User talk:Carolus/archive20


Haydn Piano Sonatas

The long awaited move is done...if you want to check for errors...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 04:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I already looked over - and did not notice any (which is not surprising). I have second thoughts about the nature of Martienssen's edition, which I suspect is more urtext than not. Carolus 04:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.
Fingerings are present which are definitely his. Also dynamics etc. The Henle differs substantially.
Also, when I first put the publisher info in, I just copied and pasted, but that probably messed up the plate numbers.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 04:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll double check on that next time I'm at WorldCat. Peters issued 2 volumes I think. Carolus 04:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

New publishers

John Johnson and J. Rieter-Biedermann. Also, people seem to keep leaving messages on your talk page and it's getting rather long :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 14:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

My talk page is just like Grand Central Station in NYC. It's the start of the month - time to make another archive. Carolus 22:10, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Estienne Roger. Yay-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:07, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Nice to have a page for Roger at last. There were a number of important issues (like Vivaldi's Quattro Staggioni) from him. Carolus 02:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep. And with all this plate numbers work, we might actually be able to date his things, instead of giving ranges like 1716-22-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

3 More

Norsk Musikforlag-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 13:51, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

And Church and Theodore Presser. BTW, Groves' doesn't have anything on Praeger and Meier, nor on C.F.W. Siegel. Does MacMillan?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 14:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Bump-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

MacMillan has a little on P and M, which I'll be adding. Carolus 01:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Compendium Antiphonarii et Breviarii Romani

Hi Carolus, I fear that the misc. notes aren't idiomatic. Would anybody understand what I mean? --Ralph Theo Misch 00:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) --Ralph Theo Misch 00:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I also removed all of the metatags and hyperlinks from that file and am uploading the revised version now. If possible, remove these before uploading as some virus protection software will prevent the PDF from opening because of the embedded links contained in the file. Carolus 00:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

OK. I'll see what you have done and I'll try to do so as well in future. --Ralph Theo Misch 01:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC) P.S.: And Musica Divina. Sive... also?

Does Musica Divina have all those embedded links also? If so, they really should be stripped of them - eventually (it's not urgent). Carolus 01:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they have. :-(( Do I have to manipulate every page then? But it's late (or early) here now (after three o'clock). I'll have a look 'tomorrow'. Good night! --Ralph Theo Misch 01:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and do some of the bigger ones, since I have some software here that can strip them out pretty fast - as long as they put the links in the same place on each page! Doing it a page at a time would be very tedious. Carolus 01:18, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that would be the maximum penalty. Which software do you use? I've got some files left of that site and consider if the effort is worth. They aren't not so important as Musica Divina. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I use Acrobat Pro with the plug-in called PitStop. It can strip out links like those in (usually) one operation. It took a few passes on the on the Compendium because they didn't place the links at the same x and y coordinates on each page. It was still a lot faster than deleting them one page at a time, though. It's expensive software, but worth it if you have to do all the manipulations that I often do. Carolus 00:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Indeed - it's expensive I've seen. And I've got enough stuff to scan until Dupré is PD. I'll have to consider. Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Durand dates

