Tempo and mood terms

Does anybody a good place to find an exceptionally concise list of Italian terms for tempo and mood? I've Googled and tried Wikipedia, but I've had little success. I've only found simple lists, things like "Allegro", "Adagio", "Larghetto". I'm looking for more in-depth terms, things like "con fuoco", "malinconico", "dolente". Anybody know where I could find a good resource for this kind of thing?

Zorazs to the rescue.

Try the Naxos glossary and see if this is any help:

Naxos Glossary

Zorazs to the rescue.

Try the Naxos glossary and see if this is any help:

Naxos Glossary

Nope, nowhere near concise enough, but thanks for trying though!

You could just use plain english....

What are the odds that any musician reading your music will know what these obscure terms mean?

:whistling:

Not to worry, I have another trick up my sleeve:

Virginia Tech Multimedia Music Dictionary

Not to worry, I have another trick up my sleeve:

Virginia Tech Multimedia Music Dictionary

That's actually mildly entertaining...

Pianissississississimo

Hundert und achtundzwanzigstelpause

*tee hee*

...

Oh, c'mon! They don't exist! :whistling:

I just have a feeling to sing "Pianissississississimo" to the tune of "The Tiki Tiki Tiki Room". :thumbsup:

Well, you came close once more. No grand prize, but I will give you a cigar! :whistling: Using the term "music directives" which I discovered on the last site you provided, a Google result listed this:

Famous Italians: Music Terminology

Which is very much what I'm looking for! If anybody else knows of any more, don't hesitate to suggest more sites.

You could just use plain english....

What are the odds that any musician reading your music will know what these obscure terms mean?

:thumbsup:

Actually, I was thinking of having this thread be an open discussion on the topic in the first place, but then I thought I wouldn't get any responses to my original question.:D I welcome everybody to give their opinion on the matter!

My reasoning: I provide translations for the more obscure terms so there isn't too much confusion on their meaning. The reason I use them in the first place is because sometimes I like to be specific. For instance, I'm using the terms "melancolico" and "irato" ("melancholy" and "irratated") in my bassoon duet to convey the emotions. They make for interesting titles to the movements as such:

Duet for Two Bassoons

I. Allegro soave

II. Andante scherzando

III. Largo melancolico - furioso e irato - pesante

IV. Presto giocoso

Makes it seem more interesting then if I just used the first word, right?

So I was of partial help, eventually. :D

But there's some terms there I would never use in my music. Take, for example, "Omaggio" (Celebration). How would placing omaggio at the top of the score change the style of the music?

"Un Omaggio per Quattro Tromboni"

What's wrong with a title like that?

Surely the way it's been scored should suggest that anyway? The key, the melody?

Doesn't that argument sort of call into question the whole concept of titles?

I don't understand why you would want to use Italian this day and age in your music unless you actually spoke the language.

If English is your primary language, then you will be able to convey meaning with its words in your music a hundred times better than using a foreign language. Unless you are fluent in the language, you never really know what sort of connotations you are giving when using more obscure terms.

Besides, no other language is as specific as English!

Besides, no other language is as specific as English!

Maybe, but how would you know this, as you profess a lack of proficiency in other languages (if I remember correctly from the previous thread).

Italian just happens to be the primary music language. It has been used in music by non-Italian speakers for hundreds of years - it's just tradition.

Compare how Latin is still spoken in the Vatican, or even how we have brought many Latin words into common usage, even though an average person on the street might not speak the language.

I'm sure most English speaking people would understand nota bene, exempli gratia, and curriculum vitae amongst many other phrases, for no other reason than tradition has handed them down to us.

I don't know it, but any respected linguist does - I'll take their word for it. Besides, it can be proven by the simple fact that English has approximately 8 times as many words as the average language does (approx. 25,000 are added to the language each year alone). But this isn't about English, its about whether or not to stick to the tradition of using Italian in your music.

