IMSLP talk:Categorization/Project Members/archive16



I note from the tagging page that the tag psalms should only be used for settings of psalms. There are a number of works entitled psalms whose relation to psalms at greatest - if that - is that they vary or are fantasiacal meditations on traditional psalm tones but purely instrumental ones, without human voices. Are these included in the sense meant of "settings" by common consensus? In the case of Psalm 100 by William Vincent Wallace, a piano work (variations, I think, though described as a "transcription" in a rather 19th-century way) I did try to make some case in the history-comment-threads that this needed only- and at most- pieces for tags, but there seems to be some disagreement. The tagging page (I mean IMSLP:Tagging) and the descriptions on the individual category pages need rationalization (with each other) in general... Eric 06:55, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I suppose instrumental psalms are possible (we’ve already seen an instrumental Credo). If the work type is a motet that uses text from the psalms, it may not meet the liturgical requirements for it to be a psalm setting, which usually demand the whole psalm text in question be set... but that doesn’t necessarily stop composers from using excerpts and giving the result the name of the whole, and its probably not appropriate for us to judge the propriety of the work. Philip @ © talk 07:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I have used psalms in only two types of cases: where it is in the title of the work (instrumental works would have to have the word psalm in the title), and where there is no taggable word in the title, but Psalm XX:X is listed under the librettist or otherwise indicated as text. This was as per Davydov's advice, and also to look for ways of cutting the number of generic tags down. Where a title was motet, I used that as a tag, even where the text was psalm-based. Steltz 07:23, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Whistling, Handbuch der musikalischen literature

Lists of repertoire, divided into instrumental works, vocal works, etc. "Catalog" seems the closest tag to me, but I also need to download on Monday and see if it is annotated. Any other ideas for a tag? Steltz 07:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

tagging list bold vs. normal

I added catalogs and publishers catalogs to the list, since they are already in use. What is the difference between the bold ones and normal ones? Steltz 07:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The bold ones are the primary (i.e., actually-used) forms of the tags, while the non-bolded ones are alternative languages and other forms of tags that should not actually be used, but simply refer to the primary form. Cheers, KGill talk email 20:44, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

temple blocks

We have a study for this instrument -- it is percussion, but before its use in orchestral music, its origins were in Japanese temples. Is it worth creating a tag, and if so, under ethnic or orchestra.? Steltz 10:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I would say that it should go under the 'percussion' section, and could potentially be tagged 'tblk' - unless we want to create a tag for all types of wood blocks? KGill talk email 20:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
I would think a tag for all blocks might be best -- maybe 'wblk'. Steltz 21:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
OK then, I'll add 'wblk' to IMSLP:Tagging - feel free to tag any page with it. Cheers, KGill talk email 22:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


Pencil drawing of Carl Maria von Weber by Eduard Morike. Do we have a tag for images? I don't see one on the list. Steltz 10:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

This raises the question of whether we should actually have work pages for images in the first place. They aren't musical works or books about music, so it's debatable whether they should even be tagged at all, in my opinion. Perhaps the image should just be linked to from some page that's related to Weber? KGill talk email 20:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
People do use images in research -- it's called iconography -- and there might be an argument for allowing them if this is to be a serious research library. I would be interested to hear other opinions. Steltz 08:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I took it from Tanzbüchlein CMV Weber. As I splitted that publication into different work pages I didn't know where to put it. I could ad it to the first file from that book, but who would find it there? Otherwise: I found it a bit strange when I created that work page. There are so many paitings of musicians and the best place for them are the Composer Categories. --Ralph Theo Misch 09:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
If they are to be used in research, then they need to be searchable, so it wouldn't really help to have them inside other files. I'm wondering if everybody thinks generally we should create a tag and make room for them? Steltz 15:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

4vv vs instruments

Martin Grayson does an awful lot of typesetting. As an example, Tallis' Purge Me O Lord has the words, also on the left designations for viols, and then another file for recorders. Grove lists this under "English Anthems and Motet adaptations", with an alternate version (different words) under "Secular partsongs". Would this make the original vocal only? In which case the recorder version at least would need to go under an "Arrangements and transcriptions" hierarchy. Also, Grove just says "4vv", whereas the modern typeset has clefs that would indicate SAAB (though the viol designations for the two with alto clef say "tenor viol"). Leave as "4vv" or put in voice types? Steltz 08:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Most likely the original is vocal only; I would recommend sticking with the 4vv description rather than guess based on the arrangements done by Grayson (which may have involved a certain amount of transposition to account for the instruments' ranges, one never knows). Cheers, KGill talk email 22:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for not getting to this sooner – I’ve mostly been out of town over the weekend and had other work waiting when I got back. Most of Tallis’ vocal music exists in multiple manuscript sources, sometimes as a set of partbooks, sometimes with organ accompaniment, and there is usually a large range of discrepancies between different sources. Grayson presumably has used one specific source. For most of the period we tend to mark the voices only as the organ is rarely an independent part of the music, unlike seconda prattica usage of continuo, where it can have a life of its own; organ is a performance option for the repertoire but many performers aspire to the somewhat anachronistic a cappella ideal. Purge me, O Lord is thus very probably sop 2alt bass, though I’d also aver that the 2nd alto is probably sufficiently low to be a tenor unhelpfully marked with an alto clef. It’s also very far from being a secular partsong! Cheers Philip @ © talk 02:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Next question -- there are canzoni that were legitimately originally done either vocally or instrumentally. Does that ever apply to Tallis, or were his works only vocal, i.e. any instrumental version to be treated as an arrangement? Steltz 15:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I don’t think it applies to Tallis – is œuvre is a little less wide-ranging than some of his contemporaries (even with Spem in alium). But as mentioned, almost all of his works exist in vocal forms primarily – instrumental forms only would be very much secondary adaptations (exactly as with Grayson’s arrangement). Philip @ © talk 03:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I think Tallis wrote some instrumental music as well but would have to check. (I may be thinking of another composer of the same period about whom I was surprised to learn he may also have written instrumental music or maybe it was someone's arrangements etc etc etc ... ... etc.etc., ...- maybe Lassus...) (*wonders if this rather out of date but very interesting indeed book I have on Tudor chamber music may still shine some light...) Eric 04:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Eric, Tallis most definitely did write instrumental music (have a look through the 40-odd In nomines we have!) – but it isn’t the subject of discussion, which is instrumental alternatives of the well-established vocal works. Philip @ © talk 05:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Right, then, 4vv it is, with Martin's arrangements done as such. Steltz 20:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)


