8

How do music editors indicate changes they've made to a score?

Sometimes an editor will make musically meaningful changes to a score, such as

  • Adding markings the editor believes were omitted by the composer or previous editors;
  • Modifying notes the editor believes were errors or omissions from previous editions;
  • Including markings where there are multiple possibilities based on earlier editions and where a definitive answer is not available;
  • The editor's interpretive opinion.

Such markings can lead to confusion and, thus, to questions here on SE Music Practice and Theory. The purpose of (the answers to) this question is to provide a hub linkage point for questions that stem from editorial score emendations.

Related questions

Aaron
  • 70,616
  • 10
  • 97
  • 243
  • 2
    I think it varies by publisher. Some don’t even give any clues to the changes that have made, which are sometimes significant. – Todd Wilcox Sep 05 '20 at 03:45
  • 1
    @ToddWilcox Maybe I should rephrase. "How do *responsible* music editors ..." :-) – Aaron Sep 05 '20 at 05:23
  • Is the intention to have one answer per method of indication? – texdr.aft Nov 04 '20 at 20:38
  • @texdr.aft Not my intention per se, but that might be a nice way to organize things. Maybe one answer per related set of editorialisms? Some sort of balance between one super long answer and a tsunami of short answers. – Aaron Nov 05 '20 at 05:07
  • I always remember a member of a quite well known string quartet saying to me: "Its the editors job to change what the composer wrote." Gave me a new view on different editions of music. – JimM Feb 18 '21 at 12:20
  • For a Q&A forum isn't this really off topic? IA question about a _actual, particular_ editorial change is answerable, but this question is open ended. A good edition general has explanatory notes in a preface, various footnotes, and things like ossia staff. – Michael Curtis Feb 18 '21 at 16:48
  • How can a composer omit a marking from a piece? – phoog Feb 19 '21 at 02:12
  • @phoog By accident. It happens occasionally in older scores that had to be hand copied or in print editions that were made cheaply. – Aaron Feb 19 '21 at 02:18
  • Well omissions in a print edition aren't omissions by the composer, and if the composer didn't put the mark in the handwritten score then the mark isn't properly part of the piece is it? – phoog Feb 19 '21 at 04:38
  • @phoog My post doesn't say omissions by the composer; it says "previous editions". Historical editions are sometimes unreliable but also sometimes the only extant copies of what a composer wrote. Urtext editions often have to rely on these or hand-copied sources, often which contradict each other, to extrapolate a composer's intentions. A common situation is two otherwise identical passages in which the composer or an editor omitted a dynamic, pedal, or articulation marking from one passage or the other. The source of the omission is sometimes the composers. They are not infallable. – Aaron Feb 19 '21 at 04:49
  • It says "omitted by the composer or previous editors." It's also possible that dynamic, pedal, or other marks were added by someone other than the composer. But the real problem is in the idea that there is only one correct canonical form of a piece. If the composer writes it out differently at two different times then there are two correct versions of the piece. Why is one that has more markings to be preferred over one that has fewer? – phoog Feb 19 '21 at 04:50
  • @phoog Yes, multiple versions are also a problem. That's why good editors indicate places where they believe a marking may have been omitted. Often it's unclear whether it's a mistake or a change. Academics make careers trying to determine which, and often footnotes in the edition will specify the sources and reasons for including or excluding some marking. And my mistake for forgetting about including "composers". This conversation has clearly gone beyond just clarifying the post. You can ping me in chat if need be. – Aaron Feb 19 '21 at 05:00

1 Answers1

3

Many editors do not mark their emendations; often one must compare a given text with an "urtext" or "original edition" (not necessarily the same) or even a facsimile of the composer's notebook.

In "good" editorial work, the editor's changes may be marked (an accidental enclosed in brackets rather than parentheses) or a dotted line or a different font from the main text. Different colors are nice but not always feasible. If the editor thinks the first edition is wrong (not uncommon), some explanation should be given.

Sometimes, the editor will have a preface (or foreword or author's note) explaining the procedures.

To some extent, you tread the minefield alone. If making a performance score for yourself, you can compare several editions as pointed out above. With modern computer software, you can prepare your own edition any way you wish. I would probably annotate my own annotations and try to highlight changes by color (perhaps blue or grey for text so as not to interfere with reading.)

ttw
  • 24,207
  • 1
  • 31
  • 76