I completely understand how Italian was the tradition - but it makes no more sense to follow the traditional spoken language of music than it does to follow the musical language of music. A soundmass composition by a 21st century American composer that uses Italian tempo markings seems contrived to me. And words like 'forte' and 'allegro', in addition to all of the common Italian music terms are actually English words now too. For me, that is more than enough as far as respecting the linguistic heritage of Western classical music. I have no qualms with using 'pp' and 'ff' and 'rit.' in my music because they are words so familiar to me that I consider them part of my 'personal' language.

The tradition of only using Italian was first broken by Beethoven about 200 years ago, so I think it is also now a tradition to use your native language and not Italian.

I don't know it, but any respected linguist does - I'll take their word for it. Besides, it can be proven by the simple fact that English has approximately 8 times as many words as the average language does (approx. 25,000 are added to the language each year alone).....

Yeah, but many of these words are redundant of others. Many are simply combinations of the meaning of two other perfectly viable words.

The tradition of only using Italian was first broken by Beethoven about 200 years ago, so I think it is also now a tradition to use your native language and not Italian.

No, it is not yet tradition to use one's own native language, it is only a little more commonplace now than it was two hundred years ago.

As usual, I agree with some of your points.. but take issue with others. (25,000 words a year? That sounds highly unlikely to me).

Beethoven wasn't the first to use his native language in music directions, there were certainly others before him.

Anyway, it all boils down to a matter of preference. I prefer using one language, and because most of the terms are most commonly found in Italian, I'd rather look up the dictionary for the word I'm not sure about, rather than mix English with Italian (the exception being that one often finds ad libitum in scores).

I don't want to be writing fortissimo in one bar, and then in the next bar suddenly quieter - it's just aesthetically displeasing to me.

It really is a matter of preference. If Italian speaks to you and you truly understand it I don't really see a problem. Also, if you are writing in that style, say Mozart for example, then it makes even more sense.

I generally use English for tempo markings, performance directions, and titles. I use the traditional 'pp', 'ff', 'rit.' as well. For cresc. and decresc. I simply use the hairpins.

A tradition is simply a custom or practice passed from one generation to the next. By that logic, using my native language in musical scores is a tradition, since it is a practice that originated many generations ago that has since been passed down to us. It is not a new concept invented recently - As Daniel said there were composers even before Beethoven who used the native language. I think a French composer would be breaking tradition nowadays by using Italian - every major French composer the past 100 years has been using French, for example.

(I got the 25,000 figure from Wikipedia, where it is taken from a reputable source. It doesn't surprise me at all, but the new words would be mostly scientific, medical, technical, and the myriad of slang words that are added every year.)

Hehe, myriad, that's a word that I'm glad was ever added, it's a fun one. :happy:

Anyways, instead of starting a new thread, just thought I'd ask here, what is the difference between hairpins and cresc./decresc. markings? I've seen them used interchangeably, usually depending on the edition/publisher, and sometimes within the same piece. I've seen cresc. marked for as little as one measure, and a hairpin for eight measures in the same piece before, so #1, what's the difference? and #2 why both?

Anyways, instead of starting a new thread, just thought I'd ask here, what is the difference between hairpins and cresc./decresc. markings? I've seen them used interchangeably, usually depending on the edition/publisher, and sometimes within the same piece. I've seen cresc. marked for as little as one measure, and a hairpin for eight measures in the same piece before, so #1, what's the difference? and #2 why both?

I don't think it matters much. The good thing about hairpins is that it's a unique and intuitive graphical symbol that you will notice at once and can very directly be put into action. Most people will react more immediately to something graphic than to a word. Also it only takes a quick glance at a score to see where something gets louder or quieter. It also has the advantage of letting you exactly specify where it begins and ends, without requiring you to write a new dynamic sign where it ends, as you would have to with cres./dim., thus allowing for small subtle dynamic changes without writing too much.