I'm finding a lot of pages where the translator is in the correct position in the specific edition, but either the language isn't included, or it's there, but doesn't show at the bottom of the page, in other words the work won't come up on a list of the translated language. Can someone please remind me how this is supposed to work so I can correct these as I find them? Steltz 08:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, there is no technical feature in place at the moment that puts a page into a category based on a translated language - one has to put it in the tag itself. However, this might be an interesting feature request to put to Feldmahler... KGill talk email 22:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Since the tags are supposed to be for the original version only, then from a strict standpoint, any language translation shouldn't be dealt with there, unless it is completely unfeasible to work it into a different feature. Steltz 15:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

satires and parodies

Benedetto Marcello's Il teatro mondo is a satire, not a serious piece of history, and according to Grove, it lampooned Vivaldi among others. Can it be tagged music history? I have put the Grove quote in so it's clear it is satire, but would there be any other ideas for it? Steltz 13:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


New tag for solfeggi, or just use 'studies' for now? I'm putting up some by Leonardo Leo from SLUB Dresden, and I'm sure there are more. See Northwestern University's work. --Fynnjamin 10:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

A while ago I added this to a list of proposed tags for discussion. We can either leave it untagged for the moment until we start discussing the list in general, or deal with it now. The problem with "solfeggi" is it isn't in the MLA list, which is what our tagging list comes from, though the preface to that list discusses guidelines in determining the status of ambiguous terms, i.e. whether they might qualify for a genre label. And we have added a few tags that aren't on the MLA list by applying those types of guidelines. The definition for solfeggio seems to be exclusively vocal (and textless), and it's an exercise to develop agility, frequently on scales. Problems in applying it to instrumental works are that they aren't vocal, frequently include a lot more than just scales, and also may not all be intended exclusively as exercises -- CPE Bach's at least has been done in concerts. We need to see if there are enough to justify giving it a tag of its own, and for all new tags, it will help if there are definable characteristics for it. Currently we have 3 with titles solfeggi or solfegietto: CPE Bach, Quantz, Zinck. If we decide not to give it its own tag, it will have to be either "exercises" or "pieces".Steltz 20:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

female voices, fvv?

Brahms has written canons for female voices, but Grausam erweiset sich Amor, WoO24, Mir lachelt kein Fruhling, WoO25, zu Rauch WoO30, Tone lindernder Klang (and perhaps others) are listed by Grove as 4vv, which isn't necessarily choir. In the meantime I've tagged it 4vv, and users will have to see from the page that it's female. Is there enough reason to consider a "fvv" and "mvv" tag for works that specify gender without necessarily specifying choral? [edit] Might need to change tagging, I've just seen that these are usually recorded as choral. Are they ever done with solo voices? [edit2] Sorry, some of these aren't for female choir, but I will have to re-tag to ch if the Grove indication vv also applies to choral as well as solo. Steltz 16:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Anything that is choral can in practice be sung OVPP (one voice per part), however that may not be the desired option from a historically-informed performance (HIP) viewpoint. While many works imply gender from voice types, few works actually specify it with absolute precision!
One more thing to point out: your citation of Grove illustrates a point of difference between their system of abbreviations and IMSLP’s: the use of vv on Grove unambiguously refers to choirs (massed voices) – if solo voices were indicated, it would be just v. Both abbreviations can use quantifying numbers, so 4v is four solo voices and 8vv is a choir in 8 parts. I suggested over a year ago that in this respect, IMSLP’s abbreviations were a point of confusion, but nothing came of my objection. Philip @ © talk 23:13, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
The part of me that likes consistency would like to see this fixed, the part of me that sees 24,000 file, of which a LARGE part are vocal is cringing. On the other hand, is the fact that we have thes "ch" tag enough to compensate? Steltz 16:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
We can live with the ambiguity for the time being. At present the choral music on IMSLP is tagged in four different ways (if it’s tagged at all, which admits a fifth category, untagged):
  1. With the “ch” tag but no indication of voicing
  2. With the “vv” tag but no indication of voicing
  3. With voicing indicated but no indication of “ch”
  4. With both “ch” and voicing, where appropriate
The intention was, when the “ch” tag was altered to take on extra duties (voicing), that gradually examples of 1–3 would be updated to the fourth type of tag, which include both aspects; 1–3 are essentially incomplete descriptive tags (but are still somewhat useful).
Tags of type 2 and 3 are treated as vocal music for soloists rather than choral music, but that only would seem to be a nuisance to users like Operalala, who was fairly insistent on wanting that as a separate musical fiefdom. There is some overlap but pieces like the Brahms originally cited are really choral works. Philip @ © talk 22:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

male alto

This is related to the last item. We now have an arrangement of the Battle Hymn of the Republic that specifies male alto. "malt" would be an obvious tag, but do we generally want to go in this direction and, if not, how to tag this? Steltz 16:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

If the composer has explicitly specified that s/he wants an alto with ovaries on the outside, then I suppose it should be tagged that way… but do we not already have a tag for countertenor? This would be the much preferred term, being a type of adult male singer that most often is emulating the range of the female contralto voice, but also can occasionally be found singing repertoire more suggestive of mezzos or sopranos. I can think of a number of works (including a few recent film scores) specifying solo countertenor or solo treble (gender unspecified) expressly for the different vocal timbre from an everyday soprano/mezzo/contralto vocalist.
The default before the 20th century is that generally composers were not so picky as to the gender of their performers, or the use of a particular uncommon voice type as an “effect”. (Even unusual work types such as virtuoso arias written for castrato singers could be attempted by coloratura sopranos, and no one is suggesting bringing back castratos in the pursuance of “historical accuracy”.) I dread the day that we begin get the 20th century works which involve vocalists/choirs inhaling helium gas in order to change the timbre of their vocal tracts! Philip @ © talk 23:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
(delicious :)) --Ralph Theo Misch 23:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC))

equal voices, but choir

Kowalewski's Bóg się rodzi (God is Born) is a sacred chorus for 3 equal voices. By definition, this probably won't be mixed (though it could be if a choir has both male and female altos), but isn't specifically male or female either. All three tags "ch" "mch" and "fch" are slightly misleading. Any other ideas? Steltz 16:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Does Kowalewski explicitly rule out octave doubling between male and female voices? (I have encountered rehearsal pianists seemingly unaware that when men and women sing “in unison” it usually involves a gap of an octave.)
If there is no specification of voice type, try “ch 3vv” on as a tag – we already have similar tags for unusual repertoire that specify numbers of parts rather than voicing.


