Can an "authentic" musical performance be a forgery?

Jaimie asked "When discussing music, sticking as close to the original work as possible is key to an "authentic" performance, where as with more "physical" art (painting, sculpture, etc.) this can be considered a forgery. Does this mean that authentic performances could be forgeries?"

Before I address this question, I would like to once again bring in the distinction of the creative and performance arts. With the creative arts, it is not the process itself that is art, but the final product. With a performance, the process is just as much part of the art as the finished piece. I would go so far to argue that the score of a piece of music, the script for a play, etc, is an entirely separate piece of art from the actual performance of the song or play, as the musicians and actors bring as much vitality and creativity to the performance as the composers and playwrights brought to the production of the score or script.

Next, the question of a forgery must be addressed. By definition, a forgery is an object, a copy of another object produced with intent to deceive, to pass off the forgery as one's own, or as something genuine, as with money or art.

Given this definition, a performance cannot be a forgery. A performance is not an object -- it is an interpretation of the object. The score from which a piece of music is played could certainly be a forgery, but the performance itself would not be, even if the musician claimed to have written the piece. The score would certainly be a forgery, but the performance would not be.

To end with a question: Is there any link between music and morality, as Scruton suggested in "The Decline of Musical Culture?"