Thread - Selections from the 1725 AM Bach Notebook, Bärenreiter ed.

Hello! Thanks for looking at my file and catching these issues. It's helpful to know that even when content is promotional, we'd want to remove it. I've uploaded a new version of the file without the last two pages.

I wasn't sure if the editorial additions warranted removal, as they didn't strike me as the kind of thing a publisher would sue over. The added text (in italics) that I noticed was bar numbers, author names, sometimes the name of something implied elsewhere in the text, and the addition of "Fine" and "al Fine" and similar phrases around repeats. The added slur markings that I noticed were things like slurs where the notebook has some phrases but has omitted markings in similar contexts.

You can see examples of all these kinds of text in the pages numbered 7 and 8 (number 6 in the collection). I also noticed an added tie in the last system of number 11. If you think these markings warrant removal, I can edit the submission further at some point.

The preface mentions other editorial additions being marked by narrower or smaller engraving, so I put that in the Misc Notes section, but it's not obvious to me what other marks might be editorial.

Great, thanks! Things like catalogues I don't think would qualify for copyright, because it's pure information; but I think it's best practice not to include any more of the publisher's information than is absolutely necessary. As I said above, I didn't find anything alarming in this scan - things like bar numbers certainly would not rise to the level of creativity required for copyright; and as I understand it, Bärenreiter's practice is to not include anything which cannot be found in some manuscript - so where fine has been included (in italics), it will be because it is in one source but not another. So those wouldn't be copyright either. Looks like Sallen tagged the file already, so you're all good now.