-
9. Dynamics and Nuance
- Indiana University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
54 Interpretation CHAPTER NINE Dynamics and Nuance Until the second half of the eighteenth century expression marks of any kind were relatively rare. Dynamics were limited mainly to the indication of echoes or the use in cantatas and concertos to alert the accompanying instruments that the solo voice was entering or leaving the texture. In mid-century, in the spirit of Sturm und Drang, composers began experimenting with the addition of unusual and dramatic effects, asking performers to make dynamic contrasts in places and ways that, because of their training, would be unexpected. This was the genesis of dynamic indications as we understand them. In the Baroque era, though, most expressive clues were contained in the music, and whereas to the untrained modern eye there would seem to be no dynamics, the performer of the day could clearly perceive the composer’s intention. Here are some of the keys to understanding the dynamic structure of music composed prior to the time when expression began to be prescribed: a. Harmony: Knowledge of the various types of consonances and dissonances and of the relationship of chords to one another. b. Melody: Awareness of its contours and the significance of tessitura—the range of a voice and the changing distance between the bass and the melodic line. c. Figures of musical speech: Recognition of the various rhetorical devices commonly used by composers, and their function. Harmony Harmony as we understand it was not codified until well into the eighteenth century —in 1722—when Jean-Philippe Rameau published his Traité de l’harmonie. Early Baroque music was still based on the modal system, and only in the late seventeenth century were composers such as Arcangelo Corelli and his teacher Maurizio Cazzati, maestro di capellla of San Petronio in Bologna, experimenting with the tonal system, which was later to become standard. Nowadays, in the twenty-first century, we have heard everything imaginable in the way of harmony (and dissonance), but if we are to appreciate fully its significance in earlier music, we must endeavor to hear the music through the ears of musicians of the time. We tend to flatter ourselves that whatever existed prior to our own time was, by definition, inferior—instruments, performance standards, the degree of sophistication, and so on. What happened, however, was an evolutionary streamlining process that eliminated many of the features once considered a normal part of music-making. These included harpsichords with split keys capable of playing the enharmonic scale; a variety of temperaments that gave each key its own unique character; the art of 55 Dynamics and Nuance ornamentation; and families of instruments that would blend and balance effortlessly not only with one another but also with members of other families. The alternation of dissonance and consonance is an essential component of tonal musical language, and composers in the Baroque era were responsible for dramatic developments in the use of this device. Whereas at first, with mean-tone temperaments, only a limited number of keys were available, some composers exploited the situation and wrote passages replete with the most extreme dissonances.1 At the height of the Baroque era a temperament was in use by which, in the cycle of 5ths, each major third became slightly wider, thereby creating an increasingly pungent V-I cadential sequence. According to Mark Linley,2 the Preludes and Fugues in Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier, when played using this tuning system, sound best in the key in which they were written and cannot effectively be transposed. It is almost certain that Bach was not using equal temperament. There are those who argue that equal temperament is a good thing: after all, they say, it solves the problem of the comma most efficiently, and you don’t really notice that no interval other than the octave is in tune, so slightly are they out of tune. I would counter that equal temperament means the absence of all temperament, for the palpable contrasts in tension that characterize dominant-tonic relationships in earlier tuning systems are eliminated, as are the exquisitely more dissonant harmonies. (Of course, a pianist can choose to compensate for this by creating dynamic nuances that were unavailable to harpsichordists.) How, then, can harmonies influence the dynamic shape of a piece? If one considers the dominant-tonic progression, for example, where the tension of the dominant chord is relieved by the consonant resolution of the cadence, it is most natural to play the dominant more...