I have a doubt about retake notation.
Is there any time when one would prefer the “Ped. *” notation repeated many times instead of the “Ped. ^ (retake) ^ hook”?
1 Like
Tbh, unless the composer is going for something really specific or something that goes against what would naturally occur by intuition, I’d prefer not to have ped markings at all.
To my mind, piano pedaling is a bit like harp pedaling. There’s an element of the dark arts about it, and it’s very personal. Let the harpist (read: pianist) decide. It’s a major part of interpretation.
That said, if they have to be there, if it’s a historical edition, use ped. If it’s more modern, use retakes.
11 Likes
I agree with James! Imho, the line/retake notation is important when the precise use of pedal is important.
Btw I also have some composition (normally organ transcriptons) where also the Sost. pedal would benefit of a retake (not the una-corda, obviously!)…
2 Likes
If you want pedal to be used throughout in a similar musical pattern, you can do like I’ve seen in my edition for Moonlight Sonata, which establishes the intended pattern of ped. retake, and then after a few bars of that says Ped. simile to tell the player to just keep on with that pattern. As the piece advances and gets busier with textures, the player must use artistic interpretation to judge where and where not to use pedal, but the initial few bars sets up the general approach.
If your piece is meant to have noticeable pedal used throughout but can be up to a player’s musical interpretation (and if they are a good player, they’ll probably have a good sensibility for this), then you can just write Con Pedale or Con Ped. (with pedal). A pianist will possibly use pedal regardless of marking where it feels right (I know many players who have their foot parked on the pedal for better or worse), but Con Ped. declares that you absolutely want it used!
If you want the opposite, you can say Senza Ped. to mean without pedal, to declare to the player you want this piece absolutely dry and tight.
I believe you can use combinations of any of these per section to make your intent clear. I don’t think you need excessive pedal markings though, it’s a bit like adding every little fingering and bowing for a string player, unless absolutely necessary for musical effect just let them decide in context.
2 Likes
I didn’t quite understand the question. Did you mean: do pianists prefer the older pedal system of Ped. Ped. Ped. without interspersed * releases, which means the same thing as the later use of brackets with retake hooks, both of which indicate “overlapping” pedal?
If so, in my opinion. there are advantages to both systems. The bracket and hook system is best for very intricate, exact pedaling. Otherwise, the Ped. * and Ped. Ped. Ped. etc. system is best because it clutters the score less.
If the edition is educational, then complete pedaling is often desired and appropriate. If not, then only the special pedaling situations need be shown, since a pianist who is a mature musician can usually be relied upon to find appropriate pedaling.
3 Likes
Sorry for not being too clear.
The choice is between:
Ped____^___^___|
And
Ped *Ped *Ped *
The composer prefers the second.
There are not extensive pedalling instructions throughout the piece, but when there are they need to be precise.
I’ve not inquired about using only Ped Ped Ped.
1 Like
Ped. * is best for isolated indications… When used for continuous pedaling, the * and the next Ped. have to be placed very close together, or it appears that gaps are intended. This is a problem with some of the extensive original pedaling indications by Chopin. This problem is avoided by omitting the * or by using the bracket and hook system.
I prefer the older system to avoid the clutter of the brackets and the composer you are dealing with may feel the same way. You might suggest omitting the * for the spots where continuous pedaling is required. The composer may not be familiar with this notation. Many musicians are not, but it is standard practice.
2 Likes
The notation with line/retakes is undoubtedly more precise. It can also be abbreviated with “Ped. simile”. But you rarely see it in classical music. Traditions are not so easy to change. Sometimes I wish that in Dorico the * after the Ped. sign could be moved horizontally vertically for reasons of space. Or is there an option for this that I have overlooked?
1 Like
You can either change the overall length of the Ped *by the grid resolution (shift-alt-left/right), or change the offset properties in Engrave (either by dragging, or entering specific values)
1 Like
@Janus I have probably explained it clumsily. It should be possible to move the asterisk upwards, as in this example:
3 Likes
@Juerg_Loeffler I think this issue has been mentioned before. If this is still not possible in Dorico, it is a capability that should be added. Ideally, the correct vertical adjustment of the asterisk would be automatic. But a user-controlled vertical adjustment would be sufficient.
I use Playing Techniques to take care of this.
3 Likes