … This is new to me.
@klafkid try this and let me know if it works. I was serious when I said I wasn’t sure I’d remember how to do the font thing! I hope I didn’t break anything in the code.
MusGlyphs 2022.zip (124.8 KB)
It works!
I only use the font for some metric modulations and tempo indications in this project, which all seem to retain.
I had to delete the old MusGlyphs before installation though, because the Version Numbers were the same, so it wasn’t replaced by the new one.
The chance of me ever working out how to interpret that is so close to zero….
1 Like
I think the desire is to be (overly?) precise about a swing rhythm. If klafkid has players who can play it to his (or the composer’s whose work he is engraving) satisfaction, more power to him.
Certain pieces require a degree in mathematics 
Dilla was a huge influence on many jazz drummers in the 00s as he would often take differing rhythmic feels and put them in conflict with each other. The author of the Dilla Time book mentioned above had a good breakdown of his rhythmic conception in this tweet thread.
1 Like
(Unpopular Opinion)
[spoiler]This is why I’ve long quipped that this type of music is more mental m_______n than anything else. And you’re not going to ever convince me that mere mortals play this with the accuracy to which it is transcribed.
And for serialists (not saying this applies to Stockhausen), it was a case of literal mathematical tables / tone row charts. It was as much about the process of composing as the end result—at least, so it would seem to me. (And lest anyone should wish to pick a bone about my observations, please be careful to note that I did not say or imply anything from an aesthetic perspective; a conversation which I’d wholly prefer to avoid.)[/spoiler]
Maybe it’s not even the goal to play these things as accurately as possible, otherwise computers would be the ideal interpreters. But if i, as a composer, have a clear idea of what i want to express, then I write it down as precisely as possible. Even if the interpretation is only approximately as noted, it is perhaps closer to the original idea, than if it had been written down more conventionally.
Even writing down a Beatles song exactly as interpreted on the recording would look like a Stockhausen score, not to mention a piece of Jazz music. But here we are more aware that we are only dealing with approximate values when notating, which have to be interpreted. I think that interpreters of avantgarde music are closer to jazz with its improvisational aspects, than to classical music.
2 Likes
I think computers are the only entities that can play that kind of material exactly as written! At least they can give guidance to human players.
It’s nonsense to write a Dilla-Beat down. It’s such a complex swing feel that drummers have to train a lot to be able to get it across convincingly. But it’s possible, as many great jazz drummers proof daily.
But just as swing, it’s a feel, and it’s exact rhythmic execution is different on every beat.
That’s why I referred to only notate 8th notes, with the above mentioned indication which is somewhat of an approximation of the beat.
There is no sense in transliterating such a complex beat, but only writing 8th notes without a comment is giving the wrong impression.
Also, the (classically trained) conductor needs to understand it, too… 
3 Likes
Hi Dan,
I just purchased your beautiful and elegant MusGlyphs for a new project. This project requires 10/4 and 11/4 time signatures and looking in Font Book I don’t see those and so two questions.
- Is there somehow a way to do it “manually”?
- I’m not sure I’m up to it but if I wanted to add these myself, what would I need to use?
**Leigh
Hi Leigh, you’re correct these are not currently available. You could use a font editor like Font Creator (Windows) to add the glyphs manually. It’s really not too difficult!
But I’m wondering if you couldn’t achieve this natively in Dorico?
I’m trying to add this to the performance notes:
8 8 beats 9 9 beats 10 10 beats 11 11 beats
4 ———— 4 ——---—- 4 ———— 4 ——————
On the staves Dorico does 10/4 and 11/4 correctly. I don’t know how to do it in text in Dorico.
See screen shot for what I have so far.
**Leigh
Anyone know if it’s possible to make a 15/8 time signature using MusGlyphs? When I try I get a dangling “1” and then a 5/8 time signature.
Are you wanting it in the MusGlyphs text file or for in Dorico?
Added time sig 15/8 (then 10/4 since it was asked for, 11/4 is there already.)
This is just the text-Regular version of MusGlyphs, hopefully what you want as you have not specified.
MusGlyphs158-Text.otf.zip (166.8 KB)
Technical:
@dan_kreider (I am new to this, currently working on my own font unrelated to music).
I created the two glyphs and scripted them (as liga like the others), compile, then appended the font name with 158 (for Full names and Font name for both General and Regular).
I checked side bearings for the time sigs and opened up time sig 10/2 which was presumably incorrect (at RSB -584, you might want to fix this in the official font file if I am correct and it should be changed?)
Everything else left as it was. I did not change anything in Font info (license, description etc. as I did not think it was necessary for the purpose here. Is what I have done here fine with you Dan? Would there be any changes in licensing, descriptions, modifications, rendering or otherwise needed?)
I can delete this if you want me to, or you might want to run it through your checks and re-upload it as a more official file since you created it.
(Or I could just PM anyone with it attached if I have time to make changes in the future, so it is not exposed here if you prefer Dan.)
As it is, 158 works in Mac and Windows as far as I can test it (but not tested in Word or anything Adobe sorry, I do not have them), but not really knowing if the text form of the font is what is wanted. I think there is no difference in the Bold version of MusGlyphs related to time signatures (from reading the information) although I did not check. I just did the Regular.
If there are any further changes to do, if I know how to do them I can, otherwise someone else with more knowledge might like to do this (much better) 
I just saw there were no replies, so thought perhaps this might help in the meantime.
2 Likes
Thanks, that all sounds good. You might be right about the RSB, I need to check that.
… surprising no one noticed 10/2 (as common as it is…) 
thank you!!