I would like to add this as a subcategory of opera, as it is not that uncommon. Currently, we have Schoenberg's Erwartung, as yet untagged. Die Gluckliche Hand, which is currently tagged as an opera, is also sometimes classified as a monodrama because, although it has a chorus, still only has one solo role. Grove classifies this one as a drama, though, not a monodrama. Comments? Steltz 16:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

We already have some unusual classifications of opera, so this seems fine. Assuming we may get some Poulenc scores in 2014, one of them might be Le Voix humaine… and even Berlioz’s Lélio is sometimes called a monodrama. Philip @ © talk 23:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


I'm trying to tag Holbrooke's List of Complete Works. Thematic catalog is recognized, as is publishers' catalog, but not plain catalog. This list isn't thematic, or from a single publisher, so I think it should just be a plain catalog. Was there a reason for only recognizing the sub-categories? Steltz 17:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

What about something that specifically denotes a list of works? The word 'catalog(ue)' is pretty vague without the proper context, which I imagine is the reason for not having just 'catalogs' as a tag. KGill talk email 02:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Caplet's Chants d'eglise

This specifies 3 of: children's voices OR female voices OR male voices. Does anyone know Caplet's Mass? It's what this came from (possible should have a page name change to the full mass), but I don't know whether the Sanctus, O Salutaris and Agnus Dei are meant to be choral or solo vocal. Steltz 08:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know it but it has been recorded a few times, including on CD (in 1991 eg with Stravinsky's). Hrm. But different recordings might take different solutions to that question, too (though... hrm. Program notes to such a recording, or a good scholarly book about Caplet or specifically his Messe, might illuminate. Answer in progress, apologies for not being done! Eric 14:11, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
If Caplet has specified the three performance options, then three tags are in order. In actual fact though, there are no less than four options for both the Mass (implied) and the Chants d’eglise:
  1. Voix d’enfants (cch)
  2. Voix de femmes (ch sop mez alt; fch – the female choir tag doesn’t currently allow qualification)
  3. Voix d’hommes (ch ten bar bass; mch – ditto the male choir tag)
  4. Possiblement: Voix d’hommes doublant les voix de femmes (ch sop mez alt ten bar bass)
As an afterthought, chorus is explicitly demanded, rather than solo voices, because each voice type is pluralised: soprani, contralti, tenori, etc.
And this is a 20th century work that explicitly demands the otherwise non-standard mezzo and baritone voices in a choral context.
The hymn O salutaris hostia is not part of the ordinary of the mass but is a commonly set communion text in combination with a mass, e.g. Berlioz’s Messe solennelle includes a setting. Interestingly all three “chants d’eglise” are reproduced a semi-tone lower than their equivalents in the mass (which does include O salutaris as a communion motet following the Agnus Dei). I feel the chants should be moved to the page for the mass and a categorised re-direct placed on the chants page. Cheers, Philip @ © talk 00:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Moving it makes sense, but now I'm trying to work out how to get the arrangements to do all four possibilities. Please look at:,_Andr%C3%A9) and see what you what you think. I'm not sure I like the layout. Steltz 16:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The proper way to fit multiple options into an arrangements subheading would be 'For Childrens Voices or Female Chorus or Male Chorus or Mixed Chorus' (in this case), which would have to be separately added to the arrangement tags. (There is ample precedent for this across the site, though admittedly it generates a rather awkwardly long line here.) Cheers, KGill talk email 01:26, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Becky, Kenny, in what way would these be arrangements? I can’t see any differences in the “chants” aside from changes stemming from the lower key. Philip @ © talk 02:49, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
I hadn't actually compared the file with the original work - sorry about that. You are correct that they are not really arrangements at all, just written in different keys from the original. I've changed the page again to reflect this. Cheers, KGill talk email 02:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
That looks better. Just for the future, though, I think the subheading of 'For Childrens Voices or Female Chorus or Male Chorus or Mixed Chorus' will make some of the categories not findable. For example, the mixed chorus option would have been nowhere near the rest of the mixed chorus works arrangements, and people will not know (or want) to look through the entire list of possibilities just to pick up one or two that they may have missed. And people generally won't think to look for anything else anyway -- I think there is a reasonable assumption that like arrangements will all be on the same list. I really think we need to change this approach somehow. Steltz 16:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

strictness of application

I know it's a good thing to apply the definitions in IMSLP:Tagging fairly strictly (though they don't quite agree with the definitions in the tag categories themselves all the time, but that's another subject, not what I want to ask about here) - still, if a composer is trying to, e.g., evoke the 16th-century canzonet in a 19th-century composition, but our category says composition of the 16th century, should 19th-century works entitled canzonet be tagged pieces since they were not composed in the 16th century - just as instrumental lieder can be tagged lieder but instrumental melodies (tag-er-wise) are flat out :) (because of the specifics of the rules)? (asking in seriousness despite light tone- and not about rationale of system, which is yet another topic :) ) Eric 14:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

instrumentation of orchestral pieces

I need to question some of the tagging of orchestra pieces that have small numbers of winds. Where there are, for example, 2 horns and strings, but the title is clearly "for small orchestra", if we tag the two horns separately they look like solo parts, when this is clearly not intended. Surely this needs to be tagged "orch"?

