Accents: size and shape

[Knut]

Yes, please make a beautiful assortment of such accents. […] The longer ones should not be too wide.

Well, all of the above will fin into one staff space (the large ones will touch the staff line above and below, though) so I think they're fine in this respect. SMuFL already lists (relatively short) hairpins and corresponding Messa di voce as recommended characters. I may add some more of these to accommodate the need for different lengths, however, they will never be wider than a regular hairpin.

Here is a look inside the Wiener Urtext of the Chopin Nocturnes:

Interesting, thanks for that! I only have the Henle edition, but I can tell you that their approach is decidedly different from the Wiener Urtext with regard to these markings. In the measures you point out, Henle substitutes the 'intensity mark' with a regular accent mark, placing it above the note. Two exceptions are m. 13, where the mark is left out entirely, and m. 30, were the mark seems to be substituted by a short, regular diminuendo leading into stretto.

To my ears, the treatment of both 'intensity marks' and accents is somewhat ambiguous in most of the recordings I've heard. The bottom line for both seem to be to bring the note out somewhat, but neither the 'intensity marks' nor many of the regular accents seem to be treated very differently. To my ears, the only real determining factor of how these symbols are treated is the context in which they appear.

[John Ruggero]

One of my problems with the Henle edition of Chopin is that it tends to favor the first German edition over the first French and English editions, and measure 5 is no exception. The French and English 1st editions apparently attempted to follow Chopin's larger marking (the autograph does not exist), the German 1st edition corrects it to an accent mark. All 1st editions place the marking between the staves as in the Wiener Urtext. Some of the other German 1st edition "accent" markings in this piece do vary in size, however.

The Wiener urtext was edited by Jan Ekier, the well-known Chopin scholar. He seems to have been very sensitive to this issue and attempted to reconstruct Chopin's marking even when the autograph does not exist by comparing the various first editions and applying his enormous knowledge of Chopin's notation. In the case of this particular "accent", however, I would respectfully disagree with Ekier and all editions of this piece. I think that the marking is an intensity marking that was carelessly placed by Chopin and should actually start under the previous note, where anyone would expect it, indicating that the appoggiatura should be particularly intense.

All of these first editions may be seen at:
http://www.cfeo.org.uk/jsp/browsecollection.jsp

Yes, the visual difference between an accent, a short diminuendo and an "intensity" mark is sometimes hard to make out in the autographs and often only context can determine what was meant. For example, the marking in measure 2 etc. in the composer's MS, the copy by his copyist:

http://burrito.whatbox.ca:15263/imglnks ... ograph.pdf

and the following are approximately the same:

http://burrito.whatbox.ca:15263/imglnks ... 40_BH5.pdf

What can this marking mean? It cannot be an accent on the first note, because that would be unmusical and the marking is far too long at every recurrence in all sources. A diminuendo is possible, but doesn't seem correct either, although one sometimes hears it interpreted that way, weakening what is intended to be strong music.

I think that the mark is simply pointing out that the pattern is a offbeat inverted turn that should be shaped as an onbeat turn or an appoggiatura is shaped: a very intense opening grading to a more normal state. Chopin felt that most performers would treat it as a light pickup without some additional information. So this is not an accent, not a diminuendo, but a rather long "intensity" marking. Of course, this one would be engraved as a short diminuendo.

[Knut]

Your analysis makes sense, and you seem to have a good foundation (most certainly better than my own) to determine the meaning of this marking and it's distinction.

My primary issue though, is of course the look of the accent mark in relation to a short diminuendo or 'intensity mark', not the meaning of the marking itself. Looking at some of the scores you posted, including another look at the Wiener Urtext edition, I can't help but feel that even though my large accent versions may be similar in size to this special mark, the placement below the staff would in itself make it clear that we're not talking about a regular accent. From the look of the low resolution pictures available to me of the Wiener edition, their accent even looks just about as large as my larger versions. The intensity mark, however, is both placed between the staffs and is noticeably larger in size. One could perhaps even make the case that this mark, with this kind of placement, just as easily could be mistaken for a very slight diminuendo. This even seems to be confirmed by Henle's interpretation of m. 30 in Op. 9, however unsubstantiated it may be.

Just to get a feel for how common the use of this marking is, do you know if it is used in other instrumental literature except piano music?

