At 03:07 15-05-16, Andrew Bernard wrote:

 >But as to preference of personal kind, why is somebody preferring to
 >hear the notated pitches but not the rest of the notation?

This is quite indefensible but unfortunately very 
common.  For instance, the first thing that 
modern orchestral string players do with a new 
set of parts -- even if they contain explicit 
instructions by a master orchestrator like Mahler 
-- is change the bowings to how they think they should be.

 >Pretty soon, if you
 >insist on the modern conception of the historical harpsichord for the
 >work, you will be wanting baroque oboes as well, and baroque strings.

Actually, in France, in 1925 the flute, oboe and 
clarinet were different from today.  The strings 
were using gut, and the pitch was somewhere 
around 435.  Early performances in Barcelona, NY 
and Boston, were also different from each other 
in this respect, the only common factor being Landowska and her Pleyel.

 >As to your comment about the OP’s question not being addressed, I
 >did reply objectively that requiring an LP and a good modern
 >harpsichord narrows the time frame for available recordings to
 >something very narrow, as the overlap here is not large, and you may
 >be quite unlikely to find anything.

There is such a recording; but the LP is also an 
anachronism. In 1926, 78s were all the go: US 
Columbia Set X-9 from 1926 with Falla playing the 
harpsichord. See: 
http://www.popsike.com/US-COLUMBIA-SET-X9-DE-FALLA-PLAYS-HIS-HARPSICHORD-CONCERTO-1926/262064431865.html

David

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Note:  opinions  expressed on HPSCHD-L are those of the  individual con-
tributors and not necessarily  those of the list owners  nor of the Uni-
versity of Iowa.  For a brief  summary of list  commands, send mail to
[log in to unmask]  saying  HELP .
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::