wing
Active Member
First of all I should say that I do understand when and why to use sf/sfz.
But many of the other specialized dynamics confuse me at times. As a player if I was reading a part written in pp and I saw an upcoming downbeat which says f, I would think that means to play at forte on the beat where it is marked. Unless there's a hairpin or crescendo marking, I wouldn't assume that is gradual. So what is the point of adding subito or sub.? Just to ensure there is no misinterpretation in performance? Does it make any difference in playback from notation software? Because I've played with adding it in Dorico which I use, and the difference in playback is basically the exact same. It plays the dynamic where it's marked. In other words, subito seems superfluous.
fp and pf are interesting, yet even reading up on them I don't really understand their duration. Let's say I had this phrase:
It's a legato phrase in particular, but if marked this way, does that mean only the first note above the marking is played forte, then the rest piano? Or the entire phrase? And then is everything after that assumed to be played at piano unless marked otherwise?
Lastly, there are combined dynamics (in Dorico anyway).
Taking that same phrase, I could do this -
Which I would take to mean play initially at mf and then gradually decrease to pppp (I mean ok maybe that short phrase isn't the best example for such a drastic volume change, but you get the idea). Either way how would that be any different from dynamics with a hairpin in between, like so?
It might help to say I'm sometimes looking for a way to tell a player (and Dorico's playback) to bring a brief phrase to the foreground in volume, and then taper off back to the quieter dynamic. Are the combined dynamics such as mf-pp for example the best tool for that job?
But many of the other specialized dynamics confuse me at times. As a player if I was reading a part written in pp and I saw an upcoming downbeat which says f, I would think that means to play at forte on the beat where it is marked. Unless there's a hairpin or crescendo marking, I wouldn't assume that is gradual. So what is the point of adding subito or sub.? Just to ensure there is no misinterpretation in performance? Does it make any difference in playback from notation software? Because I've played with adding it in Dorico which I use, and the difference in playback is basically the exact same. It plays the dynamic where it's marked. In other words, subito seems superfluous.
fp and pf are interesting, yet even reading up on them I don't really understand their duration. Let's say I had this phrase:
It's a legato phrase in particular, but if marked this way, does that mean only the first note above the marking is played forte, then the rest piano? Or the entire phrase? And then is everything after that assumed to be played at piano unless marked otherwise?
Lastly, there are combined dynamics (in Dorico anyway).
Taking that same phrase, I could do this -
Which I would take to mean play initially at mf and then gradually decrease to pppp (I mean ok maybe that short phrase isn't the best example for such a drastic volume change, but you get the idea). Either way how would that be any different from dynamics with a hairpin in between, like so?
It might help to say I'm sometimes looking for a way to tell a player (and Dorico's playback) to bring a brief phrase to the foreground in volume, and then taper off back to the quieter dynamic. Are the combined dynamics such as mf-pp for example the best tool for that job?