> Karl Hammar wrote > > Till: > >> 8.5 Transcription of ancient music > > > > Why not call it "Editing" or "Making an edition", but transcription is > > also fine. > > I think we'll stick with "Transcription" - it seems closer to the action > being performed by those working with ancient music, who usually > want to preserve the original as faithfully as possible, rather than > editing it.
Ohh, I might have misunderstood the word (transcription) but I thought it ment converting to modern notation. Also a "critical edition" is to preserve the original (or rather the manuscripts, the sources, the original meaning the thing in the composers head) as faithfully as possible with comments about dubious places, differences between manuscripts, etc (but usually still in modern notation) and transcription is not that strict. So, there is two differnt things here, 1, notation imitating historic sources visually in some way (which also apply to the barock to the romantic period, e.g. the 1900th cent. 4th rest) 2, making it in modern notation In both cases you could want to add some notes or explanations, this note should be a fis even if it isn't in the source, ... -- editorial markings. But ok, lets stick with transcription. > >> 5.2 Incipits and Mensurstriche-layout > > > > Theese are different beasts, should they not be in seperate sections. > > I'm out of my depth here. Anyone else have an opinion? > I'm quite happy to make this into two sections if there is > something different to write about each of them. The incipit is an pre part showing the clefs, mensuration signs, the first few notes etc. so we can get a fealing of the transcriptions source, but still read on in modern notation. Mensurstriche is a way to include (or a substitute for) "bar lines" for sources that didn't contain them, but without splitting the notes and/or rests that are "syncopated" over the bar lines the editor wants. > >> 5.4 Musica ficta > >> 5.4.1 Suggested accidentals (new) (2.8.4) > > This has already been changed to just > > 5.4 Musica ficta accidentals > (containing just the current text from 2.8.4) > > > Instead of Musica ficta, which are notes not in the regular hexachords, > > I suggests a section for editorial markings. Which includes suggested > > accidentals, slurs, different rhythmic (like french barock) > > interpretation. > > Happy to add Editorial markings for ancient music as an additional > section, incorporating 5.4, if someone volunteers to send me suitable > text for it, but I can't write this stuff myself :( I would be happy to help, but I'm kind of busy. Please hand me something to work on in that case. Regards, /Karl _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
