You forgot to answer about the lack of "Ragtime" category :-)
On 15/06/2018 16:08, Knute Snortum wrote: > I would frown upon changing the pitch of a note that "sounds wrong" to you > unless you have some evidence to back it up. I would want the piece exactly > how Joplin wrote it. A footnote would be acceptable, I think. You do realize that there is a difference between "How Joplin wrote it" and "How it was first published", right? The case is not so obvious in The Easy Winners, but in Maple Leaf Rag there is a place where there is obviously a note they forgot to print while type-setting it. It is missing from the first seuence, but present in the second time the sequence is given one octave down. It is also present in the first sequence the second time the notes are given (the second time part A is played). As such, it is fairly obvious that the piece as published does not reflect how Joplin wrote it. Having said that, and assuming you're using the same source as me for the notes (the yellow book bundling all of Joplin's works), the editorial at the beginning claims they have already incorporated all erratas they could find. Shachar
_______________________________________________ Mutopia-discuss mailing list Mutopia-discuss@mutopiaproject.org http://lists.bcn.mythic-beasts.com/mailman/listinfo/mutopia-discuss
