Value of original scores or facsimiles?

[JPRitchie]

Hello Piano forum,

   I've recently picked up again an interest in music and am unfamiliar with current practices. Also this is a little bit of a cross post with the current "Interpretation" thread (https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,9964.0.html) , but I hope justified because of the wider scope.

   What's really sparked my question is the effort I've needed to exert to find them - even for relatively popular pieces. Some examples: Pachelbel's Canon in D probably wasn't written for piano since the piano didn't come into use until well after his death in 1706. If that's true, who did the original transcription for piano ?  Also, for Mozart's K331 (with Rondo alla Turca) only a single page of the autograph exists, because it was torn apart and sold piece-wise after M.'s death. Henle has a Urtext version, but even here there is some question as to whether the opening (and analogous repeats) are four sixteenths or a grace, followed by an eighth and two sixteenths ? Finally, pedalling - Chopin's Op 28 No. 20 from the 1839 Paris edition shows only a single event in the last two measures, and pedaling was notated elsewhere in it, in No. 7, for example, quite extensively. The modern piano is a different instrument from what Chopin had, but wouldn't it seem clear that Chopin intended something noticeably different at the end? Given that these works are so well known and the product of exceptional composers, any interpretion of them might start with an original - some of which are surrounded by controversy. But, are there standard practices about this ? In cases where I've looked, there are significant differences between available scores and verified originals.

Regards,
Jim Ritchie

[Glyptodont]

As for Pachelbel's Canon In D, it was for a chamber orchestra originally, wasn't it?

At any rate, this issue came up some weeks ago in one of the piano forums.  Where is the TRUE version of the Canon in D?   Actually, when the Canon is written for solo piano, it is a transcription and there is no standard.

I have sort of collected them, and have about 5 transcriptions.  Some are not even in the key of D.  One is in G, and one is in C.

They are in varied levels of difficulty.

One of them, that I most detest, is really variations on the Canon in D.  No trace of the original melodic line exists.  The composer just uses the chord progression as a "trip" to do his own thing.

The George Winston version appears to be thought of as quite excellent, but I -- alas-- don't have this particular version.

Lots of luck.  Good question --

[JPRitchie]

Glyptodont, yes, the more I look at original scores, the more evident those subsequent various "trips" become. It's also possibly hazardous to performers if the re-arranger asserts a copyright on a popular composition. If I find anything about the Canon, I'll update this thread.
jpr