The term "Authentic" in Music Editing

[John Ruggero]

That's another great point, db322014. The editing approach really depends on the quality of the music and its notation. If one is dealing with one of the major composers of the classical canon, the notation is generally at the same high level as the music and most changes are really not a good idea; (although there can be small errors that have to be dealt with occasionally often caused by the engravers of the first editions). You will find numerous threads on this site in which I attempt to illustrate this point. However, there are fine composers of the second rank etc. who were not as knowledgable or as careful about their notation, and then one is forced to take a more active role in the notation.

I would be very interested to see the situations in the scores that you are editing, and I am sure that other notat.io readers would as well. It can be a great learning experience for all concerned.

Yes, I self-publish my own music and am presently preparing a number of "authentic" editions of important piano music like the Beethoven pianos sonatas and Chopin etudes etc. I have a background in both professional music editing and copying and piano teaching and performing.

By the way, I am a mouser too although I do use a lot of keyboard shortcuts. I strongly recommend using Keyboard Maestro if you use a Mac or the equivalent on a PC; it makes a world of difference to be able to call up the various tools with keyboard commands. And have you considered Dorico? As much as I like working in Finale, I have switched to Dorico for all new projects, and that might be advisable for you at this point.

[benwiggy]

Thank you, benwiggy. So you do agree that there is such a thing as inauthentic music editing and performing?

I think it's easier to define, though I suppose logically if you know that something is inauthentic, you must be able to define what is authentic.

A 19th-century approach to 16th-century keyboard music would be inauthentic (though I dare say that there would be a market for Liszt's transcriptions of Frescobaldi, if they existed....)

If you clearly show what is original and what is editorial, then I don't think it matters what adjective you use to describe that process -- Urtext, scholarly, authentic. They are broadly labels for marketing, ultimately. I'd suggest that "Edited by John Ruggero" is as good an indication of the quality as anything else.

So, many times I run into passages on these works that is clear the composer had mistaken and should have made a review,

You have to be absolutely certain that it is a mistake -- and which part is the error. In the 18th century, William Boyce produced collections of 16th-century English Church Music, and he 'corrected' things that we now know were deliberate, e.g. 'false relations' where one part has an F# and another part has an F natural at the same time.

[John Ruggero]

Thanks, benwiggy.

I think it's easier to define, though I suppose logically if you know that something is inauthentic, you must be able to define what is authentic.

Yes, that was my point. Authentic is a lot harder to define, so I find it easier to define as "not inauthentic." Authentic is a quality, a process, an attempt at something that is ultimately unattainable, but still worth pursuing.

You may be right about omitting any such terminology, but then there is marketing, as you mention. I really appreciate your very kind remark, Ben, and would say the same about anything that you put your name to. But "Who the h*** is John Ruggero and what kind of edition is this?" is a reaction I am trying to a avoid. So I am trying to come up with an alternative to Urtext, since in some ways my editions are more "urtexty" than the typical urtext edition and in some ways, less. "Authentic edition based on the original sources" is the best I have come up with so far. Maybe "based the original sources" is sufficient. "Annotated edition" is what I called my edition of Bach's inventions and sinfonias.

You made a number of other points in your posts that I would like to respond to.

I actually consider music editing and performance linked.

I think that the art of great performance is to get to the essence of the music to the point where one is able to express it in one's own way. That is what gives one the assurance to perform authoritatively. One can do no wrong if one truly understands the music one is playing. It will be authentic.

[db322014]

Good morning, fellas!

Hope you're all doing well.

So, here are some samples of what I've commented and worked on. These are manuscripts from the same composer, one from 1911 and the other from 1910.

Captura de tela 2025-04-18 091338.png (374.43 KiB) Viewed 3519 times

Captura de tela 2025-04-18 091623.png (140.46 KiB) Viewed 3519 times

Here is one example of how the composer changes his writing on grid and on the solo part. I engrave exactly what he did on the solo part, but, as often happens, what if didn't have the solo part? That would not make a big difference, of course, the output at the performance would be the same, but perhaps it would during reharsals...

Captura de tela 2025-04-18 091805.png (302 KiB) Viewed 3519 times

This sample is from the same work, at the end of the last movement... this a clear mistake of rhythm. The composer places triplets of 16th note at time signature. He should have placed triplets of 8th note instead, as he did in other similar passages.

Captura de tela 2025-04-18 093217.png (489.26 KiB) Viewed 3519 times

Captura de tela 2025-04-18 092404.png (357.75 KiB) Viewed 3519 times

These passages are from the last movement of a sonata and they also show mistake... the first pic is from bars 3-5 and the second is the reexposition in bars 139-140. In the first pic, the composer forgets the A-flat on the left hand on the piano part and later creates a dissonance between A-flat on the bass and on top left hand note. In the second pic, he writes A-flat and creates no dissonance later. This is clear for me this is an example of mistake, but I engrave it just like it is written anyway because I have no intention to do an editing/review work. Although I acknowledge the importance of the engraving work for preserving the music culture of a country and perpetuate the national memory, I am very cautious with engraved/not published scores. There are a lot of people working of Finale, Sibelius, MuseScore to engrave manuscripts without a proper attention to details, skipping/overlooking the hard and boring part: rechecking. I don't know how publishers work, but I assume the major ones check and recheck details exhaustively before scores becomes available for selling. I work as a collaborator pianist at the Music Department of a public university and I often work with graduate students. Most times when their researches approach the music of non-living composers which still in manuscripts, they are asked to engrave the work(s) and include in their dissertations as attachment. When they come to me with the engraved to rehearse and then perform, the first thing I ask them is to send me the manuscript as well... and I often find mistakes. Of course they are not professional editors/engravers but, once one assume that role, it has to be done carefully. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it has to be well done... and it is always a work in progress!