[John Ruggero]

I don't think that the placement of the marking should be a factor, because that will vary depending on the situation, but if you feel strongly about the size of your accent marks, I think they are comparable to the Wiener Urtext, as you said, and OK. However, the large ones don't seem quite centered to me and might move to the left a little. I think that would help distinguish it from the short diminuendo marking.

I am not sure about the use of the intensity mark for instruments other than the piano, but will do some research.

It is interesting that while the meaning of the cresc. hairpin is totally unambiguous no matter what its length, the opposite is true of the decresc. hairpin. This marking has two main meanings, and I think that this is what creates difficulty:

When a longer one immediately follows a cresc. hairpin, there is little doubt about meaning of the decresc. hairpin.

But an isolated longer one can mean:

A. a simple fall from the prevailing dynamic, or

B. a sudden rise in dynamic at the beginning of the mark followed by a fall.

As that hairpin is reduced in size to fall entirely over one note, it is transformed into our accent mark, which is also a sudden rise and fall in dynamic, but now isolated to one note so that it has rhythmic impact.

The ambiguous nature of the marking pursues us, however, in the short hairpins that are not accent marks. Is it merely a short dim., or a sudden rise and fall that is spread over a bit longer interval than an accent and thus has less rhythmic impact (an "intensity mark")? Only context can really determine that.

Many of the early engravers of Chopin seem to have been aware of this and solved it by simply imitating Chopin's MS. That didn't quite work because you have to actually interpret the marking to represent it correctly, which, I guess, is one reason that there are so many Chopin editions!

[Knut]

However, the large ones don't seem quite centered to me and might move to the left a little. I think that would help distinguish it from the short diminuendo marking.

You're right, they are not. Accents of this size are rarely centered on the note, because they would collide with the accidental in front of the note. Most often the mark is placed off center even if the note has no accidental, probably for reasons of regularity. This might be another reason why they have been swapped with smaller ones in more modern scores, but if you're used to them, it isn't an issue.

I am not sure about the use of the intensity mark for instruments other than the piano, but will do some research.

Excellent!

That didn't quite work because you have to actually interpret the marking to represent it correctly […]

True, and of course you're right about the diminuendo having different meanings. It actually didn't occur to me that Chopins 'intensity mark' could be interpreted as dim. type B., even though I'm sure you pointed it out earlier in so many words.

Thanks for very interesting insight!

[harpsi]

Just to get a feel for how common the use of this marking is, do you know if it is used in other instrumental literature except piano music?

These markings occur in other music as well, not only piano music. From time to time I find it really difficult to decide whether to engrave as an regular modern accent or as a short diminuendo. Again, Clive Brown's book on classical and romantic performance practice gives a lot to the discussion (pp 106-117). The meaning of the sign does indeed depend on the context, and also on the specific composer's ideas about it.

I believe that many musicians do not know about this ambiguity, and often interpret the modernized accents in a standardized way. In this case it is really enlightening to know about the history of use! Thanks for taking this up!

What can this marking mean? It cannot be an accent on the first note, because that would be unmusical and the marking is far too long at every recurrence in all sources. A diminuendo is possible, but doesn't seem correct either, although one sometimes hears it interpreted that way, weakening what is intended to be strong music.

The very first bars of Brahm's clarinet quintet. The hairpin is a bit longer than in your Chopin example, but I think the meaning is similar.

brahms.PNG (459.47 KiB) Viewed 10315 times

[John Ruggero]

Harpsi, thank you so much! That is the perfect example and so similar to the Chopin. In both cases, the composer has written out an off-beat ornamental figure that is applied to a downbeat note, yet it must be emphasized as if it were on a downbeat. I must get the Brown book.

The version that is most ambiguous and mis-engraved is where the sign is applied to a single tones, as in the Chopin Nocturne op. 9 no. 2 and many other pieces of his. There is a great difference between "standardized accents" of the rhythmic type, and this "intensity mark" which is a tonal stress of a melodic nature without any sense of attack or percussive edge to it. This is also the version that I think deserves its own glyph or set of glyphs.

[John Ruggero]

Knut, I am glad that you found that interesting. This forum is dealing with some very interesting issues, just as OCTO envisioned.