Klarinet Archive - Posting 000066.txt from 2008/12

From: "Dan Leeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Gran Partitta, again
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:49:24 -0500

Citing the first edition of K. 361 is like trying to teach a dead dog to
hunt. There is almost nothing in it that is correct. I own a copy, so I am
not talking through my hat. There are about 800 errors in dynamics in the
placement or intensity of dynamic markings, some 40 wrong notes, and some 30
rhythmic errors, and countless errors in slur markings and articulations.
The source for the first edition was a heavily marked up set of performance
parts used in 1784. Mozart did not attend the first performance and there is
no evidence that he ever heard the work in his lifetime.

There is NOTHING for which the 1803 edition can be used to support any
aspect of K. 361. It may have been the most dangerous and useless edition
ever published, because it warped the thinking of players and audiences who
heard the work played that way; i.e., through a veil which of the treasures
of the piece were seriously hidden.

The Henle edition, done by Henrik Wiese, formerly 1st flute with the Munich
Opera and now 1st flute with the Bayerischen Rundfunk Orcehstra is an
excellent editor, and nothing he says contradicts what I say.

Dan Leeson

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Wakeling" <joseph.wakeling@-----.net>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: [kl] Gran Partitta, again

> Dan Leeson wrote:
>> More important than your Mea Culpa is for you to know exactly what
>> Mozart specified.
>>
>> The autograph reads "Contra Basso" and even if the instrument were not
>> specifically identified on the first page of each of the 7 movements,
>> there are several cases of "pizzicato" and "arco," which implicitly
>> states that the 16 foot bass is a string bass not a wind bass.
>>
>> I don't object when someone prefers to use a contrabassoon. What I do
>> object to are statements that maintain the instrumental substitution was
>> Mozart's idea.
>
> According to the Henle Urtext edition I have with me right now,
>
> [The autograph] refers to the bottom stave as Contra | Baßo,
> although its ambitus extends to C. [The first edition] prefers
> the term Grand Basson ou Basse.
>
> I understand notes below low E weren't unheard of in double bass parts
> in the classical era, but I'm curious to know what performance practice
> was.
>
> The first edition dates from 1803 ...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>

------------------------------------------------------------------