Dynamic notation vs. execution

[tubeast]

This is a spin-off of the thread on the lowest note.

I guess each individual has their own dynamic range, that is, the difference in decibels between the softest, reliable speaking note and the loudest, controlled note one can play at a given pitch.
The width of your dynamic range will vary with the pitch, too.
At least that´s the case with me: in the staff I can play the loudest. High notes are comparably limited on the soft end, while lower notes are difficult to control when played loud (without barking, that is).

So here´s the problem: dealing with extreme dynamics in a score or solo literature, (pppp or ffff), pianissimo or fortissimo may already be the softest or loudest note I can manage.
Now there´s two things I can do:
- rescale the dynamic range, so ffff actually means "loudest note of the piece", pppp treated respectively.
I´d try this out on a solo piece, so the overall characteristics of the piece comes out.
- play the medium dynamics as always and live with the fact that at some passages you just don´t play as loud or soft as required. In band this seems the only possible approach, ´cause most of the time a crescendo from p to ff already calls for all of one´s dynamic range to yield the desired effect.
Plus, at below pedal range, an mf already tends to use up all the air flow that can be produced.
So what do YOU do ?

Hans
Hans

[windshieldbug]

As a performer (and as a composer in a previous guise), all I can do is add my support to

you can't assume that f means the same thing everytime. it's dependent on the piece

...and the performance and the hall and the horn and the performer (and the conductor, if used)! There were many times that my ffff wasn't loud enough, or my pppp wasn't soft enough for the moment, and it was my problem to figure out how to do it anyway, not just throw up my hands! In matter of fact, it's always relative, since the pitch range has as much to do with the perception of loudness as the actual volume (ask anyone who's used a VU meter).

[tubeast]

it was my problem to figure out how to do it anyway, not just throw up my hands!

I totally agree with you, windshieldbug, working hard on increasing my dynamic range right now, much to my neighbors´ dismay. And, with yet only a few hours of practise, it does get easier to handle both ends of that range.
This approach supports the second method mentioned in my starting post: "play fortissimo when there´s two or more f on the sheet". Adding: "and work your bud off ´till you can play the required amounts of dynamic signs".
Few hobby players have six hours a day of private practise time. Neither do I. The working-my-bud-off- business will do only so much of the job on me.

On stage I consider my job to be different: "As long as there´s a crescendo, the composer wants me to get louder. So I better do so."
The problem here is: to play a whole piece consistently this way, I´ll have to play riding the clutch at places where I could actually make a passage work the way the conductor / composer wants it, just so that ffffff chord at the end won´t have that overwhelming effect no matter what I do.

Wouldn´t it be better to play as desired at least at those passages where I can ?

Hans

[windshieldbug]

Hans-

Wouldn´t it be better to play as desired at least at those passages where I can ?

Yes! (I was trying to make that point, maybe I got carried away with playing with others... ). The whole point is to interpret the music into logical, coherent thought. Play what you can (NOT what you can't). But the point is, dynamics are always relative, not absolute.

By the way, if you DO mess up, a strategy I always found useful is to look to your side at the player next to you as if THEY did it. When I've been able to do this well, the whole section is way to busy snickering under their breath at the maestro yelling at the wrong player to correct them...

[Rick Denney]

Wouldn´t it be better to play as desired at least at those passages where I can ?

As desired by whom? That's always the question.

To me, you have to understand the general development of a piece of music. We are playing a Tchaikovsky transcription right now. There are parts early on in that music that are marked fff, just like the end of the music. But if we play it as loud as possible in the first part, the music will peak early and have no place to go. So, I see dynamic markings as being relative to the musical context. It almost always means playing more softly than the music is notated, until those few moments when the music has to move earth. Loud all the way through dulls the senses.

I'm quite sure that composers and arrangers don't think, "Well, this part of the music should register 94 dB sound pressure level, so I had better mark it ff." I'm sure it's more like, "I want this part to really jump out at the audience, compared to what went before," or, "the tubas need to be really dominant here, so I'll mark it ff because everyone else is a f already."

Let's face it, even considering pppp to ffff, we have only about 10 gradations of notation to accommodate an infinitude of subtlety. When Tchaikovsky wrote fffff, I think he meant, "Play this louder and more forcefully than anything composed before. Add more players if necessary. Just don't play it wimpy like you usually play Beethoven." And when Beethoven put all those sfz's in his music (that most orchestras seem to ignore in their romanticization of it), he meant, "I want more power than anything you ever provided for Mozart or Haydn. Got it?" And so on.

So, are there times when a soli-section marked p is louder than an accompanying section marked f? You bet. It just has to be played as though it is not as loud.

The big problem with most groups is that they can't play softly. They have gone out and selected their instruments on the basis of moving earth, and they have developed their playing skill to favor moving earth. This is true for amateurs especially and also for many pros and pro wannabes in my listening experience. Thus, to get the dynamic contrast the composer intended, they try to add on the loud end rather than exercising control on the soft end. For example, if that Tchaikovsky trancription has a part marked pppp, it means, play it more softly than anything you have played before, even if it means using only one player. In bands, I can't get anybody to heed the parts marked for a single player even when it's marked, let alone for a part that just isn't quiet enough. But that's the nature of amateur bands. And the other sections who have instruments that can really peel paint are even worse.

Rick "who has to breathe too often to sustain too much fortissimo" Denney