Agree. “orch” is the tag for these, unless (following your example) it were a double concerto for horns. Philip @ © talk 23:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

catalogs, part 2

Reviving this topic -- checking with the MLA's tagging system (though I can only find music types), it seems we created the publisher's catalogs tag ourselves, so we could do the same with "catalogs" as a generic, or any other word deemed suitable for a generic list that anyone can come up with. Suggestions? Steltz 07:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure we should create a tag that has such a vague definition? What I'm a little wary of is that people will start tagging every kind of catalogue as 'catalogs', even if there exists a more specific tag to be used in the appropriate situation. Perhaps it would be a better idea to create another modified incarnation for 'catalogs' that would fit the purpose discussed in the above topic? ('composers catalogs' or something like that) KGill talk email 20:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, we have "pieces", which is just about as vague as can be, but that's what generics are. In the Whistling case, it has many, many composers in it, so it can't be a composer's catalogue (though I think we might need that tag at some point). "Catalog" is defined as an itemized list or something arranged methodically, so it seems to me to be the best generic. As far as tagging everything a "catalog", it's kind of like "pieces". We know we will have a lot of them, but we can look at them and gradually find some groups that will warrant another tag, thereby reducing the generic list somewhat. Anyone else want to weigh in on this? Steltz 20:33, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Study for Rock Band

à la Quinn Mason. I'm not sure about a tag for rock band, since they can have different instrumentations. At the very least, we would need electric guitar (egtr), and drum set (dset?). Comments or other suggestions? Steltz 08:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, within a band, the instrumentation can change pretty rapidly (think Revolver, with keyboards, indian classical instruments, a string octet, drums, electric guitar and bass, magnetic tape, backwards guitar, etc.). It might be easier just to make some generic tag.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Bach, Johann Ludwig, Das ist meine freude

This is SATB + SATB. Would it be better to tag "2ch sop alt ten bass" or "ch 2sop 2alt 2ten 2bass"? Steltz 21:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The former tag would be taken as being only four vocal parts in total; the latter tag denotes a single undivided choir, not a piece for double choir. The tag we’ve used for double choir 8 voices is "2ch 2sop 2alt 2ten 2bass" – which admittedly doesn’t tell you which voices are in which choir (alternatively it could be SSAT – ATBB) but it does tell you how many of each voice type. Cheers Philip @ © talk 22:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Genre Categories: It's also a motet (Unsere Trübsal as well). --Ralph Theo Misch 23:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for that, will sort it out today. Steltz 06:56, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Sinfonie et Gagliarde (Rossi, Salamone)

Well, this work title is the result of a certain embarrassment. The pieces are all from the first two books. I hope soon to know which from which.
The instrumentation varies between 3 to 5. But if Rossi e.g. writes 5 and 3, he expected that the lutenist (lute player?) etc. plays the remaining parts. So what to do? --Ralph Theo Misch 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Update - meanwhile I know which piece is from which book. Will go ahead this night. --Ralph Theo Misch 10:38, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

King (Charles), 4 anthems

This has a Salve Regina, Alma Redemptoris, Regina Coeli and an Ave Regina. They have differing instrumentations/choir voicings, so I think there might be an argument for splitting them, especially if they wouldn't be intended to be performed together. This seems to be the case from the periods given, e.g. "From Advent until the Purification", which are all different. Can anyone tell me if this is indeed the case, and are there any other opinions on whether this page should be marked for file splitting like some of the other collections we have? Steltz 09:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Braunfels, Die Vogel

Grove describes this as a lyrisch-phantastisches spiel. The uploader listed the instrumentation as soloists, chorus, orchestra. Tag as opera? Steltz 21:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Hrm. (actually, according to Worldcat, "Die Vögel : ein lyrisch-phantastisches Spiel in zwei Aufzügen : op. 30" is the title, so Grove isn't putting anything there that isn't in the title. But if one could see the titlepage, the subtitle could add insight here. A magazine article implies that Bruno Walter (who premiered it in 1920, also the year it was published in vocal score and excerpted full score it seems) so referred to it, but that doesn't help. Will see if I can turn up anything strictly in line with our rules... Eric 00:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC) (the entry on Oper in the 1922 edition of the Musiklexikon - Alfred Einstein may have taken over from Hugo Riemann by that point- refers to it as an opera also, much closer in time and more definitely than the 1990 article aforementioned, but still don't know that Braunfels so referred to it, or did so on the score. Oh. it's PD-US, will go see myself assuming the cover has been scanned.)

Tonoli and issues if any of, well, composer "space"

I see that composer Giampietro Tonoli seems to have tagged a whole range of his own uploaded works improvisations. Do we make any exception for people tagging their own works (or is user Tonolig a member of the tagging team and I forgot to check- sorry!...)? Even if so, I assume we may follow rules and add tags where appropriate (e.g., adding "saltarellos" to an "improvisation" entitled Saltarello)? Eric 12:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Given that presumably at least one of his pieces was tagged by a librarian, I think that may imply Tonoli is able to tag all of the rest of his jazz pieces exactly the same as the first!
If you actually turn the attention of the Category Walker to his compositions, they are all tagged fairly similarly, and there are a few exceptions: firstly, for 3 pieces with the word Dance or Waltz in the pieces’ titles which (not surprisingly) are tagged as Dances (including the Waltz); secondly, a blues piece with Blues again in the title; thirdly, piece entitled Prelude blah blah … tagged as a Prelude; and the Saltarello.
If there’s one piece that’s oddly tagged, it’s Lo scrittoio del monco which is apparently Classical, not Modern.
In short, Tonolig perhaps should not be tagging anyone else’s pieces – but there’s probably not much wrong with what he’s doing for his own.
Cheers, Philip @ © talk 13:03, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

well- I tagged the prelude myself (and one of the Waltz- I did jump the gun, should have waited for response. Still, who did what is all in the history). Sorry about that... but yes, at least some of them were indeed ok'd by librarians (with some of his tags removed but others kept, I noticed.) You're quite right. Don't know if that means I should remove the tags I just added- suppose I should, then... will wait on a response this time though before putting foot in mouth. Eric 14:58, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Please elaborate, because I’m not sure I understand your reasoning. For what reason would you remove a functionally correct tag? Philip @ © talk 03:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Hrm, so phrased the question does answer itself...

