Klarinet Archive - Posting 000085.txt from 2006/08

From: "dnleeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: [kl] Weber concerto autograph/first edition
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 12:53:24 -0400

Fred, your note was not entirely clear to me in terms of whether
you wanted to see the manuscript of Weber concerto or the 1st
edition, assuming that the two were identical or of equal value
to an inquring performer.

Without a lot of work, there is no way to tell if the manuscript
is a better source for an inquiring performer or the first
edition. Sometimes composers would write a work and then there
would be a performance of that work (such as Mozart's string
quartets) in which the composer took part. Changes would be made
in the performance parts by the players and those altered parts
used for the edition. In those cases one can argue that the first
edition is more useful than the manuscript.

On the other hand a lot of crap can get into such an edition too
because changes were made arbitrarily.

So if you are looking for the best source in terms of truth
(meaning what the composer asked for), the autograph is the place
to go. But if you have definite proof that a performance took
place and Weber made changes in the work as the rehearsals
progress, then the first edition might be a more truthful truth.

Look at the autograph for Mahler 2 and 3. It has six layers of
changes made by Mahler himself as the work was rehearsed over a
period of years. What is true? Which is correct?

Just be careful before you leap from the frying pan into the you
know where.

Dan Leeson
DNLeeson@-----.net

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org