I don’t like using Times New Roman, even though I’ve used it a lot over the years (mainly for school and university assignments in the 1990s and 2000s).
This is partly because it was the original default typeface in Microsoft Word and it’s easy to get tired of defaults [1]. But also because I find it too thin (because of its high stroke contrast), too sharp (because of its serifs), and too condensed (because of its narrow letters and tight letterspacing).
Graphic titled ‘Times New Roman’ with the word ‘Wintermute’ shown in large letters in the middle. A few features of this typeface are called-out: higher stroke contrast, curved brackets, rounded terminals, sharp serifs, closed apertures, relatively condensed letterspacing.
Its thinness, sharpness, and condensed-ness works well for newspaper printing where you’re trying to squeeze a lot of text into a small space while also minimising your use of ink. But that isn’t always the best choice when you’re writing letters, reports, and assignments.
And it doesn’t even look nice on the screen when you’re writing in it in Microsoft Word.
Fortunately, my professional work ended up being all digital and web-based, so I don’t think I’ve written anything in Times New Roman since I finished my MBA in 2008.
My go-to alternative: Source Serif
Of course I have needed to write formal letters in a serif typeface since 2008, and for that my go-to serif has been Source Serif – originally Source Serif Pro, now Source Serif 4.
I also always use this typeface when I have to send someone a Word version of my document (into which I embed these fonts) and not a PDF.
Graphic titled ‘Source Serif 4’ with the word ‘Wintermute’ shown in large letters in the middle. A few features of this typeface are called-out: lower stroke contrast, straight brackets, rounded terminals, thicker serifs, closed apertures, relatively wider letterspacing.
I love Source Serif because it has a lower stroke contrast and thicker serifs, and because its characters and letterspacing are a little wider.
Graphic showing the word ‘Wintermute’ in large text in both Times New Roman and Source Serif 4. The Source Serif 4 letters and letterspacing are both wider, so the word takes up more horizontal space on the line.
That letterspacing can be an issue though. That’s because, at the same point size, your text ends up being longer overall. I don’t usually mind, because the resulting text looks friendlier and more solid, and overall has a darker shade.
Graphic showing two text blocks, one set in Times New Roman and the other set in Source Serif 4. The text block in Source Serif 4 looks darker, is easier to read, and takes up more space.
A new contender appears: PT Astra Serif
Last week, however, I came across PT Astra Serif. This is supposed to be a drop-in replacement for Times New Roman. And because it was created by Paratype, a type foundry I quite like, I thought I’d install it and take a look.
Graphic titled ‘PT Astra Serif’ with the word ‘Wintermute’ shown in large letters in the middle. A few features of this typeface are called-out: lower stroke contrast, straight brackets, sharper terminals, wedge serifs, more open apertures, relatively condensed letterspacing.
There are several things I like about PT Astra Serif. Compared to Times New Roman its:
stroke contrast is lower,
brackets are straighter,
terminals are sharper,
serifs are thicker, and
apertures are more open.
And size-wise it is, indeed, a drop-in replacement.
Graphic showing the word ‘Wintermute’ in large text in Times New Roman, Source Serif 4, and PT Astra Serif. The Source Serif 4 letters and letterspacing are both wider, so the word takes up more horizontal space on the line. The word is about the same overall width in Times New Roman and PT Astra Serif.
That means text written in PT Astra Serif is friendlier and darker, but otherwise pretty much the same size as Times New Roman.
Graphic showing two text blocks, one set in Times New Roman and the other set in PT Astra Serif. The text block in PT Astra Serif looks darker, is easier to read, and takes up the same amount of space as the text block set in Times New Roman.
So maybe going forward PT Astra Serif will be my alternative to writing documents in a Times New Roman-like typeface? I guess I’ll have to try it in a real-world scenario and see.
If we were going to get professional: Equity Text
Of course if I was writing these types of documents professionally, I would use MB Type’s Equity Text instead. Specifically I’d use Equity Text A, which is the slightly darker version.
Graphic titled ‘Equity Text A’ with the word ‘Wintermute’ shown in large letters in the middle. A few features of this typeface are called-out: lower stroke contrast, curved brackets, teardrop terminals, wedge serifs, more open apertures, relatively condensed letterspacing.
