Do you think, 'It's p (piano), so I have to play softly'?

Hello everyone !

In today's post, I'd like to talk about a common trap that many pianists fall into when it comes to musical nuances. Let's unpack this together and discover how we can open up a whole new world of expression in your playing.

How do you interpret the symbols like "p (piano)" and "f (forte)" written in musical scores?

"p means softly, quietly"

"f means strongly, loudly"

You probably learned this "strong-weak" rule first when you started playing the piano. However, this very mindset of "adhering to the nuances (dynamics) as written in the score" can sometimes become a "trap" that limits the possibilities of our performance.

This time, I will share episodes from my own lessons and discuss "how to truly expand your expression" without being bound by the markings in the score.

1. The misconception: "It's p (piano), so I can't add accents?"

The other day, during a lesson with one of my students.

I advised them to emphasize a particular note within a phrase more, to make it stand out. The student then looked a bit puzzled and said:

"But Sensei, 'p (piano)' is written here. Since it's piano, I shouldn't play it strongly, right?"

I understand this feeling very well. It's precisely because you approach the score so earnestly that you feel you "must not deviate from the world of p."

However, "being p (piano)" and "emphasizing individual notes" are not contradictory at all.

Even within the quiet world of p, accents that make a single note stand out exist. Conversely, it is certainly possible to play a long, exquisitely smooth legato (connecting notes smoothly) within the intense world of f (forte).

Misconceptions like "because it's p, I shouldn't rush" or "because it's p, I shouldn't make the sound sharp" can unknowingly become troublesome traps that restrict our expressiveness.

2. Nuance is "relative," not "absolute"

To begin with, dynamics (nuance) in music are not fixed like digital values, such as "from here, it's X decibels." Everything is based on "relative relationships."

As an extreme example, suppose there's a piece composed entirely of ppp (pianississimo) and p (piano). In that piece, the note indicated with p would be the "strongest note," wouldn't it?

In other words, what's important is not the absolute volume of "p = soft sound," but rather the "differences" and "changes" within the preceding and following context.

💡 Re-examining nuance from a 360-degree perspective

• There's an explosive forte, and there's also a gentle, warm forte.

• There's a piano that quietly holds its breath, and there's also a piano with a strong core, harboring energy.

Step away from the flat interpretation of "loud/soft" and look at the character of the sound from a 360-degree, three-dimensional perspective. Just doing that should drastically change the tone color of your playing.

3. Try changing the "order of reading the score"

So, how can we achieve rich expression without being caught in the trap of markings?

What I recommend is the approach of "changing the order in which you read the score."

We tend to automatically react to the "p" and "f" symbols that immediately catch our eye, controlling the volume. However, the ideal original steps are as follows:

1. Observe the sequence of notes, rhythm, and how rests enter.
2. Decipher the harmonic movement and the length of phrases.
3. Grasp "what this piece wants to express."
4. [As a result] The perfectly fitting nuance will naturally emerge.

Surprisingly, if you deeply read the score in this order, you'll be able to understand, "Ah, with this harmonic development, I naturally want to play forte," even without being told.

For instance, after a tension-filled chord (dominant) is repeated many times, the moment it finally resolves to the tonic chord. If p is written there, it's not an instruction to "play softly."

The feeling of relief, "Ah, I can finally relax here," automatically leads to the choice of a $p$ sound as a result.

4. The world that expands by "infusing emotion"

What if a "melody where the heart is violently stirred" is written in the score, but the instruction is "p"? How would you express that?

If you simply make the sound soft, the "expression" of the music itself becomes weak and shrivels.

Here, take a step further and imagine: "What psychological state would lead one's heart to be so powerfully moved, yet still require a quiet whisper as a sound?"

"Perhaps there's a strong passion hidden within, even if it can't be expressed loudly."

"Perhaps a heartbreaking pain is being desperately suppressed."

By simply aligning your heart with the world of the piece in this way, even the same $p$ will resonate as wonderful, energetic sound that touches the listener's heart. It's not about controlling the music, but about living the emotions within the music that is most important.

Finally: A self-admonition as an instructor

Actually, this story is also something I realized from a small "sermon" (?) of my own.

Although I usually tell my students, "Don't take nuances at face value," there was one lesson where I unintentionally admonished, "That's not f (forte)!".

Afterward, I suddenly reflected, "Wait, am I contradicting what I usually say?"

The student had been playing a long stretch of p, and then simply played the isolated f marking without any change.

What I wanted to convey was not to "slam that one spot strongly with force." It was to "feel the difference between the continuous piano world and the forte world that appears here, in your heart, and depict it expressively."

If you get caught up only in the surface of words, you can sometimes lose sight of the essential nature of music.

So, when you open a musical score, please step beyond the confines of the symbols and freely explore the vast world of music that lies beneath. That time of trial and error is sure to make playing the piano even more interesting and precious.

Well then, have a wonderful piano life today!

Haruka Ogawa