This presentation examines notation as a locus of power and, potentially, oppression. Part of my Doctoral Artistic Research on ""imperfection in music as a fundamental compositional and performative dimension"", it identifies the musical score as occupying a privileged position in Western concert music tradition – one in which perfectionist reminiscences abound, such as the idea of a ""perfect execution"", the authority of the composer over the performer, and the concept of a work of art. The score is a stable element, but an actual performance is unstable: it mistranslates the score, deviating into uniqueness. This could be embraced as a positive, creative relationship. Nonetheless, much of the vocabulary employed in classical performance does the contrary, as if a direct and perfect translation of the score could exist and should be pursued. 

Engaging with these questions in a practice-based artistic research allows these tacit assumptions to emerge. Words and concepts that could be easily dismissed in a theoretical approach still appear in practice, as operating reminiscences in everyday music-makings. Firmly anchored in the epistemic validity of direct knowledge characteristic of artistic research,  the study revolves around the creation of two new pieces: ""Becoming – four études and an Aria"" for solo oboe (with Angela Calvo Rios), and ""Études para Quijote"", for solo harp (with Rahel Schweizer). The discussion explores aspects of the composition and musical notation, records from the rehearsal process and concerts, conversation between the performers, the public and myself. This documentation reveals aspects intimate to the performers, such as frustration, evaluation by peers and public, and different attitudes towards different types of notation. This case study shows that, in order to explore musical imperfection as a positive dimension in musical creation, it is necessary to modify a fundamental ethical-aesthetical relationship with the score.