Williams, Jim wrote:
[RANT]
I believe that it was Gardner Read who raked Swedish composer Bo Nilsson over
the coals several times for--among other things--indicating the same kind of
ultra-fine gradations of dynamics. In this case:
1. It is doubtful that the composer could hear such gradations and that even
the most skilled performer could produce them (every note was assigned a
dynamic from 0.5 to 10.0 in 0.5 increments, thus 20 gradations) AND
2. He wrote this rubbish for an instrument utterly incapable of producing such fine gradation.
While David labels it "voodoo notation," I'd agree and also call it "spurious accuracy" or, perhaps better, "I'm a more sensitive and intellectual composer than you are because I'm so beyond ppp to fff that I can create 20 dynamic gradations. Look at MEEEEEE!!!"
I'll look later and post a few more of Nilsson's absurdities that Read brought to light.
[/RANT]
Jim W.
Spurious analogy. We're not talking about some abstract decimalised
invented system, but the use of 'ffff', 'pppp' and beyond. I've got no
problem as a performer from using these (a) as a different set of
subdivisions than 'fff-ppp' would involve, or depending on context (b)
representing extremes of volume beyond that normally expected by
three-letter indications.
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
