Many of the publishing clients I work for want to have their logos on the score and parts for the music they publish.  Simple enough, and there are lots of different ways to do this depending on the notation program you use.  Sibelius and Finale both have graphic tools, while Dorico’s page templates in Engrave Mode allow you to add graphics as needed.  Another option is to use programs like Adobe Acrobat to add the images to various pages. 
 
When using Acrobat, Dorico, or Finale, it’s easy to set the image to show up in the same location on the score and parts and have a consistent size.  However, in Sibelius, it’s another matter.  Unlike Finale, where you can place an image on the first page of the score and have it show up on all the parts, or Dorico, where you can adjust your part page template to include it, Sibelius has no direct way to place a single graphic that then appears on the score and all parts simultaneously.  You can place the same graphic into the score and each individual part, but there is no way to have a consistent look and placement.  Even when opening the inspector with the image selected, there are no options to set a repeatable placement location or resize the image to the same specifications on each part.  It would be nearly impossible to place and resize the image on each part to exactly match all the others.  In the past, I would finalize my score and parts, generate PDFs, and then add the image as a custom watermark in Acrobat, which gives precise controls over placement, size, and what pages it appears on.  But what if you don’t want to spend hundreds of dollars on Acrobat, but still want the consistency that something like that will offer directly in Sibelius? 
 
I was pondering this problem several months ago and lamenting that Sibelius has no native way to achieve the results I could easily do in Finale or Dorico.  Sibelius does have options to have elements show up on the score and parts in certain, consistent locations and sizes, like headers, footers, part names, etc., but they are all font styles and images cannot be fonts.  That seemed like the end of the matter till I asked this simple question, “Wait, can an image be formatted in such a way that it could be used as a font?”  Behold, an idea was born!  To achieve this, it does involve some other programs, which you can download and use for free, or here’s a place where AI (shudder) may also help if you’re brave enough to use it.
 
First, you take your image file and then convert it to a vector (.SVG) file.  I used a program called Inkscape to help me do this, but this is a place where your AI of choice might be able to help as well.  In short (and I’m certainly not an image editing expert), instead of having the image as a JPEG or other file format, you convert it to a vector file, which can then be coded into a font. 
 
Second, you need to create a custom font for this vector file.  For this, I used IcoMoon, and once I uploaded the vector file, all I had to do was click “Generate Font.”  The last step before downloading the font from IcoMoon was to assign a custom ligature (a series of letters or numbers, which are case-sensitive) to the image.  That way, when you use this font in any program, it will behave just like any normal font, and you can type whatever you want.  However, once you type in the specific ligature you assigned to the image, the image will appear like magic!
 
Third, now download and install your new font.  Once you’ve done that, open Sibelius and it’s time to put the new font to work.  Go to the Text tab, open the font styles menu, and create a new font style, calling it something like Logos or whatever you want.  Set the font to use your newly created logo font, set the font size (this is how you adjust the size of the image when placed in the score/part), and set the specific location you want.  Hit OK, and that should be ready for you to use.  Now create a new text using the new font style you created, type in the ligature for the image, and it should appear! 
 
Lastly, just test to see if the image shows up when generating a PDF.  It should, but it’s always good to check.


The best thing about this method is that you can now have repeatable and consistent sizing and placement of images throughout the score and all parts without having to place the image into each part and hoping you get the placement and size just right.
 
If this feels like a lot of steps, I get that, but it’s actually a straightforward process.  There are a few things to remember/consider:

1. I have found that black and white images gave me the best results.  Complex color logos and similar images can be converted to a vector file, but they didn’t give great results for me. 
2. You can create an account on IcoMoon to save your project, and you can keep adding more images to it to expand the image library within the font.  Just remember that each time you add an image to the font, you need to download and reinstall the font again for the new images to appear.
3. It’s best to have a separate document that catalogues the ligatures for each image, just so you don’t forget.
4. If you want the image to appear in the same location on the score and parts, like a part name or header, it’s best to duplicate a font style in Sibelius that already uses similar characteristics.  You can always adjust them, but if there is something that behaves almost exactly like how you want to place the image in the new font style, why not save some time and use that font style as a basis for the new one?

 
The last thing to consider is that if you give your Sibelius file to someone else, they won’t have this custom font, and the image will not appear; it will just show the string of letters or numbers you used as the ligature for the image.  Make sure you share your font and ligature code sheet with anyone who might need to open the Sibelius file, and even then, it’s best to generate a PDF for them as well to make sure they know how it should look in case something goes awry.
 
Okay, that’s it!  In an age where we seem to be converting text to images and even videos, this backwards method of converting an image to a usable font gives Sibelius an entirely new function that was not present in the program before.  A classic workaround!

Got questions?  Reach out to me and let’s chat.  Want help creating your own fonts for images or help with Sibelius template design all the way to formatting scores and parts for studio or stage? You got it; reach out and I’ll be happy to help!

This is an interesting question I get asked a lot:

“Given that there are so many good digital music reader options and iPads and other tablets, why are we still printing music?”

