On 1 Feb 2006 at 15:25, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:

> This isn't the first time I have heard such criticisms about
> Barenreiter's Editions. Considering the cost of buying their editions,
> you'd expect top notch work.

When Hogwood recorded them, he used Cliff Eisen's newly-prepared 
editions, rather than the NMA (since at that time, only the horrid 
1956 editions of the early symphonies were available).

I don't know why the early symphonies were so poorly done. It's clear 
that at the same time those awful editions were being prepared, the 
Bach edition was preparing exemplary editions. Perhaps it was just a 
bad editor, or that they didn't think anyone would care if the early 
symphonies were edited in a slapdash fashion.

> Ton Koopman made a few comments about this in his Erato recordings of
> some of the Mozart Symphonies . Koopman also commented that parts were
> not available for sale for quite a few of them, which made me
> wonder--why would Barenreiter allow such a staple in their catalogue
> go out of print?

I can't imagine that any major early music performing group would not 
prepare its own editions of Mozart for a comprehensive recording. 
Even good editions have lots of assumptions in them, and if you're 
aiming for a fresh look at the repertory, revisiting the textual 
sources seems to me to be a required place to start.

Bärenreiter lets things go out of print, I'd assume, when nobody is 
buying them. The real problem is when you can't even get the parts 
from a rental agency.

-- 
David W. Fenton                    http://dfenton.com
David Fenton Associates       http://dfenton.com/DFA/


_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to