On Jan 28, 2004, at 10:56 AM, Keef wrote:
Very interesting argument but I was always under the impression that fp, sf and sfz were *accents* not dynamics. Basically, you punch it and get off of the punch as quickly as you can. That they look like dynamics and use the same characters make them confusing.
Sfp and sfzp would not make any sense to me as a performer. What's the word to describe these markings? What's the action intended? Wouldn't fp suffice? Would they change the level in the dynamic realm or not? Can you have an sfp at the mf level or does it change the level from mf to p?
To me, sf or sfz is a dynamic accent, but not a dynamic per se. Thus, the loudness of the accent is within the context of the pre-set dynamic level and it does not change that dynamic level.
fp, on the other hand, is a dynamic. It is simply two dynamics placed closely together on a single note. First you play loud, then very soon after you play quiet. On some instruments that may have the equivalent effect of an accent, but on others it may not. If the preceding dynamic is mf, a fp will indeed set the following dynamic level to p.
I've occasionally seen similar hybrid dynamics, such as ffp or mfp. They have the same logic: first you play the one dynamic, and soon after you change to the other.
Sfp is also a hybrid. This time an accent (sf) followed by a dynamic (p).
All of the foregoing are distinct to me. What is not distinct to me is sf=sfz, and sfp=sfzp. I've always considered sf and sfz to be equivalent. By logical extension, that makes me read sfp and sfz as equivalent as well.
I'm not pretending to be an expert on any of this. I'm just adding my own personal impressions to the survey sample.
mdl
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