Pad instruments

In Padstück, tbp 107, by Roberto Novegno I gather pad is for touchpad - is "syn" sufficient for the instrumentation part of the tag? Eric 00:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Request to become a new member

A little late in entering, but I have already obtained permission from Davydov to change tags in cases where there is an obvious typo, and also add obvious tags to pages. Would it be possible for me to be a librarian? I've read the guidelines and thoroughly understand the tagging system. Cheers, Lndlewis10 00:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Since Davydov is not here, I've given you permission. Welcome to the team :) --Feldmahler 00:58, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Welcome Nick! First up, please review all of the previous topics of discussion… for great justice! Philip @ © talk 02:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


Hrm. Used to tag these as pieces, but maybe they should go under wedding music? Eric 01:52, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I've added it to the new tags, though it isn't a new tag per se, but just adding something else in the list of pieces that use a given tag. Steltz 17:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


Is this a verset? As in 3 Introitus mit Versus by Christian Erbach. Steltz 17:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

No, the verse is part of the general scheme of the introit, so tag as "introits". (A very well-known introit with verse is in the requiem mass: the verse is "Te decet hymnus in Sion", and the text "Requiem aeternam" is sung both before and after the verse.) Philip @ © talk 22:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Done, thanks. Steltz 07:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Instructive Pieces for Piano (Müller, August Eberhard)

Erm, grey area. I would argue it should be tagged methods ; pf rather than pieces ; pf. After all, it is meant as a set of instructive pieces, Lndlewis10 20:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

A method generally has instructive text involved, so unless it has that, it really should be pieces. Many works are Grade 1 or 2 level and as such, they are instructive, but definitely not methods. Steltz 20:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, it does have some text, but I agree. I meant to say "study" for which there can be made a much larger case. Maybe not methods, but definitely not pieces ;) Lndlewis10 23:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I think pieces is correct -- as I said, many pieces at lower grade levels aren't studies per se but they are used instructionally. And it is in the title. :-)) Steltz 07:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

"Pieces" is in the title... But so is "instructive" :-) I'm not so sure I would call them lower level grade studies either. In fact, some of them are quite complex, Lndlewis10 13:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Remember that in tagging, we differentiate between nouns and adjectives in order to decide on the tag. By your logic, Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique would also be tagged a Fantasia. The level of the piece is perhaps not that relevant, and I didn't mean "lower" in any derogatory sense. When I was studying piano, I was assigned Chopin Preludes because they were excellent developmental pieces, i.e. instructive. But they are still Preludes and should be tagged a such, regardless of what piano teachers use them for. Just because a piece is used instructionally doesn't make it a study. Go by the nouns in the title. Steltz 08:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

"ch 4vv" ?

Is there a case for adding a tag such as this? I'm thinking about Victoria's Motecta Festorum, which I've just tagged, but the options open to us currently are either misleading or not really complete. Grove mentions that Victoria was working with 12 priests and 6 choir boys, so he definitely had more than one voice on a part. I tagged these as 4vv, 5vv, etc., but they probably are really choral. But without downloading the whole set and figuring out which are "ch sop 2alt 3ten" etc., which is also going to cause a lot of clutter, given that there are 37 of them, would it be useful to be able to tag "ch 4vv ; ch 5vv ; ch 6vv ; ch 8vv"? Steltz 07:44, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

All those tags (ch 4vv, 5vv, 6vv, etc.) have actually existed since April, I believe (Philip added them following this discussion) :-) Cheers, KGill talk email 13:59, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Bril, re-tagged! :-))

Gervais, Psalms

This question is for our Baroque experts. An example of the instrumentation for these is: Voix : Sol 2 (indication, p. 24 : "dessus ou taille"), Ut 3, Fa 3 (2). - Choeur : Sol 2 (2), Ut 3, Ut 4, Fa 3, Fa 4. - Orchestre : Sol 1, Ut 1, Ut 2, Fa 4 (Sol 1 divisés lorsque Ut 2 est abs.), fl. Does this imply continuo? I haven't put "bc" in the tag because it isn't specified, but if it is almost certain that one would have been used, I can add it. Steltz 08:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

compilations, i.e. Davidson's Universal Melodist (Various) and Calliope, or English Harmony (Various)

I need to question the addition of this tag -- it's not yet in the tagging list, so I don't think Davydov added it. the Music Library Association's list of Types of Compositions for Use in Music Uniform Titles doesn't contain it, and it's not really a genre like an Allegretto is -- we don't play a "compilation" as a work. Further, there are other ways of denoting collections. What was the rationale in making it a taggable work genre? Steltz 18:10, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Reveries and pieces with synonymous titles

hrm. in part because the category "pieces" is overcrowded (but not mainly for that reason) these would seem to fit under Nocturnes, any thoughts? Right now people have been tagging them under pieces. (Nocturnes aren't one of the tags labeled "only tag if the composer specifically titles as such" so a certain amount of flexibility and judgment seems allowed, even called for.) Eric 14:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I think we are far enough along to start discussion the list of potential added tags, also because Davydov is back (albeit on a probably limited basis) and his advice was always "sage". The list is at My own feeling is that reverie should have its own tag, because there is an element of dreaminess that a nocturne might not necessarily have; even though a nocturne implies night time, it could also just be quiet and calm, but awake. Any other opinions? As to the rest of the list, maybe we should just take a few at a time, to make sure each one is adequately discussed. We can discuss them here, and as the decisions are made, I will remove them from the list over there. Steltz 08:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


I thought this might go under something else, but it is supposed to evoke very happy scenes, frequently but not always pastoral, so "pastorale" might not be an adequate substitute. Idyll does seem to have its own connotations. Steltz 08:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


