John Smyth wrote:

>O.K.  all of you philosophers out there; let the ex-Middle School Music
>teacher from California silence you all: The score will always be an
>approximation of the performance, and not vice versa.
>
>My proof? It exists in computer programs that translate keyboard playing
>into musical notation.  By necessity, the program offers the option of
>*rounding off* the just-performed piece to the nearest 16th note.
>
>Since the composer writes from a performance in his (or her--California
>upbringing), head the same inevitable rounding-off takes place.  The
>conceptual moment of a piece occurs in the head with or without the aid
>of an instrument *before* the score.
>
>Until others have real-time access to our musical thoughts, the score will
>always be an approximation.

This makes a confusion between "the score is a literally description of
notes" - that is like midi a pitch/duration/dynamics code - and "the score
encodes music".  When one learns how to play a great deal of the challenge
of going from "typing notes" to "performing" is learning what the score
acutally says...

Stirling Newberry