Klarinet Archive - Posting 001152.txt from 2003/04

From: Roger Shilcock <roger.shilcock@-----.uk>
Subj: Re: [kl] Spelling/pronunciation/Haydn
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 00:48:08 -0400

The point about the Mozart concerto is surely that he would have had a very good idea what the soloist would have decided (a) because he knew him personally,
(b) because of the conventions of the time, of which we have a certain amount of written evidence.
I hope this makes sense - I haven't got time just now to say more.
Roger S.

In message <23562.32.97.110.142.1051196520.squirrel@-----.org writes:
> Tony Pay wrote:
>
> > > What would be the result if we took such liberty with our expression
> > > of written music? Or do we perhaps already do so? I haven't given it
> > > much thought, actually ...
> >
> > There certainly seems to be the notion amongst some people that it's our
> > job to do something different from what's written; and some people even
> > think that our job is to *change* what's written, either by producing an
> > edition or by pencilling in our own markings.
> >
> > I don't think it's our job to do either of these things, as I've posted
> > here very often.
>
> Yes, you've stated this many times, but on what basis do you make this statement (I
> don't recall seeing the supporting rationale)?
>
> Granted, my knowledge of musical history woldn't even fill a thimble. However, it is
> my understanding that (as an example), when Mozart wrote his Clarinet Concerto, he
> deliberately left out much in the way of articulation, leaving it up to the soloist
> to decide.
>
> I read somewhere that, at least in the Baroque era, it was common practice for
> performers to add their own ornamentations to the music. Of course, just because I
> read it somewhere doesn't make it so, so it could be wrong; but on the other hand, it
> doesn't seem unreasonable, either. Can you speak to that?
>
> How many original manuscripts do we have of all known compositions? It appears to me
> that there is a lot of scholarly work underway to provide "authentic" editions of
> various musical works. Since it often takes years to produce these editions (and even
> then, I don't think it can be stated that they are 100% accurate), the source
> materials must be very difficult to come by. If we don't have the composition as
> written in the composer's own hand, how can we *really* know what was intended by the
> composer?
>
> Another way to state what you have said is that there is only one correct way to play
> a musical piece. Yet due to the inherent vagueness in much of the written musical
> vocabulary, I do not see how this is possible. "What is written" is often subject to
> interpretation because it is not explicit.
>
> For example, take a piece whose tempo marking is simply "Allegro". Even something as
> fundamental as the tempo is open to interpretation. What about a fermata? Exactly how
> long does the composer expect the note to be held? Again, that is open to
> interpretation. What about staccato? Exactly how short is short? Dynamics? How soft
> is "piano" (besides "louder than pianissimo and softer than mezzo-piano")? If I see a
> couple of measures marked with a crescendo and a diminuendo, with no dynamic marked
> between, exactly how loud do I get at the height of the crescendo?
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/
>
>

--
Cet animal est méchant. Quand on l'attaque, il se défend.
---- Alleged sign in French zoo.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/