NOTATIO

Perhaps I'm a bit of a crank, but I'm mildly frustrated that there is no way in the standard notation scheme to specify a dynamic value to be neither soft nor loud - rather I want it to be "in the middle". AFAICT there's no such thing. mP is a bit soft. mF a bit loud. In Dorico the dynamic range is CC from 1 to 127, mP is 52, mF is 76. The middle value would be 64. I'd like some notational method to specify that.

mf is indeed what you are looking for. If you don't like the Dorico setting, change it.

I agree with you, ehellner. I read that some use the term mezzo for a neutral dynamic level, which might be abbreviated m although that might not be distinctive enough in practice.

John, can you describe a "neutral dynamic"?

I don't think I need to remind you that dynamics are relative - what is loud in a 300 seat auditorium could be inaudible in a 12,000 seat arena.

If the OP is looking for a setting for a mock-up, that's all well and good, but if s/he is dealing with live musicians, then this micromanaging of dynamics is, I'm afraid, a fool's errand.

Am I correct that Beethoven never (or almost never) used mf for a dynamic? I seem to remember Otto Werner Muller telling us this.

RMK wrote: ↑31 Aug 2025, 13:49 dynamics are relative - what is loud in a 300 seat auditorium could be inaudible in a 12,000 seat arena.

Of course dynamics are relative. I trust the musicians (or conductor) to use their judgement and interpret the score according to the moment. But taking a step back, any instrument can only play so loud - so how should we notate that largest value? While there are some composers - Ligeti e.g. - that actually use ffffff , and while (to my knowledge) all the standard notation packages actually allow that, I personally find such notation overkill and prefer to limit myself to fff - and even that should be used sparingly. My composition professor suggested that we should limit fff to extreme moments - e.g. when the operatic heroine commits suicide.

John Ruggero wrote: ↑31 Aug 2025, 13:19 mf is indeed what you are looking for.

If mf is the middle value, then there are at most 3 levels above that: f, ff, and fff (which is used sparingly) - while there are 4 levels of dynamics softer. I.e., there are 4 gradations of softness but only 3 levels of loudness. Is this terrible? Obviously not, composers have been living with this for several hundreds of years now. But using m - as John suggests - would give us composers some additional flexibility.

John Ruggero wrote: ↑31 Aug 2025, 13:19 mf is indeed what you are looking for. If you don't like the Dorico setting, change it.

That would not change anything - there would still be only 3 levels of dynamics above mf - and the audible difference between them would be larger.

I think you are confusing me with John Ruggero - all your quotes are mine,

It would be interesting to experiment with mf, mp and your in-between dynamic (using actual musicians in a concert hall) to see if one could actually differentiate the "mezzo" dynamic as distinct from the other two.

I think your composition professor might agree with me that sometimes subtleties on paper do not always manifest audibly.

BTW, Tchaikovsky uses pppppp in his Sixth Symphony.

Yes - I was responding to you, not John. Mystery to me why it had John in there.

Next time I have the opportunity I'll ask some players to experiment w "mezzo".

I'll check out Tchaikovsky's 6th when I get the chance.

Just thinking out loud:

A composer might not want to specify a dynamic level, particularly if the composer has associated dynamic levels with particular moods or qualities, forceful vs. lyrical for example. The mezzo version of the dynamic (mf or mp etc.) might still be associated with the corresponding quality. In this case, mezzo might come in handy to show a neutral state, the absence of any particular special quality.

I think one should be wary of using mezzo on its own as a dynamic, in case it is confused with mezza, an abbreviation for mezza voce which is primarily, but not exclusively, a vocal direction to use a half tone, which is usually rather quiet (more likely sounding pp than mp). This is cancelled by any normal dynamic (or by piena voce).

With voices and most instruments, tone can often be as important as dynamic. Something played or sung in a certain way may seem louder to the listener than when done differently, even though both are the same in terms of decibels.

Yes, as with any innovation mezzo should be defined in a footnote. And because of the potential confusion pointed out by David Ward, perhaps restricted to instrumental music. I don't think I've ever seen mezza as an abbreviation of mezza voce in piano music, only m.v.