[lindig]

I found the argument about balance within individual characters interesting: the direction of stems and the white space between them. As an example, N is shown. However, I it feels top heavy to me, almost unstable - which is not something I expected for a utilitarian font. Any comment on that design choice?

[mpatane]

You are definitely right. The slightly, almost out-of-balance feeling is an integral part of the design. The white areas within letters are not of equal weight, and this creates the internal dynamism that I’m referring to. B is a good example. The lower mass of white is bigger than the upper one and this gives the feeling that is pushing upwards, while the upper mass of white is contrasting it. There is not a perfect equilibrium between the two areas, and this creates a tension that I was looking for.The overall stems construction holds in place the two forces.I still find the font utilitarian in its nature. It is quite easy to use, and flexible; I would define it as a workhorse, but with its personality. Its features become more relevant at bigger sizes, but they are toned down enough to work well at smaller sizes. I have to say that possibly the N is one of the more border-line cases, and I’m considering keeping the more traditional one as default, and use this as stylistic alternate. It’s been a while since I’m thinking about it, and some comments here confirm it might be a good idea.

[dreamer7]

B definitely triggered the OCD in me for it to be symmetric. The rest of the font looked so balanced and the B kept screaming to me for help

[lindig]

If you look at B in most fonts: it is not meant to be symmetric. The bottom is usually heavier, providing stability, on which the top sits. The bottom also needs to align somewhat with the x-height of lowercase characters to not look out of place - hence be taller than the upper half. Pure symmetry is not the correct measure in fonts.