Editor's Workbench

By Esther Criscuola de Laix

Editions of operas, operettas, oratorios, masques, musical theater pieces, and other dramatic or semidramatic pieces include a number of elements unique to dramatic music, from act and scene labeling to stage directions. This post offers guidelines on how to format and present these elements within a critical edition.

By Esther Criscuola de Laix

The phrase musica ficta (literally, “fictitious music,” “false music”) comes up in almost every critical edition of medieval or renaissance music ever published. Originally, the term referred to notes that did not fit within the hexachordal system devised by Guido d’Arezzo in the eleventh century and used as the standard music-theoretical system in Western Europe for almost six centuries following. However, when editors of medieval and early modern music use this term, it is specifically to refer to the means and practices of translating into notation the altered pitches that were not expressly notated in written music—the ones early performers would have applied on their own initiative, but which might not automatically occur to modern performers. This article provides a summary of A-R’s house style and recommended practices for notating musica ficta.

By Alex Widstrand

In previous UnderScore posts we have dealt with the broad topic of accidentals, both in terms of tailoring the policy governing accidental usage to the needs of a particular source and more generally how to balance form and function in accidental application. This third installment focuses on cautionary (or “courtesy”) accidentals: those pitch inflections not strictly necessary by standard notation conventions, but that are nonetheless useful in dispelling ambiguity. Since the question of what is or is not musically ambiguous is quite subjective, this post, while by no means exhaustive, offers broad guidance on best practices for deploying cautionary accidentals in a critical edition.

By Alexander Dean

A “critical” edition is concerned with faithfulness to a source, and its authenticity, along with the probity of the editors involved, is bound to an understanding that the source material has been adequately and conscientiously accounted for. But any source will present elements that fall into a gray area, not at once sliding into their place in even the most carefully constructed pre-transcription editorial methodology. Prime among these are layout-specific elements: those numbers, directives, and graphical notations that serve in manuscripts and early music prints to guide readers and performers safely from one page to the next. Since, in the translation to a modern edition, the layout will necessarily change, one might be tempted to dismiss any such marking out of hand, along with the source page numbers and other obvious candidates for tacit removal. While this is not a bad rule of thumb, at least to start out, each type of notation will need to be evaluated on its own.

By David C. Birchler

Performance parts are often overlooked or placed last in a list of sources. It is understandable that an extant autograph score is considered to be the primary source for a symphony, concerto, mass, or opera; or that a copyist’s score or published score, particularly one prepared under the composer’s supervision, would be chosen as primary source if the autograph is lost or presents an earlier or indeed superseded version of the work. But parts have a strength of their own in that they are specifically tailored to meeting the needs of individual players for the realization of the work in performance. Taking careful account of available source parts as you are preparing your edition will often provide details of notation that are only implied in the source score and make your job that much easier.

By Esther Criscuola de Laix

What are critical notes? Well, many of our editions say that “critical notes describe rejected source readings” or “differences between the source and the edition” that are not otherwise covered by the editorial methods. It sounds straightforward enough. Yet many volume editors find this to be one of the most fiddly and confusing parts of the editing process. So, here are some dos and don’ts to help dispel the confusion.

By Esther Criscuola de Laix

Congratulations, you’ve got your A-R contract in hand! This means you are probably working busily away at one or more portions of your text apparatus as outlined in our guidelines for Manuscript and Disk Preparation: table of contents, acknowledgments, introduction, critical report, and, if applicable, tables, captions, and a “Texts and Translations” section. Here are a few simple tips for using your word processor to prepare a clean, readable text apparatus that will be a joy to work with for both editor and typesetter.

By Alexander Dean

A further investigation into accidentals in modern editions of early music, this post deals with the challenges presented by various sources, and how the editor might go about choosing from the available options.

By Pamela Whitcomb

Developing an editorial policy for accidentals can be tricky business, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Converting from archaic conventions to modern ones often means prioritizing either form or function: form-based approaches favor editorial transparency, while function-based approaches prioritize clarity of content. 

By Alexander Dean

Dr. Andrew Levin’s edition of a viola concerto by a certain Joseph Schubert presented a unique editorial challenge: how to identify and account for the various versions of the piece evident in the surviving performance parts, and how and whether to incorporate the overlapping manuscript markings, especially in the solo viola part. In this case, the additions to the solo part were probably made by the performer, and the performer may have been Schubert himself.

Resolving these questions meant delving into the heart of what makes a critical edition worthwhile. What are the responsibilities of the editor, and what are the opportunities afforded by a source situation such as this? How much can be notated in the score, and what should be relegated to the critical commentary? And for what is in the score, is there a clear way to set off different layers of notation without sacrificing clarity and readability?