The origin of the attempt to distinguish early from modern music and to establish the canons of
performance practice for each lies in the eighteenth century. In the first half of that century, when
Telemann and Bach ran the collegium musicum in Leipzig, Germany, they performed their own and other
modern music. In the German universities of the early twentieth century, however, the reconstituted
collegium musicum devoted itself to performing music from the centuries before the beginning of the
"standard repertory," by which was understood music from before the time of Bach and Handel. Alongside
this modern collegium musicum, German musicologists developed the historical sub-discipline known as
"performance practice," which included the deciphering of obsolete musical notation and its transcription
into modern notation, the study of obsolete instruments, and the re-establishment of lost oral traditions
associated with those forgotten repertories. The cutoff date for this study was understood to be around
1 750, the year of Bach's death, since the music of Bach, Handel, Telemann and their contemporaries did
call for obsolete instruments and voices and unannotated performing traditions-for instance, the
spontaneous realization of vocal and instrumental melodic ornamentation. Furthermore, with a few
exceptions, late baroque music had ceased to be performed for nearly a century, and the orally
transmitted performing traditions associated with it were forgotten as a result. In contrast, the notation in
the music of Haydn and Mozart from the second half of the eighteenth century was more complete than in
the earlier styles, and the instruments seemed familiar, so no "special" knowledge appeared necessary.
Also, the music of Haydn and Mozart, having never ceased to be performed, had maintained some kind of
oral tradition of performance practice. Beginning around 1960, however, early-music performers began to
encroach upon the music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. Why? Scholars studying performance
practice had discovered that the living oral traditions associated with the Viennese classics frequently
could not be traced to the eighteenth century and that there were nearly as many performance mysteries
to solve for music after 1750 as for earlier repertories. Furthermore, more and more young singers and
instrumentalists became attracted to early music, and as many of them graduated from student- amateur
to professional status, the technical level of early-music performances took a giant leap forward. As
professional early-music groups, building on these developments, expanded their repertories to include
later music, the mainstream protested vehemently. The differences between the two camps extended
beyond the question of which instruments to use to the more critical matter of style and delivery. At the
heart of their disagreement is whether historical knowledge about performing traditions is a prerequisite
for proper interpretation of music or whether it merely creates an obstacle to inspired musical tradition.
It can be inferred from the passage that the "standard repertory" mentioned in line 15 might have included
music that was written
- A. before the time of Handel
- B. during the early twentieth century
- C. by the performance-practice composers
- D. to be played using obsolete instruments
- E. before 1700
Answer: D
Explanation: Only visible for Actual4Labs members. You can sign-up / login (it's free).