Pedal lines should end on the first beat of the next measure
By default, the pedal lines should end on the first beat of the next measure, since this is what the user want most of the time, since this is how you generally play piano pieces IRL.
Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.
Comments
I am a pianist and this is not my experience.
In reply to I am a pianist and this is by xavierjazz
You may want to re-evaluate your knowledge then. XD
Seriously, what I wrote in the OP is the standard usage of the damper pedal and the standard notation for it. Although I'm not totally sure about the notation part (I've seen some scores doing it differently), it's definitely how you generally play a piece. So it makes sense for the notation to follow that usage.
Yeah, I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about the score itself, or the playback? Certainly most published scores I see end pedal markings at or before the barline when not extending *through* the next measure. They would only extend to the first note of the next measure when using the pedal change marking (angle bracket), and that is what MuseScore does as well if you extend the pedal marking to that next note.
For playback, it should also be the case that the angle bracket causes the pedal change to occur right *after* the note to which it is applied. Which is to say, it should be just how one is normally taught to do this.
If you are are seeing a case where something is not behaving as you feel it should, please post the specific score you are having problems with and steps to reproduce.
In reply to Yeah, I'm not sure what you by Marc Sabatella
I agree with the original poster, and I share his frustration - but changing the default behavior as he or she suggested would be beneficial largely in simple pieces with short measures. Generally, in such situations, a pedal 'change' takes place on the first beat of each measure because that's where the underlying harmony changes. (Think of waltzes and similar 'salon pieces' of the 19th century, which very frequently employ this exact structure; they're the most basic examples of syncopated pedaling techniquer, which is standard performance practice in classical piano.)
Still, I find myself shortening pedal lines at least as frequently as I need to lengthen them across bar lines because complex scores with longer measures are likely to contain multiple changes of pedal within the measure.
Whatever the default behavior is, it won't suit all situations and everyone won't be pleased. This is a minor issue for me, and I'm commenting only to confirm that, in my experience, 255 raises a valid point.
In reply to I agree with the original by [DELETED] 448831
Hmmm, it's possible I am misunderstanding the request. Could you post a published example or two showing what you are looking for? You refer to pedal changes, but those *do* align with the note where the change occurs. Yes, when you first place the pedal marking, it end with the last note of the current measure and you need to extend it with a double click & shift+right, and I guess that default could change.
But my sense the OP is talking about something quite different - not the fact that it takes an extra step to move the anchor point of a pedal change, but that the actual *end* of the pedal line should be drawn to the eright of the barline rather than at or the barline or to left. And I have *never* seen this. To me, the way MuseScore does it is exactly how the published scores I have look. Well, the ones from the past few decades, anyhow - a century ago and more, it was more common to use the "Ped" and "*" indications with no lines. But still, the release would appear at or before the barline. And this is also how Gould shows the examples in "Behind Bars", the standard reference we rely on a lot (although by no means blindly or exclusively).
In reply to Hmmm, it's possible I am by Marc Sabatella
>Yes, when you first place the pedal marking, it end with the last note of the current measure and you need to extend it with a double click & shift+right, and I guess that default could change.
I'm talking exactly about this.
In reply to >Yes, when you first place by 255
This should be standard behaviour:
If you try to do this in MuseScore, the Ped. marking will be wrongly placed and you have to correct it manually to make it reach the next measure.
In reply to This should be standard by 255
Well, yes, as I said, this is not about pedal *end* - it is about pedal *change*. I thought you were saying pedal *end* marking (the vertical hook) should align with the first note of the next measure in cases where pedal is meant to be released on the downbeat; and it was *that* I was saying would be non-standard. Pedal *end* markings, as I have been saying, align at or before the barline. Perhaps more commonly *at* the barlne when using the line & hook, *before* when using the asterisk, but never *after* in my experience.
Pedal *change* indeed needs to align with the note it changes on, of course. But it already does. It's just that MuseScore doesn't know what note you will want to change on, and perhaps it doesn't make the most educated guess either. No matter what note is guessed, it's going to be right some times and wrong other times, so you'll have to adjust. That's no different from ottavas or hairpins or voltas - MuseScore has to guess when you initially place the markings, and as often as not, you will need to adjust. It's just that it would be possible to make a slightly more intelligent initial guess that would require adjustment less often. I get that, so as an enhancement request to save a couple of clicks on pedal changes that happen to fall on the beginning of the measure - which is of course not uncommon - that makes sense. I just thought you were saying something completely different.
