Subito indications?

[John Ruggero]

When did subito dynamic indications first start to be used? I don't recall any in music before the late 19th century.

And which form is more common in the past and today: subito and sub. or subito and sub. etc.?

[David Ward]

And which form is more common in the past and today: subito and sub. or subito and sub. etc.?

Might that, sometimes at least, depend more on space or alignment with other things than on any absolute preference?

[hautbois baryton]

I have found myself using "p sub." etc., more often as of late. For me, making sure the dynamic is right under the correct note is paramount.

[John Ruggero]

Might that, sometimes at least, depend more on space or alignment with other things than on any absolute preference?

Thanks, David. It might in some cases, but do you have a preference if there are no special considerations?

I have found myself using "p sub." etc., more often as of late. For me, making sure the dynamic is right under the correct note is paramount.

Thanks, hautbois baryton. That is exactly E. Gould's point about putting the dynamic before the sub. in her book. Did you mean that in the past you used sub. p more frequently than p sub.?

[David Ward]

Thanks, David. It might in some cases, but do you have a preference if there are no special considerations?

I think since I've been using computer notation (2001) that I've usually placed the dynamic before the subito. I think I did the same in manuscript fair copies, but I'll need to check to be sure.

[John Ruggero]

Thanks again, David. Gould considers p sub. to be standard and that has always been my impression. This came up on the Dorico forum. https://forums.steinberg.net/t/custom-dynamics/901923

But I wonder when composers started adding the subito. I don't think it was used in the days of subito-maestro Ludwig B.

[hautbois baryton]

I definitely used to be more cavalier about order/placement.

[John Ruggero]

I see. Thanks, hautbois baryton.