Sam Brown wrote:

>I would like to know some different thoughts on the various editions
>of Mozart's Requiem...Do you feel that one edition (Sussmayer, Maunder,
>etc.) is better than the others?  I am specifically comparing the
>traditional Sussmayer to the more recent Maunder (in which he rewrites
>and re-orchestrates the Sussmayer movements) and would like to know some
>of your opinions...

I've dealt with this issue myself.  I come down on Sussmayr's side, for
various reasons.  The two chief ones are that the style was "natural"
to him and that he's the only editor actually to have talked with Mozart
himself.

Supposedly, there are infelicities (even downright incompetence) in
Sussmayr's completion.  However, Sussmayr is, as far as I know, never
done "straight" these days.  Furthermore, there are many places in the
Requiem by Sussmayr in my poor opinion as good as those by Mozart.

Maunder (and other modern reconstructors) say essentially one of the
following:

* I don't like this.  Therefore Mozart couldn't have written it.  I'll
write something I do like instead.

* Most 18th-century works do something other than what's done here.
The statistical probability is that Mozart wouldn't have done it this
way.  On the other hand, there's plenty in the Requiem you won't find
in 18th-century sacred works (other than ones by Mozart), and one of the
things geniuses do is surprise us with new approaches to the same old
thing.

Steve Schwartz