On 22.02.2006 Cecil Rigby wrote:
If it's a scholarly edition in which you want credit for the edits then you could include the brackets (ugh!). An alternative is to asterisk them and include a note, which is much less obtrusive. The small addition to the marks' footprints probably wouldn't have a bearing on whatever regular rules for placement you use.
In my opinion this (asterisks) is by far the worst way of including editorial markings. Brackets are perfectly fine, and standard for many critical editions. An alternative is to include them in reduced size. (Actually, there is one even worse, in the case of some of the Boccherini complete edtion the asterisk marks the original markings, not the editorial).
Bärenreiter uses a third way, which I personally find extremely confusing: The have non-italic markings as original and italic markings as editorial. Since the standard markings are mostly in italics in almost all other publications, I end up having to look this up every single time I use a Bärenreiter score (NBA).
Brackets do have the additional advantage of allowing several layers of bracketing, by using round, square and other bracket styles. Admittedly this doesn't always make such editions more readable, but it is sometimes the only way of representing the source material in enough detail, especially when no single authorative source exists.
Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
