# Sudden ff after continuous pp: marking & interpretation



## Fenestella (Oct 4, 2015)

For instance, in Chopin's 1st Scherzo, out of the blue after several minutes of_ p & pp_, there's a chord marked _ff _in bar 205: some performers bang the chord so loud (as if it were meant to be the loudest moment in the entire scherzo) that it scares the living daylights out of listeners; other performers (e.g., Josef Hofmann, Anatole Kitain) play the chord with restraint, which I find much more tasteful and considerate.

On the part of the composers, I don't appreciate such markings.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Not all music is meant to be tasteful and considerate though - to take just one example, where would such a requirement leave Beethoven? You've a perfect right not to like such dynamic contrasts, but a composer has to be true to his/her inspiration.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

Fenestella said:


> For instance, in Chopin's 1st Scherzo, out of the blue after several minutes of_ p & pp_, there's a chord marked _ff _in bar 205: some performers bang the chord so loud (as if it were meant to be the loudest moment in the entire scherzo) that it scares the living daylights out of listeners; other performers (e.g., Josef Hofmann, Anatole Kitain) play the chord with restraint, which I find much more tasteful and considerate.
> 
> On the part of the composers, I don't appreciate such markings.


I agree with you that some performers play that chord too loudly - they don't take into account the difference between Chopin's pianos and our modern concert grands. The early 19th-century pianos in Chopin's time weren't as loud as today's pianos, so when Chopin wrote _ff_, he didn't have today's booming sound in mind. If he had been writing for today's concert grands, he probably would have written _f _instead.


----------



## Sekhar (May 30, 2016)

I believe markings like this (dynamics, tempo, etc.) are really for communicating the composer's intent more than anything else. For that reason these markings IMO serve a valuable purpose even if they may look odd or sometimes even unplayable. I don't think performers will (or should, for that matter) take these literally in practice.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

In this instance, there's a double forte after the calm and poetic middle section where he hints at the return to the fury and agitation of the beginning, and he's doing so deliberately with purpose because he's not finished with it. His first Scherzo is full of double fortes (fortissimos) and even triple fortes (fortisstissimos), and his return to that level of dynamics is not exactly unexpected.

I think the real problem is that some pianists have a tendency to be "bangers" when they're playing a forzando, suddenly forceful or loud note or passage, and performances can vary along those lines. I don't care for bangers myself, but at the same time it may be a challenge for any pianist to play something suddenly or unexpectedly loud, even triple forte, without banging. 

I do not believe Chopin can or should be faulted here for writing a fantastic Scherzo that is often full of rage, ranting, fury and agitation - feelings he must have felt strongly about and wanted to vent.

This is not the Chopin of the Nocturnes and Preludes; it's the Chopin with definite ideas and opinions and a keen sense of injustice; and it sounds like he definitely had something on his mind; but of course he never exactly spells out what it is, though I'd say his alternating moods are clearly evident, as if two sides of the composer were sometimes in dramatic or extreme conflict with each other: his furious agitation in contrast to his calm serenity, and then back again.


----------

