Klarinet Archive - Posting 000086.txt from 2009/12

From: fred jacobowitz <fbjacobo@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Letting the players decide
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:07:05 -0500

Hear, hear! That's what editors are for. I demand that my students trust my=
musical judgement because I know an awful lot more than they do. The same =
goes for an URTEXT. That's the point! The scholars know more than I do on t=
he subject. Else why pay so d*** much for the edition? Dan, I'm sorry they =
didn't allow you to do your job. I mean, if they hired you, one would think=
that they thought you were the best. You'd think they'd trust you to do yo=
ur job!

Fred Jacobowitz
CASE CLOSED Musical Instrument Case Repair Service
Kol Haruach Klezmer Band
Ebony and Ivory duo

-----Original Message-----
>From: Dan Leeson <dnleeson@-----.net>
>Sent: Dec 18, 2009 3:13 PM
>To: klarinet@-----.org
>Subject: Re: [kl] Letting the players decide
>
>Hi Joe,
>
>Well, now there is a footnote, which I insisted be put in. But I really=
=20
>wanted was no comment whatsoever. I don't have to explain every change I=
=20
>made (and I made plenty). That is editorial authority.
>
>What I would not permit was a suggestion that the players should make the=
=20
>decision. I only explained the two choices. In the critical commentary=20
>(which no player is going to have access to during rehearsals and=20
>performances), there are about 5 pages of text and references to technical=
=20
>papers explaining the issues..
>
>Dan
>
>
>----- Original Message -----=20
>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=20
>favorites.
>
>
>On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Dan Leeson <dnleeson@-----.net> wrot=
e:
>> In an edition I did for B=C3=A4renreiter, I had a basic problem in that =
a=20
>> 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=
=20
>> the
>> "other" way. The editorial board felt that my suggested solution was too
>> radical, so they proposed that both solutions be presented in the editio=
n,
>> which would give the players the opportunity to decide which way to play=
=20
>> 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
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>

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