But FWIW, I think I use and think of pedal differently than you. Elsewhere, you say it would be uncommon to use full pedal because you don't want notes to sustain the full measure. Well, I'd agree you often don't want notes to sustain the full measure, but to me, the solution isn't necessarily half-pedal (although that can also be part of it) - it's more frequent pedal changes. So if MuseScore always guessed you wanted the change in the next measure, that would mean one extra step to *shorten* the pedal in the cases where you want to indicate the change *more* often than once per measure, which to me is *also* quite common.
Anyhow, the code when initially placing lines is currently quite generic - it simply always assumes the line should extend by default to the end of the current measure, and that will will need to adjust from there. It's not bad default for ottavas and hairpins, but indeed, if you are msotly notating pedal changes on the downbeats, special casing pedal lines that end in angle brackets and making the line extent into the next measure would be a better default.
that you will want the change on the first note of the next measure. So it's not a question of MuseScore produce incorrect layout as it sounded like you were saying; it's a question of MsueScore not correctly guessing that the most liekly place to change pedal is the beginning of the next measure, and thus missing an oppotuntiy to save you a couple of clicks. I can see that, but it's definitely something very different from what I thought you were syaing.
In reply to Well, yes, as I said, this is by Marc Sabatella
Which is my much longer way of saying what both xavierjazz and stevebob said :-)
In reply to Well, yes, as I said, this is by Marc Sabatella
>>But FWIW, I think I use and think of pedal differently than you. Elsewhere, you say it would be uncommon to use full pedal because you don't want notes to sustain the full measure. Well, I'd agree you often don't want notes to sustain the full measure, but to me, the solution isn't necessarily half-pedal (although that can also be part of it) - it's more frequent pedal changes.
You're talking about a different problem and I opened two different threads because indeed those are different problems. I see why you see a link but they are two different problems. Also, I do not agree: frequent pedal changes is of course a better way to play some measures, but if these changes still has the pedal 100% down it still sounds bad while the pedal is down; on a grand piano (or a good piano VST), playing any simple piano piece with the pedal full down is gonna sound terrible EVEN if you do frequent changes. Only a beginner will play like that; the correct way to play is to use the pedal not completely down AND frequent pedal changes here and there depending on the harmony and other things. You want full pedal down only where you want the bass to sustain for very long or where you really want a big sound and a big resonance. For any further discussion though, please use the other thread since these are two different problems.
In reply to >>But FWIW, I think I use and by 255
Well, the question of how fully I press the pedal and the extent to which any given synthesizer might support MIDI messages to that effect do belong in the other thread, I guess, but I don't knwo that there is anywhere to get on that topic. We have different way of performing, I guess, and different experiences with synthesizers. In my world, full pedal is extremely common, and synthersizers that support anything but that are extremely rare. So while a feature to allow half-pedal control for the people who want it and have synthesizers that support it fine, I don't have an interest in that feature personally, so I'll let others discuss it. i just want normal pedal to work with normal synthesizers, and it already does.
What *does* interest me in this thread is finding a good default for the initial placement of a pedal marking that ends in an angle hook as opposed to a vertical hook. In particular, what percentage of time the default anchor of the pedal line ends up being not long enough and therefore having a longer default would be a help, and what percentage of the time the default anchor ends up being too long and hence have a longer default would actually be counterproductive. I personally suspect it's close enough to 50/50 to make me not see any point in special casing "pedal markings with angle hooks" to make them use a different default fromn other lines.
I base this on the fact that pedal changes normally occur on every *harmonic* change, and piano music complex enough to require explicit pedal markings in the first place is seldom simple enough that harmnic changes occur only once per measure. Most piano music in my experience is published with little or no pedal markings - I've got shelves full of classical, jazz, and pop piano music with very very little of it. The music with explicit markings tends to be either very simpe pieces - in which case, indeed, once a measure is pretty common - or else complex music in which the pedal is virtually *never* helld as long as a full measure, unless maybe it is being used as an extended technique in itself and actually last *longer* than a full measure.
It would be interesting, then, to compare a wide selection of published piano music to see if the once-per-measure change is really common enough to make the default. I will say this - it's almost certianly more common than any other single default we can choose. but the current default already strikes me as too *long* most of the time, and that is why the idea of going out of our way to lengthening it by default doesn't particularly appeal to me.
I can guess maybe you are thinking more about playback than appearance, and that's why you might be in the habit of putting in lots and lots of pedal markings, so maybe that's a place where having different perceptions of the relative importance of notation versus playback might influence what one thinks of as the most useful default.
In reply to Well, the question of how by Marc Sabatella
Yes, you got a point here. If one wants to place a pedal e.g. from chord A to chord B and the measure at that point is not finished, if the default is what I propose in the OP the user is forced to resize it back. However the problem is that the user would be forced to resize it back anyway, because even if the pedal ends before the end of the measure, its just before the measure line but its still actually the end.