It’s a fair question.  This is the digital age after all; software is easy to purchase and use, and these once expensive devices are now ubiquitous and, relatively speaking, cheap.  So again, why are we still printing music?  It seems like such a waste of resources, and surely it's easier for everyone to just read off one of these newer options than a piece of paper.

The answer to this question is that despite what it may seem, there are very few true digital music stands out there, and depending on the circumstance in which the sheet music is being used, digital isn’t always easier.  Let’s dive into some use cases and see why paper may still be the best option for your music.

1) Book publication – Let’s say you wrote a piano method book for your students with scales, fingering exercises, etc.  It would be easy to just give your students (or have them purchase) a PDF from you and then use a tablet to view.  Simple, straightforward, and makes sense.  However, printing and binding copies for your students may make just as much sense.  The printed copies can be written on during lessons to make notes for students, and students may not always have easy access to yet another screen at home or for lessons, so a printed copy is much easier to use.  In this case, I think physical or digital copies both have equal advantages and disadvantages, so it comes down to what makes the most sense for your application.
 
2) Publisher works – This is like the discussion on book publication, except on a larger scale.  When you are printing 100 or 1,000 copies of a book, different market forces come into play.  Printing physical books is a more expensive method of distribution and then adding on the cost of shipping makes it even more costly.  Digital distribution can be more cost-effective, but it’s not free; there are costs to host and maintain websites and e-commerce charges, etc.  Again, this is a case where either option can make sense; it just depends on the goals for the presentation of your music.  Also, you’re relying on your customer to have a good digital method to view the music. 
 
 
3) Live performance and studio sessions – This is where Engraver’s Mark Music does most of our printing.  We print, on average, 150,000+ pages a year of music that goes to the concert stage or the recording studio.  So, you say, the advantages of digital would get multiplied as you use them for these larger groups, correct?  Well, not exactly.  This is where the economics of using digital screens or physical printing get interesting.
 
Let’s use an example of a recording of a 30-piece string group, with 10 1st Violins, 8 2nd Violins, 6 Violas, 4 Cellos and 2 Basses.  This comes out to 16 stands of music, with the Violins, Violas and Cellos sharing stands and each bass having its own stand.  To use a digital music stand, we would have to have 16 screens, all of which would need to be the same, either with power cords for all of them or have them all fully charged before a session, and then a method to connect them all to a central location to load all the files for that day and then set up each stand with only the music for that instrument.  Then, you would need a dedicated network to connect all the screens to a host computer in case there were edits or changes or additional music to add to the stand.  And then you need to have 16 foot pedals for the musicians to use to turn pages and some sort of stylus for each stand to mark changes on the sheet music.
 
All this technology is available, but only as separate pieces that would have to be coordinated by the copyist and librarian.  You could not rely on the musicians to purchase everything on this list and then bring them in addition to their instruments to each session.  Knowing that, someone must purchase all this equipment, maintain it, and set it up before each session and break it down.  This is expensive and very time-consuming.  All the advantages of digital distribution go out the window.  A recording studio is unlikely to want to spend the thousands or tens of thousands of dollars to purchase and maintain a system like this and then they would also likely have to hire a person just to run this system, since they could have different projects each day and assuming that someone outside of their studio would be able to learn and adapt to the software and set up instantly would be foolish.  Beyond that, the simple question of who must pay for something when it breaks or gets lost is another expense a studio is unlikely to want to add.
 
Printed music is much easier to manage in this case.  Beyond the music, our team brings our own printer and supplies to each session, which is simple to set up and train our team members to use.  Setting out the music is easy, and changes can be quickly made and then printed to hand out to the players.  If a piece of music falls off the stand, no harm done, unlike a screen, which would likely be permanently damaged if it fell. 
 
Also, consider the size of most tablets; at best, you’re getting about a 9in x 12in screen, and you can only view one page at a time.  I can tell you, as a copyist, it’s impossible to have a clean page turn on every single page for a part.  When using printed parts, musicians can set up 2 or 3 pages on the stand to make playing longer passages easier. 
 
Similar limitations and hurdles for using digital screens for live performance exist as well.  An orchestra would have to purchase all the equipment and maintain it along with all the challenges of running the orchestra.
 
From an environmental perspective, it seems like printing music is much less eco-friendly than a screen, but that’s not always true either.  All the screens and accessories use more power, their lifespan isn’t always very long, and e-waste is a huge problem.  Printing music certainly uses additional resources to make the paper and print it, and that must be accounted for.  At least for Engraver’s Mark Music, we collect, shred, and recycle all the music we print for sessions locally and do our best to use products made from recycled materials whenever possible. 

In the end, it really depends on how you are using the sheet music that will dictate which method is best to use.  If you have a small recording session for a single player or two, then a digital screen might work just fine.  A larger session or even a book you’ve completed might be better served as a physical copy.  Not sure which option is best for your project? Contact us and let’s see what may be best for you!