This one seems fairly obvious to me, since people may very well want to search for orchestration treatises, and we do have some fairly historically important ones, e.g. Rimsky-Korsakov. Also, we have added tags such as "organology" (BTW, this seems to be misspelled in the tagging list -- is it really "organolgy"? Steltz 08:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)#

there's a few other at least irritating cases like that in the list where the tagging list has singular while correct tagging would be plural for example (and since not all tags are plural, ... hrm. -do- we have authority to change the list to correct for errors? I think I have done so some while back though I'm not sure and am not sure I ought have. ... Eric 10:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Please bring it up here first so it can be checked and discussed. For this tag specifically, it should stay singular - also music theory - because it makes more sense than "music theories". The logic is that although you can have hundreds of allegrettos, you would have hundreds of books (plural) on orchestration or music theory (singular). (Of course, you can also have hundreds of music theories, but that has a different meaning not really applicable here.) With any other tags I want first to see if MLA has the tag as singular or plural -- coming up with new tags is one thing, but I'm not sure we should be altering spellings of the ones they have on their list. In addition, the ones I saw that were singular were in Latin, so I suspect there is some sort of logical reasoning behind it. Can you remember which ones you altered? Steltz 09:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
none. however, i meant tags that were singular on IMSLP:Tagging but not in MediaWiki:Genres#Tags - that is, things that seem to be typos and indeed cause errors if used as specified on the former page- like Category:Dixtuor Eric 21:01, 22 July 2011 (UTC).
Ah. We need to correct these. Do you remember which ones they are? I'll correct organology in the meantime. Steltz 08:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
ah, one example say, would be "duettino" in IMSLP:Tagging which is really supposed to be "duettinos" and gives an error if applied as given. Will look for others soon- sorry!! Eric 02:42, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

2 choirs tagging

In the Musica Sacra (various), there is a chorus for two choirs, but each with a different voicing. The first choir is SATB, but the other one is SSAB. For the moment, I've tagged it "ch sop alt ten bass 2sop alt bass", but I don't think we have a way of doing two different choral voicings, so this might have to change. I'm assuming that "2ch sop alt ten bass" means 2 choirs each with SATB voicing? Steltz 11:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

At the moment, the accepted way of tagging this sort of thing is to list every voice in all choirs as if it were one giant choir - so, for instance, the first example would (under the current format) be '2ch 3sop 2alt ten 2bass', and the second would be '2ch 2sop 2alt 2ten 2bass'. It might well be useful to have a sort of two-part tag for each choir (like your suggestion for the first example), but it could be slightly tricky to implement if we want to create the kind of precise category names we already have for single choirs. Cheers, KGill talk email 14:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Der Geige (Schanz, Frida)

This is a poem, my German is so rusty, I think it's probably a poem of praise. The most generic "writings" will have to do unless someone can think of something better (not sure music history works). Steltz 08:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

It's defenitly not a poem with historical connection. But a poem of a love story (with happy end) in form of a ballade, which uses classical and mythological godheads (e.g. Eros). --Ralph Theo Misch 08:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Hare and Walsh, print (Loeillet)

Please don't tag this one for right now. Martin Grayson is trying to work out what the original instrumentation was, which was probably not 2 recorders. Steltz 15:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Reichgott, Ballet class music

Heather Reichgott has written music specifically for ballet classes. If tagged as ballet, it will also bring up "stage music", which isn't, strictly speaking, true. Still, ballet is the purpose. It could also be tagged "dances", since one of the pieces is a tango. "ballets", "pieces", or "dances"? Steltz 08:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I'd say "dances" is the best option — P.davydov 09:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Done. Steltz 09:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Reger, Scherzo for flute and string quintet

Currently, this is tagged correctly, i.e. "fl 2vn va vc cb", but it comes up as "strings", which automatically denotes string orchestra. Since this is clearly single strings, I think it needs the tag needs to be re-categorized so it comes up under "for 6 players". Any objections? Steltz 09:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Last night, I noticed this and redid the tag in the definitions - I think it's not yet showing up due to the cache or something like that. (There were 3 or 4 other tags in its immediate vicinity which had the same problem, which I also changed.) The category 'For flute, 2 violins, viola, cello, double bass' was IIRC already defined, so it should work all right (I hope at least). Cheers, KGill talk email 14:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Toada, for 5-stringed viola (Paulinyi, Zoltan)

My demotion brought unexpected renewed interest around here... Browsing around the old listing of viola pieces, it struck me that the above piece is categorized under Viola featured pieces. The 5-stringed viola is an instrument that is different from the viola... in that it has 5 strings indeed. There are a number of 5-stringed violas built worldwide (among tens of other viola variants, many of them bearing only ergonomical or acoustic adjustments), but no standards really exist on this instrument.

The above piece is impossible to play on a viola of course, so it is incorrectly tagged. I would propose to create a new subgenre under viola, either five-stringed viola or something like viola variants.

Peter talk 13:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I'll put in a vote for "5-stringed cello" for BWV 1012 here, too. Nice to see renewed interest :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 13:37, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
How about appending a numeral to the instrumental tag to denote number of strings used? The tags would become 'va5' and 'vc5' in that case, and there would new categories 'Scores featuring the 5-stringed viola', etc. defined as subcategories of 'Scores featuring the viola'. What do you think?
Also, Peter, if you're showing renewed interest then perhaps I should just restore your rights? After all, you're no longer inactive :-) (though I don't know how long that will be the case). Cheers, KGill talk email 03:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Seems OK to me. I don't need any administrative rights for the moment , thanks.Peter talk 08:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
OK then - the tag for the Paulinyi has been created and used. Cheers, KGill talk email 00:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurgs... Versuch ueber die musikalische Temperatur

Presumably, this means temperament. Theory, or organology (probably not), or performance practice (?) Steltz 06:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

opera comiques vs opera-ballets

I just added operas comiques to the tagging page, because although we've been using it for a while, it wasn't on the table. I noticed, because it comes under opera-ballet, that the opera-ballet tag uses the hyphen and the other doesn't. Is this correct? Steltz 06:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there should be a hyphen in "opera-ballets" because it's a combination of two separate concepts, but not in "operas comiques", where "comiques" is just an adjective. In case anyone was wondering, because this is a French term, "operas comiques" is correctly pluralized (unlike "opera seria", from the Italian), but we can't use the accented "é" in tags. Therefore, "operas comiques" is the correct tag — P.davydov 13:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, just checking. Steltz 15:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Johann Strauss, Jr.

