Rall. vs. Rit

I know the difference between Rall. and Rit. can be ambiguous. Ive seen people debate about this for a while, and I thought it would make an interesting discussion. I've seen composers who will only use Rit. no matter the situation. Whenever they slow down it's always "Rit. Rit. Rit." But I've also seen other composers who will only use Rall., even at the end of a piece where one expects it to say Rit.

Now, I know a lot of teachers may tell you there's really no difference between the two, but as a composer, I use them both very differently.

For me, Ritardando is used when there is a decrease in tempo and energy. Not necessarily dynamic. This will usually come at the end of a piece or section, but can be anywhere that there is a decrease in both tempo and intensity.

I use Rallentando when I have a decrease in tempo and the intensity increases. This often happens as a big slow-down before a downbeat. The energy builds up and is then release.

I always think of Rall. as if I'm galloping on a horse and then pull hard on the reins to make it skid. I think of Rit. as pulling lightly on the rains to slow down. Still, the speed at which you slow down has nothing to do with whether one uses Rall. or Rit. That's what "molto" and "poco" are for! :happy:

I'm curious to hear the opinions of other composers/teachers/performers/etc. out there!

If we look in the dictionary, Rallantare only ever means to slow down (in Italy you will see a sign with this verb, in the imperetive tense, approaching roundabouts and other hazards). Ritardare has several meanings, including to slow down but also to be late, to delay, and to be slow. In conversation there is probably a subtle difference inferred between the terms. In musical terms there is almost no difference, although some perform a rallentando slightly more drawn out. Grove gives rall. as being fairly recent in usage and that the term lentando was most often used in the ninteenth century. Some people insist that a rall. marking implies a decrease in tempo by a greater number of metronome marks than a rit. but this is not universally agreed on.

Really composers should only use Rit. to mean ritenuto, which is unambiguously a very rapid decrease in tempo. That way, this confusing use of two already ambiguous terms for the same intruction can be avoided. For an even greater degree of clarity and control, putting metronome marks at the start of a tempo change, however subtle, can also be done, although this limits the scope for interpretation of the gesture.

I use Rallentando when I have a decrease in tempo and the intensity increases. This often happens as a big slow-down before a downbeat. The energy builds up and is then release.

Isn't that allargando?

Isn't that allargando?

allargando just means lengthening. It can be interpreted however you want though. :)

I use them as follows:

Rit. means "slow down lightly"

Rall. means "slow down heavily"

Idk what the "weight" of a tempo change is, but I guess its just a feeling thing.

And indeed, "slow down and get louder" is allargando.

MiggTorr I find your picture very frightning.

As to the subject, who cares what you use.

How you use it should be enough to make it clear to the performer.

Otherwise, add a legend to the score. Or write it out. Or just use english words.

Play it yourself if you think you are the only one who can interpret it just like you want it.

First off, ritard, rallentando and allargando do not have ANY bearing on dynamics. NEVER.

Ritard and rallentando are practically synonymous. The only difference is specificity. Rallentando is a general pulling back over time which means you could have a molto rubato where the tempo noticeably speeds up and slows down but with the rall indication, this process slows down over time. Ritard on the other hand would cancel this and be a consistent slowing down. Ritenuto would be a drastic slowing down. Finally allargando is quite similar to ritenuto except the goal implied would be to an extremely slow tempo (eg you may go from presto to Allegretto within a bar with the ritenuto indication while allargando would mean presto to largo). And even the details of what I have written can be debated.

The best way to do this is as posted earlier -- mark a tempo indication at the end of your ritard (or whatever your term you use for slowing down, pulling back) EXCEPT if the slowing down indication is in the last measure or two.

It's so interesting to see how everyone has a different take on the subject.

I agree with Tokkemon on the whole "weight" issue. I think that's analogous to my "intensity" idea. But i disagree with what he said about allargando meaning getting louder and slower. As Composerorganist said on the 11th of October at 8:17 PM:

First off, ritard, rallentando and allargando do not have ANY bearing on dynamics. NEVER.

Allargando to me means getting broader, but not necessarily louder. Maybe a lot of composers use allargando in conjunction with crescendos, idk. I don't see allargando as often as rit or rall.

On the subject of "rit"'s ambiguity, I think composers should write out "ritard." or "ritardando" and "riten." or "ritenuto" to avoid ambiguity; just avoid "rit." all together (I may do that from now on...).

I think eventually there should be some consensus on the issue. I mean Wikipedia still defines Rall and Rit exactly the same way. Now, I know it's Wikipedia which is very general and relatively unreliable, but still. It just goes to show that even though we all have our own opinions on the matter, there is still a lot of ambiguity surrounding the difference between Rallentando and Ritardando.

Hmm... glad I brought this up.

Yay, another semantic argument...

Now, I know it's Wikipedia which is very general and relatively unreliable, but still. It just goes to show that even though we all have our own opinions on the matter, there is still a lot of ambiguity surrounding the difference between Rallentando and Ritardando.

Hmm... glad I brought this up.

I happen to think Wikipedia is generally more reliable for information than printed materials, just for the reason that Wikipedia can always be updated whenever it's needed. An Encyclopedia goes under tough scrutiny, sure, but if a mistake in information is made, it's still in print, it's not likely to be corrected until another volume comes out, etc. If you find something wrong on Wikipedia, you can go in and change it. If you use it, you sort of have a duty to change inaccurate information - that's more or less the idea of Wikipedia. Anyways...

I've always used Rallentando on the end of a measure and Ritardando at the beginning of a measure where I'm trying to manipulate the tempo. I don't think of Rallentando as a gradual change but rather a short, significant change in tempo, and I generally use it when I'm transitioning or moving into a restatement of some important phrase. The Ritardando is more "final" in some ways, especially when poco a poco to the end of a section. Rallentando, to me, is almost like a miniature fermata that adds a short burst of slowness to the tempo, whereas the Ritardando is like a morphine drip, steadily slowing me down.

Rallentando, to me, is almost like a miniature fermata that adds a short burst of slowness to the tempo, whereas the Ritardando is like a morphine drip, steadily slowing me down.

Yes! I agree with this statement entirely.