Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Wed, 17 May 2000 03:11:27 +0200 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Ian Crisp wrote a very funny response to my post:
>From me, same answer as before. If you think it's good to do it that way,
>go right ahead. Just put a note in the concert programme (or wherever)
>that the repeat is not as written. And play it the original way now and
>again, just to see if you've changed your mind.
>
>It is barely possible that other listmembers may disagree.
Actually, in reality, I must apologize, my post was intended as a
joke. I wouldn't really repeat the section, much as I would like to.
As Joel points out, it would be unusual, and though the coda is a simple
restatement of the exposition with no new material, WAM wrote no repeat so,
as much as I'd like to repeat it three or four times I guess we'll just
play it once. Then encore it!
I REALLY did not want to re-open this debate. It was more a statement of
how much I adore this music.
David Runnion
|
|
|