Klarinet Archive - Posting 000081.txt from 2009/12

From: "Dan Leeson" <dnleeson@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Letting the players decide
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:13:28 -0500

Hi Joe,

Well, now there is a footnote, which I insisted be put in. But I really
wanted was no comment whatsoever. I don't have to explain every change I
made (and I made plenty). That is editorial authority.

What I would not permit was a suggestion that the players should make the
decision. I only explained the two choices. In the critical commentary
(which no player is going to have access to during rehearsals and
performances), there are about 5 pages of text and references to technical
papers explaining the issues..

Dan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Fasel" <jhfasel@-----.com>
To: <klarinet@-----.org>
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [kl] Letting the players decide

Dan,

You may be indeed be a first-class curmudgeon, but you are one of my
favorites.

On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Dan Leeson <dnleeson@-----.net> wrote:
> In an edition I did for Bärenreiter, I had a basic problem in that a
> certain
> passage could be executed in two different ways.
>
> I had evidence that supported a particular way and that is the way I
> submitted the manuscript to the publisher. I refused to even acknowledge
> the
> "other" way. The editorial board felt that my suggested solution was too
> radical, so they proposed that both solutions be presented in the edition,
> which would give the players the opportunity to decide which way to play
> it.

Was there at least a footnote or a discussion in the editorial
introduction explaining that the incorrect alternative was included
only to document what previous editions had mistakenly done and that
the editor strongly advised against using it?

Cheers,
--Joe

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

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