Mark D Lew wrote:
On Nov 15, 2006, at 6:10 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
And if, in the collection, or the notes, the specified what changes
they made in the original, as many scholarly editions do, then one
can "back out" the editorial changes, and recreate the public domain
original.
Are you comfortable backing out like that?
I've not done it yet, but it seems academic that if the additions and
editions in a scholarly edition were backed out, one could revert the
score to a previous version which would not be copyright by those who
added the additions or editions, as it predated their music.
Several years ago, a singer hired me to make a piano reduction of an
aria from a lesser-known Haydn opera, so she could sing it in recital
and auditions. The orchestra-score source she gave me was photocopied
from that complete-Haydn volume. (I can't remember the title, but
it's the Haydn equivalent of the NMA for Mozart.) The editorial
markings are very clear and it was pretty obvious what the editor had
done. Thinking ahead, I made a point of ignoring the extra notations
and doing my arranging based on only the unbracketed stuff.
(Admittedly, 90% of the bracketed stuff was elementary and pretty
self-evident from the rest of the music.)
I've seen a Complete works edition of Haydn, and from the bindings, I
suspect that it is old enough to be in the public domain, though I
haven't checked to verify this.
ns
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