Carolus, I see you have made some adjustments to the Durand publisher page regarding removal of trailing question marks for dates. Have you been able to establish that these pieces were in fact published during those dates? There are 3 notes I'm using for these dates: year listed without parenthesis denotes what was printed on the source, or those conclusive in WorldCat, year in parenthesis not printed on score but verified via some other method (thematic catalogue, WorldCat, Durand catalogue, etcl), and year in parenthesis with question mark to denote approximate date based on surrounding plate numbers in the Durand list. Daphnis 14:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I noticed one of our newer contributors adding a lot of dating info to publisher pages, so my mistake - I did not realize you were actually tweaking the rubric we'd been using (parens for estimated, plain for confirmed) here. What you're describing seems pretty reasonable, though. I agree that the most reliable dates are from a composer's thematic catalogue, the Hofmeister Monatsbericht (spotty on the French issues, though), and of course the Lesure book. WorldCat is not terribly consistent or reliable about dating - but some of the libraries who add stuff to the aggregate are much better at it than others, so I can see that having a confirming date from WorldCat plus the general inference from the plate number would warrant a different indication that the simple inference from sequence in the series. Just added a note at the head of the plate-number section to explain this system - correct if I got it wrong, please. Carolus 04:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks much. I'm trying to be careful about how I do this and use as many reliable sources to date these pieces as I can. I'm also uncovering several mistakes I and others made with the actual plate numbers, so this is a good opportunity to correct them. I think in the end we'll have an excellent table used as a reference to date other unknown pieces, and something unmatched out there, to boot. WorldCat is only as reliable as those who initially wrote the record, but the only times I'm going on dates supplied by them is when multiple records exist for the same score, which I'll then cross-check against our multitudinous plate list. Even less reliable are the dates supplied by Sibley, which I wish people wouldn't hardly even put when they upload pieces from them, although I suppose the bulk of those are taken straight from the respective WorldCat records themselves. What help I could really use is for other users to scour the wiki and find those odd pieces published by Durand that don't necessarily occur by composers who didn't sign contracts with them, and therefore are likely to have just a few pieces published by them. Just collecting these plate numbers from all those Saint-Saëns pieces is work enough! And this is on top of all the scanning work I'm doing. I really wish in retrospect that I had kept this list up-to-date as I added pieces by Durand, which seems to be most of my work. Oh well, hindsight is always 20:20. Daphnis 05:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Mozart’s concert rondos for piano (& violin)

Hi Carolus,

I had moved these earlier in the year to avoid confusion when we obtain versions of the concert rondos for violin and orchestra, at which point we will have four works identified only by (partially outdated 1E) Köchel numbers, without identifying the concertante instrument as either a piano or violin...

This was the subject of a long conversation with CC who had likewise insisted on removing the instrument from the title, and I pointed out this would cause needless confusion once there were scores of either KV 373 or KV 269 (261a) on here as well. Unfortunately the conversation is no longer accessible but the argument was conclusively decided that the instrument should be part of the work title... or if not, perhaps for consistency we should go through all of the Mozart concertos and remove the instrument designation, since the Köchel number alone would suffice to identify the work? o_O

I’m less worried about the key designation, though it does stand to reason that the Rondo in D is obviously an alternate conclusion (Wien) to an earlier (Salzburg) Concerto in D, and similarly the Rondo in A is Mozart’s first version of an ending to the corresponding Concerto in A. These are obviously less important considerations as the single movements can “stand alone”.

Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 02:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Point taken, thanks. Now that you mention it, I can see where this could create some confusion - which is certainly a good reason to override the general rule. I've moved them back, sans keys as the template you've made for the concerti makes it readily apparent (nice job) that the Rondo in A goes with the Concerto in A, etc. Carolus
No problem. We seem to have no end of redirects for these two works as a result of well-intentioned moves (I will own up to some of them, having thought that the description of KV 382 as “Piano Concerto No.28” was firmly in the ridiculous category). Cheers Philip Legge @ © talk 06:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

TB forum topic

Could you make a new one? IMSLP.EU changes things substantially-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

OK. Probably this weekendCarolus 04:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Paderewski NIE

Hi, I'm assuming you've seen this - just making sure my rationale for EU-blocking Piupianissimo's new files is clear :-) Cheers, KGill talk email 14:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I am rather amazed the the copyright office allowed that, since the items were most likely public domain in the country of origin in 1996. However, the NIE is prima facie evidence of the copyright status in the USA, so we have no choice but to respect it accordingly. Carolus 23:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Piano Trio No.1, Op.9 (Dietrich, Albert Hermann)

Hi Carolus, would you please have a look at the "revised" edition. For me it looks like a reprint of the old edition. Bar numbers have been added, yes, but that's insignificant in my understanding. And there's no fingering in the parts. Thanks, Hobbypianist 13:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I think you're correct. It's definitely a reprint of a 19th century score. My bet is that it's another scarecrow. They have a reputation for doing this. Carolus 18:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Antiphonarium officii (Anonymous)

Hi, Carolus, the file I've just uploaded doesn't appear at the work page. Did I something wrong? - Thanks --Ralph Theo Misch 17:54, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

