On 9 May 2006 at 9:13, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > On 08.05.2006 David W. Fenton wrote: > > > > Well, of course. But even if it's drawn directly from the original > > source, both surely can't be correct -- I can't see an > > interpretation of the differing rhythmic values that would make any > > sense. > > No, but I'd like to leave this to the performer.
And, of course, I didn't say anything at all that remotely disputes that. In fact, I generally reproduce more of the original notation than you generally do, based on your reactions to some of my posts. > A few weeks ago I bought score and parts for a Telemann Overture, only > to discover that the editor had changed the notation in the slow > section to double dotted qarter notes. The edition was published in > the 70s, and I am sure the editor really believed he was doing the > right thing, but for my purposes this was a disaster (took me many > hours to correct it with tip-ex). Who knows, perhaps in a few years > someone discovers something radical about grace notes, and what we > today believe to be an error turns out to give us important clues as > to how to perform them. I don't want future performers to curse my > editions like I did with this Moeseler publication. I'm a musicologist, Johannes. I don't bleach the "inconsistencies" out of my editions, except those made for very specific purposes. For general use editions, I believe it's the editor's job to make clear at all turns what is editorial intervention and what was in the original edition, precisely so that the performer can make the choice. Many "modern" performers trained in the lackadaisical "just play the notes" school of performing won't bother to think about it. But that's *their* fault, not mine (or yours)! > >> > The problem with grace note length is that some composers try > >> > to be very consistent, . . . > > > > The problem is, of course (and this is something I know you know > > perfectly well), that the source may be several layers removed > > from the composer's intention, with one or more additional layers > > of intervention, intentional and accidental, from copyists and > > engravers. A copyist who is trained not to pay attention to > > consistency of appoggiatura length can easily corrupt a very > > consistent composer's text. > > As is probably the case in the majority of 18th century editions. [] > >> > Of course I am aware that there was not always difference > >> > between a slashed 8th grace note and a 16th grace note in print, > >> > so no need to discuss this. > > > > I would go so far as to say there is *never* a difference, as a > > slashed 8th note is simply an alternate notation for a 16th note > > (one flag plus as many slashes as necessary to indicate the > > number of additional flags that modern printed notation would > > use). > > Well, the problem is that it is sometimes difficult to decide from > when on there was a difference. I have certainly seen late 18th > century editions which used both slashed and 16th grace notes, and > although they were not always consistent, they mostly made sense as > being different. I haven't run onto any that did that, except in the haphazard way that screams to me "these signs are completely identical in meaning and you shouldn't read anything into whether one or the other is used in any particular case." > > The "slash" only acquired an independent meaning in the 19th > > century, with the invention of the concept of what we now call the > > "grace note." And in that concept, there was little if any > > consistent rhythmic meaning to it at all. > > Well, from what I have seen, I am not sure whether this is > completely true. I can say that in an edition dating from 1806 > there was certainly a difference, paired with a lot of > inconsistency. (Sorry, can't tell you what it was.) I've never encountered that, and many of the editions I'm working with are from 1800-20. Of course, they are also pretty reliably Viennese, which is surely one of the important variables involved here, i.e., regional practices. I'd be interested to see examples from the edition you speak of, if you're able to send it privately. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
