Question about Dynamics

All the way from ppppp to ffff, right? That's a lot of different dynamics.

If I write some music, I know how loud I want it to be, but I have no idea which dynamic it is.

How does one learn to distinguish between them all?

Also, how common is it for different instruments to be playing in different dynamics at the same time during a piece?

I think I remember reading in QcCowboy's masterclass thread that it's better to balance the volume by choosing the number of instruments appropriately rather than indicating different dynamics all over the place. (Feel free to correct me if this is not the case.)

Thanks,

Chris

Yes, I DID say that in an orchestral context you should not be trying to correct errors of balance by simply writing differnt dynamics.

I stand by this.

About dynamics, you can go to extremes of ppppppppppppppppp and ffffffffffffffffff, but then, no one will take you seriously.

Personally, I never use anything other than pp - p - mp - mf - f and ff.

I don't think a musician will make much of a difference between pppp and ppppp. particularly if the other extreme of dynamics within the piece is fffff.

Be reasonable with your dynamics. If you think that you cannot tell the difference yourself between two dynamics, then assume that your musician will not either.

Thanks for your reply.

Something I'm still curious about...

How do I know what mp (this sounds like it's about the middle one), for example, sounds like?

I assume there is some kind of standard.

How do musicians learn this?

There is no standard: dynamics are all relative to their context.

There is no standard: dynamics are all relative to their context.

I mean like, if I am playing a flute, and the first note says 'f' for example, how do I know how loud to play? The piece has not begun so there is no preset context.

the context is what follows, then.

if you know you will have a ff to play later on, then you don't want your simple f to be the loudest you can play.

These are all things you should be discussing with a performance teacher. They are all part and parcel of learning how to play an instrument.

Ligeti used some extreme dynamics... I think he went as extreme as using ppppppp in one of his pieces.

This reminds me of a question in another forum, where the person asked how much dB correspond to pp, fff, and so on. My reply was that this is relative, it is all about differentiation between different dynamic levels, about change in dynamics, not that pp correspond strictly to XX dB SPL (sound pressure level), which is the ratio between certain air pressure and the pressure of 20

Of course, all dynamics are relative. What is loud for one piece may be quiet for another. Usually mf is about as loud as a conversation you would hold with someone else. P corresponds to about a whisper. At least for middle range instruments-piccolos obviously don't have the sound capacity of a tuba.

When you go off of this scale it doesn't really make sense to put more than fff or ppp, as the difference is really negligible.

As has been said, dynamics are relative and must be decided on by the performer in the context of the piece she or he is playing. In a Baroque piece with just either f or p, you can take these to the extreme, however you also have some freedom in interpreting these terms, as they're so basic. So you could very well play one "p" as "ppp" and another merely as "mp". On the other hand, when playing a piece where there's a "ppppp" part, that may mean two things: Either the composer is using a really "fine resolution" of dynamics and wants to be able to express, say, 12 different dynamic levels precisely, so he writes anything ranging from ppppp to fffff. In that case you might also see "ppp"s and "mf" and "ffff" in the score somewhere and would know how to adapt these dynamics in order to realise the whole scale of 12 dynamic steps.

OR the "ppppp" is only a singular thing in the whole piece, while it otherwise consists of more "normal" dynamic markings. In such a case it likely just is a psychological help to really make musicians play almost unhearable.

Personally, I only use "ppp" to "fff", meaning "as quietly as possible" and "as loudly as possible", while "pp" and "ff" are simply "very quiet" and "very loud".

But yeah, dynamics aren't always very clear. Recently I've seen a piece with fairly "normal" dynamics where an "fff" appeared in a single case, which gives the impression of "as loud as possible". But then, at another point there is written "ff possibile" which also means "as loud as possible". Why then are there two different markings? Is the "fff" actually not as loud as possible after all?

If you want to have it precicely, you could always indicate your dynamics in dezibels :P I'm sure the performers will love it!

Dynamics are all relative. Personally I only use ppp - pp - p - mp - mf - f - ff - fff... and I only use them for instruments that are truly capable of playing at that relative dynamic in the range they're written.

and I only use them for instruments that are truly capable of playing at that relative dynamic in the range they're written.

I think that's a very important question too, which is handled very differently from composer to composer: Should you write what you expect to hear, or an ideal you want the performer to strive for? Personally, I might well write a pp or even ppp for an oboe in its low range even if I know it won't be very quiet, just to tell the oboist to play as quietly as possible within the given limits of the instrument. If I only write p or mp, the oboist might think, ah well, it's not that quiet, and not even try to make it really quiet.

Of course this can also be confusing for performers and conductors though, since they don't know whether the composer actually expected the tone to sound in the dynamic he wrote, or not. But I suppose that's just another case where, as a performer/conductor, you have to interpret a score individually.

If you want to have it precicely, you could always indicate your dynamics in dezibels :P I'm sure the performers will love it!

I've done this, and it sucks. The trick is what type of piece it is, and if you're working with people. In an electronic piece, you're almost always going to work with exact dynamic down to the decibel level.

But, in those cases too you can work with direct frequencies, rather than notes and such. So, it's not stuff a human player is going to be able to take and play unless they're familiar with it in the first place and the vast majority aren't.

One of the great things about electronic music really, you can really get the sound you want always. With people, you have to settle for something in the vicinity of what you planned.

Indication in dB and in more special cases Hz is really non-standard, uncomfortable and hard for human performers. I doubt such numbers will mean much to a performer unless he is programming electronic instruments with suitable indicators. Of course, it may be useful in electronic music where one person does everything and knows precisely his own work and desires.

One of the great things about electronic music really, you can really get the sound you want always. With people, you have to settle for something in the vicinity of what you planned.

Which can of course also be a good thing! A life performer may add a quality to the music that you didn't plan or expect at all. But of course it's also great to be able to realise your ideas with the greatest amount of precision. Interestingly though, whenever I work with electronic music I tend to add elements that are either to some degree random, or so complex that I can't accurately predict the result.

As for notation with dB or Hertz: It's certainly infeasible with average performers today. Even after having worked with such measurments in electronic music for a bit, I'd have great trouble actually playing them on an instrument. That doesn't mean though that it's impossible per se, as in the end it's simply a matter of training. Who knows, maybe in the future it will be possible to tell a singer to sing a 716 Hz tone and she will be able to sing it quite accurately. Just think of the possibilities this would offer!

That'd be awesome. I never said that performers' limitations concerning accuracy is a bad thing, though. But hey, it CAN be, as it can be good as well. Depends on what you're going for.

A good rule of thumb is that mf is pretty much standard volume. When you just play a note without trying to be loud or soft, thats mf. The other dynamic levels relate to that in some way. A lot of it actually depends on the performer, I may play a ff louder than you for example.

A good rule of thumb is that mf is pretty much standard volume. When you just play a note without trying to be loud or soft, thats mf. The other dynamic levels relate to that in some way. A lot of it actually depends on the performer, I may play a ff louder than you for example.

Cool, thanks for that.