That's really strange. I worked for me - but said that the file has already been uploaded to that page. I have no idea why it would be behaving like that. Maybe it didn't like the comma in the file name? I'm just guessing here, but sometimes things behave oddly when file names contain commas, ampersands, and other characters of that nature. Carolus 18:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

This night, I'll upload Cod. 391 without those things. Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 18:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


Is there a tag on IMSLP like Wikipedia's {{dead link}} for calling attention to references/links that no longer point to useful resources (e.g. 404s, access forbidden, ...) so that they can be replaced usefully/monitored/etc.?... Or should such links just be removed? I'll remove the one I have in mind for the time being but it's in history if need be of course and will replace it appropriately etc. - I fortunately do have another link to substitute that hopefully has equivalent information, in this case. Thanks! (Apologies if I should be asking someone else!) Eric 13:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I am not aware of such a tag - but I'm not necessarily the most up-to-date on such issues. Perlnerd666 might know, and Feldmahler (who is our programming god) would know for sure. My recommendation would be to remove such broken links, as they aren't of any use to someone wishing to find out more info, etc. BTW, thanks for all of your Sibley additions. It's really nice to be catching up since they've added so many titles in the past 2 years. Carolus 22:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I haven't come across it. I would definitely remove it, or call attention to the fact in RED. Why keep a bad link? I hate how Wikipedia doesn't do enough of this tag.
I transferred a basic version of "Dead link" Here-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Reasons (I should know this better than I do...) for keeping a bad link on Wikipedia by the way :) include not wanting to remove the last reference for a claim (or an entire article, leaving claim more open to deletion or the whole article even more open to deletion requests). There are people - admins and otherwise - on the site who go around looking at the categories of stubs, orphaned articles, etc. etc.etc., dead links, etc.etc. etc. :) and see if they can either replace e.g. the dead links with still-existing references proving the same claims, or if not, with cached copies of the dead ones. Something on that order... Eric 22:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

OK. Happy templating!-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks much to you both!! Also, you're welcome of course (and discovering Sibley's RSS feed has made it a little easier *g* - it's really a lot of fun. Though unless someone uploads something of Martin Levin 's- a Holocaust disappearance (i.e. almost definitely victim) who I had confused with the mysterious composer Miron Levin about whom I can find out practically nothing - I might as well admit I goofed and ask that that category be deleted :) (edit:considering just creating a category Category:Levin, Miron with such information as I do have unless something suggests that he was alive post-1959...) Eric 22:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


Why is this PD-EU? RoST again? When should we learn to apply this with Russian scores?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

When the author died in Russia (or USSR) before 1953, RoST applies for the EU (at least some countries). It's a little more questionable for Russian expats who ended up in the USA (Rachmaninoff, for instance), since most of the important EU countries have bilateral treaties with the USA from 1891 onwards that are still in force. Russians who fled to countries now in the EU (like Medtner) fall under the full 70pma term. So, I'm leaving the autotags in place, but marking those who died before 1953 in the USSR as "C" due to RoST. Carolus 18:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 18:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

MPH recent reprints

Firstly, it appears we need to now take numbers to post on your ever-expanding talk page. Grand Central indeed. I'm just wondering out of curiosity if you know by what legal authority Musikproduktion Höflich (MPH) is offering reprints of fairly recently published materials such as Ravel's Shéhérazade: ouverture de féerie which was first published by Salabert in 1975 or Kurt Atterberg's (d. 1974) Dollar Symphony (No. 6)? Daphnis 20:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

They have to be doing so under license from the copyright owners. They've reprinted items by Frank Martin and other composers who are still protected in the EU over the past 5 years or so. I expect they have permission from the original publishers are are paying them a royalty. Eulenburg (now owned by Schott) has done the same thing over the years - for example Vaughan Williams' Symphony No.5. Carolus 21:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I guess. I've just not seen anything on those reprints that mentioned they were by permission. Daphnis 22:11, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Really? No copyright notice, for example? BTW, if they legally republished a work without notice, it could inject the work into the US public domain even now. Carolus 22:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I can't recall those 2 examples specifically, but I remember not seeing some where I should have. Daphnis 22:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Ask them using one of the links on their contact page? Eric 23:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Typesets