  • Generally: Most of his waltzes, e.g. Frühlingstimmen were published as piano pieces first, then arranged for many different things. Grove doesn't give dates for any of the arrangements, nor for any arrangers, so I think probably Johann Jr. himself did the arrangements, also because he was a very astute businessman. Given that this is an assumption, tag as "pf ; orch" or "pf" with orchestration as an arrangement?
  • Frühlingstimmin specifically -- there is a note at the bottom of the Eulenberg orchestral score that the original version was soprano and orchestra, premiered in 1885, though Grove gives the composition date as 1883, and makes no mention of a vocal original, though it gives the name of somebody in brackets, presumably the librettist. Does this also get the pf tag? Steltz 15:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
In the early nineteenth century it wasn't uncommon for orchestral works to be published first in a piano reduction, as they would be snapped up by the public in this form, while sales of the full scores were much less profitable for the publishers. So the appearance of a piano version before the orchestral one doesn't necessarily mean that the work was originally written for piano and orchestrated later. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I'd assume that each of Strauss's waltzes were conceived as orchestral works..
On the second point, there's some information here that agrees with Eulenberg that Frühlingstimmen was originally written for voice with orchestra — P.davydov 16:27, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Though evidence for or against (piano or orchestra precedence) may exist in some good Strauss life-and-works biography if any of his letters addressed the question, for instance. As with any particular composer. Just suggesting somewhere someone could look if they were particularly interested- sorry :) (as to piano reduction etc.- good point, possibly even more so after one odd tale in which the reverse was tried but... well, it's a tale and a comedy of errors and 19th-century-lawsuit. ) Eric 21:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Scales- request for reminder

processing and planning to upload soon (will be easier to answer once I do, I suppose- sorry...) a collection of "24 Preludes and Scales" for piano published mid-19th century - the preludes are easy enough to tag :) but are scales always tagged as "studies"- or does it depend?... Thanks! Eric 21:26, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

There is actually a tag 'scales' which also will put the work into the category for studies in addition to the eponymous category (there are only a few pages tagged thusly so far). Cheers, KGill talk email 21:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thanks!! Eric 21:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Perosi, Versetti brillanti e fugati

My tourist's Italian is inadequate here. "Fugati" -- is it noun or adjective, e.g. a fugal verset? If adjectival, the tag is simply "versets", otherwise I add the fugues one as well. Steltz 07:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it's adjective. Moreover I couln't find any fugal passage in any of those pieces. So 'fugati' means approximately: volatile, fleeting, fugitive, cursory, quick, etc. --Ralph Theo Misch 08:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Ralph, I will leave it as it is (haven't gotten back yet to the other item you put on my talk page, but I will!) Steltz 08:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Pla/Heinichen tags, or tags for any Baroque item specifying single bass instruments

  • I have asked Davydov or Philip to mediate this issue.
  • I have to reiterate that tagging must be done according to some kind of principle that doesn't include how many works are on a particular list.
  • As Philip pointed out in his Forum post, "The solution adopted where there are ambiguities of instrumentation has been to supply extra tags to cover the most likely possibilities that will be searched on. The important thing to note is, these extra possibilities are not mutually exclusive."
  • Because this has been dealt with in a semi-aggressive manner, I am starting to notice other works that specify a single instrument on the bass line. For example, Oliver y Astorga has written sonatas for violin, with cello specified as the bass instrument. This is in addition to the two works on IMSLP that specify "or cello", and the one that specifies "basson". I'm sure over the next days and weeks, I will see more of this sort of thing without really going looking for it. I think it is simplistic in the extreme, not to mention unscholarly, to just ascribe any single bass instrument in a title to an unreliable copyist.
  • Philip has pointed out that with 3 tags * 3 instruments, there is some amount of clutter on the page. However, I'm not sure this should take precedence over the concept of tagging by title, and in any case, there is still less clutter than some of the pages on IMSLP (ref: Handel's Messiah).
  • My vote is for using the "bc" tag as a generic, but then also tagging for any instrument specified in the title, with the proviso that where the autograph manuscript exists, that title takes preference over other editions. Steltz 08:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
[Edit] It just occurred to me that I needed to see how many "2vn vc" tags there are -- we have 113, of which many are in this period. It doesn't seem to me advisable to change those all to "bc" just to simplify the bass instrument scenario. Steltz 10:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I personally think that a lot of those 2vn vc tags need to be changed, because no baroque performer is going to look under that tagging for trio sonatas...need to be more careful about who does what tagging...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 15:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but if that is the instrumentation in the title, it points to quite a lot of pieces that are specified with cello. People looking for works for 2 violins and cello may not think to look under continuo. At best, we might consider both tags, but I don't think it is appropriate to remove a tag that is clearly indicated by the title. Steltz 09:06, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Ornithoparchus, De arte cantando

Grove cites ""He sharply criticized practices in sacred music, complaining of the priests’ inadequate musical knowledge and hasty singing, wrong accentuation, incorrect pronunciation, rhythmic waywardness, ‘crying’ and ‘howling’." Given this and the title, is it worth adding "performance practice" to the tags? Steltz 09:06, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Moszkowski, Boabdil

This is tagged as an orchestral suite, but Grove lists it as a stage work, and it was premiered at an opera house. The version we have is more likely to be a suite from a larger work, but I can't find more detail on it. Does anyone know if it was an opera? Steltz 08:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Operone says "große Oper 3 Akte op. 49". Eric 23:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for that, will take care of it. Steltz 19:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Graun, operatic selections

In 2 volumes at about 100MB each. Should it be tagged for cleanup, to be split into individual parts and put on work pages for the operas? Steltz 08:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Presumably yes; as it appears to be a collection made long after Graun's death, it would seem to have little validity as a separate 'work' and should be split. Cheers, KGill talk email 01:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Caprices and Capriccios

