On 02.06.2006 Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
David Fenton wrote:
"Well, why is it that sometime between 1770 and 1790, all composers
started becoming substantially more specific in notating dynamics and
articulations than they were before? Does the absence of the explicit
performance indications mean that they played the music straight,
with no dynamic changes and no contrasts of articulation? I don't
believe so, but if you argue that the composers who explicitly
specified no repeats were doing so because everybody before then
played the repeats, then logically you'd have to argue that the
missing dynamics and articulations were also not observed."
That's a non-sequitor.
And as it's been shown by some citations earlier in this thread, it was the custom to play the repeat (at least in the author's opinion. You disagreed that represented a normative custom). During the baroque, the notion of music as rhetoric made use of repetition as a tool. This is commented on in writings of theorists of the period.
No, the common sense understanding (really the Occam's razor reading) of why Boccherini and Beethoven marked some da capo's "senza repetitione" is simple: the norm was to play the repeats.
I have to agree. But I do see that there is some small room for doubt.
In fact, Johann Stamitz was much more elaborate in marking dynamics than
Boccherini, yet he never made any indication of leaving out repeats in
the Menuets. After all he was one of the first to include Menuets in
symphonies, so there would have been very good reasons to clarify the
performance practice.
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