This too is a drop-in replacement that, while a smidge wider in the example below (because of better kerning, tbh), is otherwise closer to the design of Times New Roman itself.
Graphic showing the word ‘Wintermute’ in large text in Times New Roman, Equity Text A, and PT Astra Serif. The word is about the same overall width in all three typefaces, though the Equity Text A word is fractionally wider.
Which means that, while text blocks written in Equity Text A have a darker shade and are considerably more readable, they take up about the same amount of space on the page as Times New Roman does.
Graphic showing two text blocks, one set in Times New Roman and the other set in Equity Text A. The text block in Equity Text A looks darker, is easier to read, and takes up the same amount of space as the text block set in Times New Roman.
Putting it all together…
The slight differences between these typefaces become clearer when you put them all next to each other.
Graphic showing four short text blocks that are set in Times New Roman, PT Astra Serif, Equity Text A, and Source Serif 4. There are comments written under each heading. Under Times New Roman the comment reads, “Sharp, narrow, tightly-spaced”. Under PT Astra Serif the comment reads, “Friendlier (less sharp)”. Under Equity Text A the comment reads, “More readable (less sharp, darker text)”. Under Source Serif 4 the comment reads, “Friendlier (less sharp), wider, larger”.
When you look at the text blocks below, you can see why Equity Text is the obvious best choice (at least it is to me).
Graphic showing four text blocks that are set in Times New Roman, PT Astra Serif, Equity Text A, and Source Serif 4. The text block in Equity Text A takes up the same amount of space as the Times New Roman and PT Astra Serif text blocks, but it is the easiest to read.
As a professional I’d be thrilled with Equity Text because my work would look significantly nicer than the work of all the other shmucks who were still using boring old Times New Roman :) And that’s something I’d be happy to pay for, especially since Equity Text is surprisingly affordable as typefaces go.
My other preferred alternative: Mercury
Fortunately, I am not a professional who needs to use that style of typeface. So what I actually end up using in my serif-text-block PDFs is Hoefler&Co’s Mercury – another typeface created for print newspaper publishing (though this one in the late 1990s).
Mercury is considerably larger and wider than Times New Roman, and even wider than Source Serif 4.
Graphic showing the word ‘Wintermute’ in large text in Times New Roman, Source Serif 4, and Mercury. The Source Serif 4 letters and letterspacing are both wider, so the word takes up more horizontal space on the line. The Mercury letters and letterspacing are even wider than that, so this word takes up even more horizontal space on the line.
But the cool thing is that when you drop its size down by 2 points and gently nudge its line spacing to be a little higher, you can make it fit about the same amount of space as Times New Roman.
Graphic showing two text blocks, one set in Times New Roman and the other set in Mercury. The text block in PT Astra Serif looks darker, is easier to read, and takes up the same amount of space as the text block set in Times New Roman. A note under the Mercury text box reads, “Note: This text is 2pt smaller than the text on the left, with 5% higher line spacing (ie x1.05 line spacing)”.
Of course when you do this you completely change the vibe of your text – which, in my case, is very much intentional!
Bottom line
Through all this one thing is clear: unless you’re printing a newspaper that needs to look like it came from the 1930s to 1970s, it is time to leave Time New Roman behind and embrace any other typeface for your serif-y writing.
And if you’re ready to leave Times New Roman behind, perhaps you’re considering alternatives to other default system typefaces as well? If so, read about my journey of moving away from default typefaces. Though really you should read the ‘Font recommendations’ chapter of Matthew Butterick’s Practical Typography instead [2]. That whole book is free and readily available on the web. And if you’re even slightly into typography, I would highly recommend you read it.
(Matthew Butterick, by the way, is a lawyer, typographer, and the designer of Equity Text.)
Whatever you do, have fun and enjoy the wonderful world of modern, digital typography that we all have at our fingertips these days.
[1] Times New Roman was replaced by Calibri as the default typeface in Microsoft Word in 2007. That, in turn, was replaced by Aptos as the new default in 2024.
[2] Maybe if you’re a lawyer you should read Typography for Lawyers instead – even if it is a little US-focused.