Cresc./dim. have the advantage of being easier to typeset as with them you can avoid "collisions" with other elements easily. They also work great for really slow and/or small changes (poco cresc. etc.), whereas when a performer sees a crescendo hairpin, they sometimes tend to get loud too fast. Hairpins also are a bit of trouble when they lap over a line or page.

Personally I tend to use hairpins for shorter passages up to two or three bars, as long as it doesn't cause any notational problems. For longer passages I use words. I guess it comes down to personal preference.

Hmm, I just thought: Assuming hairpins tend to be executed more immediately/faster than cresc./dim. markings, and we also assume that musicians in an orchestra have a tendency of playing louder than they should, speeding up crescendos, and being slow in their decrescendos, we could deduct that it'd be best to use the word cresc. for a crescendo and a hairpin for a diminuendo... :unsure:

Just use English in your music if you know nothing of Italian. It is just as good even if English is not rudimentary. I can call a cheesy pie a pizza, and I can also call A cappella a vocal duet. It's easier if I say A cappella and pizza, but if I didn't know what those words meant I could simply use a word or words I knew. If you can't explain the term in detail then I presume English is the way to go. ;) It's not as uncommon as you think it should be to use plain English in scores.

You could just use plain english....

English is an ugly, non-musical language.

If English is your primary language, then you will be able to convey meaning with its words in your music a hundred times better than using a foreign language. Unless you are fluent in the language, you never really know what sort of connotations you are giving when using more obscure terms.

That means giving up words such as tempo, accel, cresc, mf, f, ff, p, mp, p.... etc. etc.

Yeah, but many of these words are redundant of others. Many are simply combinations of the meaning of two other perfectly viable words.

And many are also scientific words that are completely useless and... 99% of situations. There, are three kinds of lies, lies, damned lies, and statistics.

No, it is not yet tradition to use one's own native language, it is only a little more commonplace now than it was two hundred years ago.

Mahler's symphony No.2 utilizes both, as does 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9... Beethoven hardly broke it. Even he used it after he "broke" it, his 15th and 16th string quartet still use the Italian. even Elgar used the Italian.

Personally, I use either German or Italian. English is such a mechanical, and un-lyrical language.

So you'd rather stand there explaining all the obscure Italian words to your ensemble, than use English because it's supposedly un-lyrical?

Fair enough. If the score is just for you, then that's fine. If it's getting performed or recorded - especially when studio time costs and you can't afford to be faffing around explaining basics - then neither the players nor your wallet will thank you for dotting beautiful Italian words all over your parts.

I'll use well-known Italian phrases but for anything else I'll use English. Clairty is the most important thing and whilst mixing English and Italian may not be ideal, if you have an ensemble of English-speaking players, it's the best way to go if you really need to have very specific instructions in your socre.

Personally, being a fundamentally non-English speaker, I think that one traditional language in music makes perfect sense. If I'd write out my compositions in my native language ("hr

So you'd rather stand there explaining all the obscure Italian words to your ensemble, than use English because it's supposedly un-lyrical?

No. I chose musicians that are serious about there music. They would either know it already, or want to know it and learn in themselves.

Fair enough. If the score is just for you, then that's fine. If it's getting performed or recorded - especially when studio time costs and you can't afford to be faffing around explaining basics - then neither the players nor your wallet will thank you for dotting beautiful Italian words all over your parts.

If I'm getting it recorded, and there is time restraints like you said, it means I have gotten a profesional to play it, they would already know what the word mean.

I'll use well-known Italian phrases but for anything else I'll use English. Clairty is the most important thing and whilst mixing English and Italian may not be ideal, if you have an ensemble of English-speaking players, it's the best way to go if you really need to have very specific instructions in your socre.

Again, I use serious musicians. But English is a descriptive language, Italian, German (and Russian, but Cyrillic puts me off) are more emotional, and thus are better at mood.

Personally, being a fundamentally non-English speaker, I think that one traditional language in music makes perfect sense. If I'd write out my compositions in my native language ("hr