Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org!

Klarinet Archive - Posting 000478.txt from 2004/08

From: Tony Pay <tony.p@-----.org>
Subj: RE: [kl] Source for K. 581 (was K. 581 performance practice)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:29:08 -0400

On 15 Aug, "dnleeson" <dnleeson@-----.net> wrote:

> Something cannot be established to be authoritative unless a manuscript is
> available for confirmation. If not, it is not authoritative. I recognize
> that it might be, and perhaps "necessarily" would have been a useful
> descriptor, but I was tring to convey the absolute reality of the
> situation. My suspicion is that what we have is probably fiarly close to
> what Mozart wrote. Judging from past experience that means about 20 wrong
> notes, 100-200 wrong dynamics, 5 incorrect rhythms, and no one knows how
> many incorrect phrase shapes.

I think your suspicion in the case of K581 is pretty wide of the mark. The
first edition of K581 is *very* unadorned, both with regard to dynamics and
with regard to phrasing. And we know that very many Mozart *manuscripts*
have this character.

Clearly, in assessing the extent of editorial interference, you have to take
into account the *sort* of editing you're dealing with. Unless, that is, you
think there is a sort of 'anti-editor' who takes things out of the manuscript
rather than putting things in -- which I for one find psychologically
implausible.

If there are a lot of markings, then I agree the situation becomes more
difficult, as in the case of K361.

Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd tony.p@-----.org
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE http://classicalplus.gmn.com/artists
tel/fax 01865 553339

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

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org