I like this quote from Piers Adam, the recorder player and leader of the Red Priest baroque music ensemble:It is important to remember that the idea of a performer separated from the creative process is unique to our age and culture, and would not have been recognised in Vivaldi's day; thus there is a paradox at the heart of the whole "authentic movement–the very act of re-creating some hypothetical past performance is in itself "inauthentic." ....Surely if music is to remain a living art then the concept of performer as arranger/co-composer must be revived.http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/music/0306/classical/debate.htmWhen I perform other composer's works, I want to put my own personal stamp on it. I am singularly not interested in acting as if my relationship to a composer is that of a ventriloquist's dummy. I base my interpretation on several factors:1) an examination of the musical phrases, especially in seeking what passages to bring out and what notes to emphasize. In chamber music, composers do not typically mark which is the main line and which, the subsidiary. It is the performer's task to figure this out. While orchestra conductors spend a lot of time working these distinctions out, unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the practice of chamber musicians. The audience is presented with a bland running together of lines. This lack of clarity results in bland performances. Again, this is in marked contrast to orchestral performances. A melody line must be played a little - or even a lot- louder than the other lines.3) Taking a closer look at notation. As Malcolm Bilson pointed out in his DVD on performance, a quarter note in Mozart is not always twice as long as an 8th note. Jazz musicians know this to be true. When you're playing a jazz arrangement - any arrangement - you have to decide which notes should be played short and which, full value. In Mozart, when there are running 8th in the right hand and a single quarter-note in the left, that quarter note should probably be sounded for just a half-beat so it matches the right-hand notes.Notation of triplets: Until World War II, triplets were not notated with much exactitude, and a dot following a note did not always indicate an exact addition of half the value of that note. Sometimes, a a pair of dotted 8ths followed by 16th note indicated what jazz musicians call swing 8ths: the first note is played with a rhythmic value of 2/3rds of the beat and the second note, 1/3 of the beat. In piano music another notational bugaboo occured with some frequency: one hand plays triplets while the other hand plays 8th notes. According to some interpretations, the 8th notes are "assimilated" to the triplet as swing 8ths, with the second 8th note lining up with the 3rd triplet. In the jazz world, music from the first part of the 20th century is likewise replete with similar conundrums about swing 8ths, but despite the notation - whether it is "even 8ths" or dotted notes, the correct rhythmic interpretation is nearly always swing 8ths.4) Experimenting with added dynamics. Composers don't mark in all the dynamics and rely on a performer to bring the music to life. Sometimes the composer's own dynamics aren't the best guide - especially when all the instruments in an ensemble have the same dynamics, but one line has to be brought out a little louder.5) Trying out different tempos. Tempo decisions are based partly on a historically informed opinion, but also on my comfort level. In playing dance suites, for example, I think it's important to stick to the tempo indicated by the dance. Some musicians like to play things as fast as possible, but fast tempos just don't do anything for me if they stifle my ability to bring out the articulation (always a little slow on a saxophone) or play with a wide dynamic range. I have found that in solo performance that making breaks between sections brings out phrasing. In group settings, I tend to prefer strict tempos - especially in a jazz context.6) Adding my own embellishments on the fly. Why not add ornaments - turns and mordents and glides - to notated music? It makes for a less rigid interpretation. This was the practice from Bach's time to Mozart, and it makes sense to alter repeated sections the second time around.Now that I've spent a couple of months reading about historically-informed performance practices, I have developed a strong notion of what I want to hear in chamber music. Too much chamber music is performed legato even when the composer has indicated staccato. Extra-fast tempos tend to mask the nuances, and extra-slow tempos quickly destroy momentum. I want to hear deeply nuanced pieces based on a thorough musical analysis. I want to hear contrasting dynamics to emphasize the counterpoint in a single line. I want to hear linch-pin notes given more emphasis. I want to hear variety on repeated sections. These are just a few of the items I look for. I'd like to say that I don't care what the results are as long as the performer is trying to make a unique performance. But this isn't how I feel in 2013 (I could change my mind!) I don't like music based on bad judgement, and I believe that there is sometimes a right and a wrong way to perform a particular piece of music. But I have a confession to make: I value my own musical judgement and aesthetic desires enough that I don't really care what people think about my recreating or recomposing the works of long-dead composers such as Mozart.