Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[tisimst]

On Sunday, November 22, 2015, Simon Albrecht-2 [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> 	On 22.11.2015 14:52, tisimst wrote:
> > One other thing I noticed in Valse 2, m. 42-43 - remove staccato from 
> > tied end notes. They just don't make sense. I would guess the one in 
> > the source engraving (m. 42) is a typo as it is omitted in the next 
> > measure. 
>
> It is definitely not. There is perfect consistency between the staccato 
> dots in mm. 37f. and 41–43: the crotchets are supposed to be cut short. 
> The first note in m. 44 already is a quaver, and the slur from the next 
> note also suggests playing it short, so there is no necessity for the 
> dot here. In general, please be careful about changing notation in such 
> situations! If you can’t make any sense from that which the composer 
> wrote, that doesn’t mean there is none. The 19th century used a number 
> of notational features, which were forgotten during the 20th century, 
> such as the distinction between (de)crescendo and hairpins. If we as 
> modern editors iron out these, we are in danger of eradicating 
> information which contains important hints on the performance practice 
> and intent of the music.
>
> Yours, Simon
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

You are right, Simon. Thank you for correcting me. I didn't mean to arbitrarily dismiss a marking that was unfamiliar to me. I'll be more careful in the future. In a way, it makes me wonder about deviating from these original engravings *at all*.

Best,

Abraham 

---

View this message in context: Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.