Is there a good reason to have different tags for caprices and capriccios (at least one good dictionary, I think, defines one as equivalent to the other French-Italian, which we usually do not separate out tags for?) It is true that a Zelenka Capriccio and a Romantic-era caprice for piano are very, very different beasties, but so are a Tudor Phantasie for viols and many a 19th-century piano Fantaisie but they are tagged alike (modulo instrumentation) ... so what does a person think... Eric 23:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Oxford Dictionary uses them synonymously; the entry for "Caprice" is "see Capriccio", so I went to the MLA website to see if there was anything enlightening there. There wasn't but there was an email address for their team, if people have questions. I will write to the contact person next week (so I can do it from my university email address), and see what they have to say about it. Steltz 13:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

opera buffa, operas bouffes

In the tagging page, the general definition of opera says "the "genres" allocated in Wikipedia, such as "opera buffa" and "singspiele", may also be used instead, and will be treated here as sub-categories of "opera"". I noticed today that the tag we use is "operas bouffes". It wasn't on the tagging list at all, so I added it, since it is already in use, but should the definition change to use the French? Surely we aren't using both as tags? Steltz 19:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems that we are indeed using separate tags for 'opera buffa' and 'operas bouffes', presumably because there is a distinction between the two terms (according to the category page, the French equivalent to opera buffa is in fact operas bouffons, which we also have a tag for (!) ). I suppose that we should account for all three on the tagging definitions page. Cheers, KGill talk email 01:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
I would suggest, if "opera bouffons" and "opera buffa" are synonymous, that we consolidate those two so that there are only two types, but that the tags page describe what the difference is. Steltz 13:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Concerto in C major, GraunWV C:XIII:62 (Graun, Johann Gottlieb)

This is apparently scored for an 'orchestra with soloists' of 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 bassoons, 3 violins, strings, and continuo. Is this really a proper nonuple concerto, or should it just be left as orch bc? Thanks, KGill talk email 01:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Will download next week and have a look at it. Steltz 13:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

2 other new tag suggestions

2 large groups of works in the 19th century especially (in the US for instance) large amounts of which have been scanned in, at the LoC among other places, are political campaign works for one and programmatic piano works for the other (without, however, program music in the title- but often representing battles). In hopes to subdivide the pieces category among several other reasons I might suggest something along the very general lines of war_related and political tags, perhaps, though that doesn't seem quite there yet. (Eg The Battle of Roanoke Island, Op.1395 as one example. We don't have too many of the other type transferred yet though LoC has quite a few as I recall. Eric 05:05, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, let me think about this one. A couple of things come to mind immediately: 1) Some battle-related pieces might be marches, others might be overtures or symphonies, so the battle or war tag doesn't in an of itself give a piece type, which is what the uniform title system (that our tagging system is based on) is supposed to do. On the other hand, it would be helpful to find all of these in one place. 2) It might work to stick with tagging according to title, and using the comments field to insert something that can be searched for in a general search. For example, if I search "battle" it gives 221 results, though because of the format of the general search mechanism I get only 10 per page, as opposed to a larger list. Does the LOC have a tag they are using? And would this include laments for those fallen in battle, of which we have at least one? Steltz 13:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

new tags

I decided to email the MLA contact person about Caprices today instead of waiting, and also decided to run some of our new proposed tags by her. In double checking our list against MLA's I discovered that the following are official titles, "Concert pieces" with all the translations, "idylls", "night piece" (not to be used synonymously with nocturne), "novelettes", and "poem" and translations. In changing these over, we need to make sure we do a search for all currently tagged "pieces". I'll start with novelettes, but if any of you decide to start one of the others, please just post here so that we don't duplicate each other's searching.  :-)) Steltz 14:38, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I've just noticed that MLA seems to put distinctive titles in singular, where as only the generic are in plural, or those with cognates in several languages (?). Novelette is down as a distinctive. All of ours except those in Latin are plural. "Novelette" or "Novelettes"? Steltz 15:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi Steltz. Before introducing any of those terms, can you point us to the version of the MLA list you've been looking at? When I compiled the original list there were different versions accessible online, some of which were more up-to-date than others — P.davydov 16:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
It's the one that links from the top of our tagging page -- Steltz 17:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Ah, now I see where you're coming from. IMSLP's version of the MLA list includes all the headings marked as "Type", but not those which are labelled "Distinctive". The difference between the two types, and why the latter isn't used for classifying works, is explained near the top of the MLA page, under the sub-heading "Preface to the 1st edition" — P.davydov 18:02, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
That preface describes a third type --these are not generics, but "Some of these terms may be treated as types of composition if they are so used by enough composers; others may not." I think the idea was to wait until the tagging was mostly done and see what could possibly come out of the "pieces" category. We started a list of possible tags for discussion here: Please have a look and let us know what you think. Steltz 20:37, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Yes, some good ideas there, but also one or two I'd be cautious about without strict definitions. I'll stay resolutely non-committal for now until everyone's had their say :-) — P.davydov 05:43, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Köhler: Allgemeine Musiklehre für Lehrende und Lernende

This looks pedagogical, though I'm not 100% certain. Do we have a sub-category in writings for pedagogy? Steltz 08:27, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

refining tags for use

just noticed works that really should be tagged with pflh that aren't, that I'm guessing were tagged before the pflh tag was added to the list- in general I'm guessing a big project to be attacked slowly and piecemeal (because it is big, but because it may be necessary I somehow think) may be to apply some of the more important of the newer tags to any works to which they apply, that were tagged before they were available to tag them on/to/... Eric 16:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC) (eventually and not now, except bit by bit as it comes up)

I'm pretty sure that "pflh" was there from the start. With so many piano works it would have been easy for a tagger's concentration to wander, and that's probably what happened, but they do need fixing when we come across them. (I've found a few recently that were "pf" instead of "pf4h") — P.davydov 17:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
I've also found a couple that were tagged correctly initially because what was initially uploaded turned out to be an arrangement. When the original was uploaded the person who uploaded it didn't think to notify the tagging team to take a look at the changed original instrumentation . . . . Steltz 19:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)