Wait, scores doesn’t always mean the same thing?
No, the traditions around interpreting scores can be radically different depending on context, and we don’t do a great job of making that clear to students.
We tend to treat the score as an encyclopedia of interpretation – all information for interpretation is contained therein. And that can certainly be true with regards to the great works of Classical and Romantic music.
But in jazz, there’s a lot that’s not on the page – from articulations to the way we measure eighth notes in swing. And there is freedom that I feel in interpreting the piece as a conductor, adding articulations, altering rhythms and even changing chords from what’s published. Doubly or triply so as a solo jazz interpreter.
In pop a cappella scores, I often include almost no dynamics. Is that because I think the interpretation should contain no dynamic contrast? Of course not; it’s that I don’t consider them necessary on the page to create an effective interpretation.
If I try to interpret a classical piece with the freedom of a jazz piece, I risk ending up with a mess. But if I interpret other scores with the reverence that I bring to a Classical score, I will end up with anodyne or even un-musical performances.