My experience placing pedal marking here and there always give the same result: the pedal goes to the end of the measure, although not reaching the next one.
This IMO is something you never want so it makes no sense to have it as default; however, there are two different ways to proced: one, as I said in the OP is reaching the first beat of the next measure, the other is ending at the next note maybe.
It's a matter of deciding what's better. And it may indeed not be that simple, because as you said in simple pieces it's generally the first case, but in more complex pieces it's more frequent pedal changes. Still, I say it again, as it is now is totally useless IMO. Or... a good average ahah.
In reply to Yes, you got a point here. If by 255
Here's a traditional engraving (published by G. Schirmer) of the sort of piece I originally described as having consistently short measures, typically with a harmonic change at the start of each:
Note that standard engraving practices of the era dictate an asterisk for pedal release - and that its placement is both arbitrary and inconsistent (i.e., generally on the last beat, sometimes on the last note (mm. 3 and 5), and at other times so imprecise that it's neither one nor the other - even there is no reason to imagine that the pedaling should be different in any case).
These two systems shown could be re-notated with modern pedal notation as follows:
At this point, it's worth commenting that MuseScore's default is this same basic pattern: it assumes pedal release before the first beat of the next measure. In performance practice, this is called 'rhythmic pedaling': full release of the pedal at or before the end of one measure and then re-applying pedal on the downbeat of the following measure.
However, that is not what I would guess the vast majority of pianists actually do. Instead, standard practice would instead be 'syncopated pedaling': holding the pedal through to the downbeat of the next measure, at which time it is 'changed' (i.e., released and immediately re-applied). This is how one would notate it:
In a visual nutshell then, this is what we're discussing here and why we're discussing it.
As I wrote before and as Marc confirmed, most piano music is neither so simple nor so formulaic. Measures are typically longer, and harmony is generally more complex. I only entered this thread because it seemed that the point of 255's original post was misunderstood; I wanted to confirm the reality that one does in fact generally hold the pedal through from one measure to the next.
In piano music generally, however, it is at least as likely that there will be multiple changes or releases of pedal within any given measure. This has been acknowledged, including by 255. I disagree that it 'makes no sense' to have the current default exactly as it is, given that one is at least as likely to truncate the pedal line as to extend it.
No default setting will fit all cases, obviously, and I believe that any default setting must be regarded as a starting point from which further tweaking will probably be necessary. I don't understand why that should be found to be problematic. Even the slurs in the two systems that I re-engraved here needed manual adjustments to look as they do! And although 255 seems to equate a 'good average' with 'totally useless', I disagree. I think that a good average is exactly what we can expect of default settings.
In reply to Here's a traditional by [DELETED] 448831
Yes, my claims were overstated.
Anyway, very good post.
In reply to Yes, my claims were by 255
Gosh, thanks! It took a bit longer to put together than I had initially planned, so I truly appreciate your acknowledgment.
In reply to Gosh, thanks! It took a bit by [DELETED] 448831
I guess I agree with you in the end, especially because I thought most scores are like the last image, but that's not true, so maybe it's better to leave it at "average position".
In reply to Here's a traditional by [DELETED] 448831
Yes, thanks for the work of putting that post together, stevebob!
This has been a fascinating discussion, glad to see us finding common ground. Here's how I would summarize from my perspective as a MuseScore developer as well as a pianist:
1) With regard to pedal lines ending in with vertical hooks: the default initial guess of end anchor seems fine.
2) With regard to pedal lines ending in angled hooks, the default initial guess is indeed quite unlikely to be useful as is, and hence might seem less than ideal. However, there is no single alternative that is necessarily an improvement, since sometimes we would want the line longer, but other times shorter. The alternative of making it extend to the first note of the next measure is the right default sometimes, but a change in the wrong direction other times.
So I guess my most important observation here is this:
3) The code for calculating the "initial guess" is essentially the same for all lines (although slurs are different). To change this, we'd have to special-case this one line type. I guess I'd want to see a more compelling reason. But it has been quite interesting to consider!
FWIW, if you haven't used 1.3 much, you might want to try playing with pedal lines there to get a sense of just how far we've come already (the angle bracket / pedal change capability didn't even exist, initial placement of pedal lines was all but random, etc). So I'm pleased if it's now just down to debates over details like this :-)
In reply to Yes, thanks for the work of by Marc Sabatella
You're welcome, Marc! I'm happy to have contributed in a way that was found helpful.
We've come a long way indeed from 1.3 (in this specific functionality and in so many others), and I couldn't be more appreciative of all the hard work by the development team that has brought this remarkable software to its present state.
Ahhh, I misunderstood.
In reply to Ahhh, I misunderstood. by xavierjazz
Yeah maybe with the image that I've posted it's clearer now.