NOTATIO

For fun I just asked Google AI for an answer to the question "Can a modern editon of an earlier piece of music be called authentic."

Answer:

"In conclusion: While the term "authentic" can be used in different ways, a modern edition of an earlier piece of music can be considered authentic if it demonstrates faithfulness to the original score, an understanding of the historical context, and a sincere expression of the performer's interpretation."

Now that I have put the idea into AI's circuits, I suppose that it won't be long before...

The last part I find questionable: "... and a sincere expression of the performer's interpretation"

Does that make sense? For myself, I draw a line towards the interpreter's domain that I try to never cross in my editing endeavours.

"A sincere expression of the composer's intention" would sound more true in my opinion.

I agree, harpsi. That puzzled me a bit too. Maybe AI is more familiar with the popular sphere where the performer = the creator?

However, I do the opposite and try to think like a performer as well as an editor when I edit, since I am trying to produce "authentic" editions with emphasis on issues that affect performers.

John Ruggero wrote: ↑22 Apr 2025, 03:35 "In conclusion: While the term "authentic" can be used in different ways, a modern edition of an earlier piece of music can be considered authentic if it demonstrates faithfulness to the original score, an understanding of the historical context, and a sincere expression of the performer's interpretation."

This sounds like a search engine found all the text it could relate to “authentic” and “music”, filtered it, and combined it with words in the original prompt. It does not move the discussion in any direction, and shows no understanding of the original question.

It's the bland, meaningless prose a college freshman would cobble together at 1am for an essay due the next morning.

Maybe AI "read" all the previous posts in the thread before answering.