About Finale, I use it because it is no longer being updated, so I could find the last version for free the web. Since it's the same software I used to work years ago, I keep working today with all the resources it's got until the last update. Still needa learning more though... about the keyboard, I'd never heard of it. I use a Logitech K120, which is the standard type keyboard used in Brazil. Even though there are more keys than on iMac or Macbook, it is impossible for me to memorize all the shortcuts for the infinite Maestro/Finale Maestro characters.

Peace!

[John Ruggero]

Thanks for those examples, db322014. Those would be typical of the kinds of obvious errors that one encounters in manuscript. I wouldn't hesitate to correct them without a thought, really, because they are not substantive. Were I archiving this music for historical purposes and creating a kind of engraved facsimile of the music, as you seem to be doing, I would correct the errors and enclose them in brackets, and create a running commentary to record every error corrected. In an Urtext edition, errors of this kind are often corrected without comment, and rightly so, in my opinion. I also see a cautionary C natural that I would add in the top staff of the piano part.

I find the first discrepancy in notation the more interesting issue and the kind of thing that requires some interpretation and decision-making to deal with. It appears that the composer preferred the tied version, but was compelled to use the dotted notes for lack of space in the part. The slurs in the part are also problematic and don't exist in the score. Slurs can often go astray in fast hand-copying and one has to becomes familiar with the calligraphic style of the composer to make a good guess about correction. I find this sleuthing a fascinating part of editing, actually.

As for your graduate students...When I worked as a hand copyist, we always found the work of students to be the most difficult to deal with. My boss would sit them down at his desk and show them the error of their ways, point by point. They left having learned more about music notation in an hour than they had before and possibly after, as did I! I am glad that you are helping them and I am sure that they are learning a lot from the experience. (I sent you a private message. Top of page under Private messages.)

[benwiggy]

About Finale, I use it because it is no longer being updated, so I could find the last version for free the web.

Pirated versions on the internet can contain malware. It is quite unsafe to use them.

If you have an old (legal) version of Finale, then you can get the crossgrade to Dorico for $149. That also includes a copy of Finale 27.4.

[John Ruggero]

I forgot to mention that Keyboard Maestro is not an actual computer keyboard. It's a program that allows you to create macros for use with other software. I use it to create keyboard commands both in Finale and Dorico for commands that these programs don't provide. Its a free program, but only for Mac.

And what benwiggy just said. As well, Finale would not be a good choice for archiving because it is no longer being developed and support will end in a few months. Dorico is an excellent program that is superior to Finale in many ways and most importantly it is in active development and will useable for the foreseeable.

[db322014]

Hi, John

Thanks for you feedback. I have been working on engraving some works of this particular composer because they are almost all on manuscripts still, rarely performed, not simple at all to play and so unique. He died in 1914 at 30yo, so he didn't really have time to review his works, and yet he wrote more than 100 works among piano solo, voice and piano, violin, and piano, cello and piano, 4 trios, piano 4 hands, string quartet, one unfinished opera... He was criticized by the press of his time for the harmony and structural form of his works, but he could raise some admirers and followers, who later founded a society with his name. So, we can find many dissonant passages, some are intentional (like those C natural and C sharp) and others are actually a mistake. Like I said before, I am just engraving his scores, not in a position to make alterations - that was a tough decision I had to make since the first works - maybe if was doing doctorade, I would be doing a broader study of his life and work and then make a deep review.

Yet there are some passages that, if we don't correct, the software doesn't let go further, which is the case with rhythms, and then we have to cheat on Finale LOL In this particular case with the triplets, it's not a big deal, some notes would be missing but we can adjust spacing. This composer writes too much information on the scores, expression and notes... sometimes I think he could have been more economic and dry out many things that, in practice, wouldn't make much of a difference or no difference at all. I think a composer would really see a difference of so many details put on the score IF he/she is a performer as well, and so many unnecessary things can avoided. This way, performers' work can be optimized and much less stress for them would be eliminated.

About the students, as soon as I see something strange and I check the manuscript, I tell them. Some are working editing those pieces, others use the engraved material done by other colleagues/classmates. In this latter case, I make corrections myself. Some of them are really focused on doing a good engraving, others just don't care much. I think their advisor don't even check whether it's good or not, just see if the score is in attachment.

PS: About the Keyboard Maestro, I use Windows, so it wouldn't work for me. Like I said, I'm an amateur, doing that engraving work literally for love, love for learning new skills, no intention to become an expert or professional. That's why I have not invested on purchasing softwares, big monitor, and all the stuff a professional need to master his/her work.

Peace!

[RMK]

About Finale, I use it because it is no longer being updated, so I could find the last version for free the web.

And you wonder why they stopped developing it?

[John Ruggero]

Good luck with your project, db322014, which is a worthy one. And please let us know if anything else comes up; we'd be glad to help.