Oh, I well believe they will- thanks for the advice. Can the licence be changed retroactively or would I need to reupload? :) Eric 00:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

You can change retroactively with ease. Just add "Non-commercial" or "Share Alike" before the version number (3.0). Carolus 01:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks much again! Eric 01:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Denkmäler deutscher Tonkunst

This may be a complex question, but perhaps I just don't know enough about music publishing. The DDT was developed and published by Breitkopf in the years 1892-1931. It was then revised and republished in the years 1957-1961. Who exactly did this? Most libraries seem to list it as a B&H publication, listing Wiesbaden as the city of reissue. However, quoting from a page at University Music Editions:

The original Breitkopf und Härtel edition of 1892-1931 was reprinted with critical revisions and published by Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1957-1961.

I gather that these are not the same companies. Both companies presently offer the reissued version for sale. Further to this, I will be adding a reissue tag to my DDT uploads, as they are from the reissued version. Those that have been scanned by the BSB are the original. Should my reissue tag say:

Reissue - Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1957-1961.
Reissue - Wiesbaden, 1957-1961.

Thanks for your insights into this. --Homerdundas 02:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

My vote would be to use the "Reissue - Wiesbaden, 1957-1961" for the sole reason that it was originally funded by the German (Imperial) government, then the Weimar government. It was originally a German (rather than Austrian) issue, so the Austrian company (Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz) should be regarded as the co-publisher or Austrian distributor for the reissue. Carolus 02:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


Thanks!-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:53, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


Hi Carolus,

there are 76 pieces of Pezels "Fünfstimmige blasende Music", most of them are intradas, but not all. The numbering takes account of all pieces and not only of the intradas. Would it be not better to say therefore "No.1 Intrada" instead of "Intrada No.1"? Notenschreiber 08:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Schering only included 16 selections in the DDT volume. I think maybe the best thing to do would be to use the number present on the original 76-piece collection, which Schering gives in parentheses in the DDT volume. Carolus 17:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


To all: I will be away starting this evening (August 12) and will return on Monday (August 16). Carolus 22:32, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Théolinda l'Orpheline / Le lutin de la vallée

Hi Carolus -- Just curious as to where you got the information that Pugni's Théolinda l'orpheline is a re-working of Gautier's Le lutin de la vallée. As far as I can tell from Grove, they simply share a title (Le lutin de la vallée is the subtitle of Pugni's work) and possibly a librettist/scenarist (A. Saint-Léon) but no mention of the pieces sharing any music or Pugni's work being anything but entirely original. I added an opera to Gautier's page and was just taking a look at what else was posted when I came across this issue. I did not want to change anything though until I had clarified it with you since you created the page and the link to Gautier. Thanks! Massenetique 01:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, The rather extensive and well-referenced bio of Pugni on Wikipedia makes this claim. Perhaps some additional research is needed here, as this may well be the only place where this claim is found. However, given the ballet practices of the era, it is certainly plausible. If you look over the list of works on the Wikipedia page, you will see that the authors took great care to designate original works and adaptations. Carolus 00:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I see where that is written on Pugni's wiki page, and indeed the listing of works seems studied and reliable. Odd that the Grove dictionary would make no mention of the work as an adaptation, but it's not beyond them to make a mistake what with the scope of the information they compile. Some further research would probably clear it up, most useful would be an actual score of the original Gautier work. Obviously not a priority but I'll see if I can find anything. Thanks, Massenetique 01:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Macfarlane, Will C.

Hi Carolus. A few more works by this composer, who died in 1945, have just been uploaded. I tagegd them as V/V/2116, before finding that you'd tagged one earlier work of his as V/V/C, citing the RoST. I guess the logic is that Macfarlane is already PD in his home country (USA) and that overrides the EU's 70-years-from-death term, but I've not come across that before. So for now I've left the new tags as V/V/2116, but feel free to correct them if I'm being too cautious — P.davydov 09:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

The "Rule of the Shorter Term" applies to the EU as a whole but is frequently over-ruled by a previously existing bi-lateral treaty between the USA and individual EU countries. This applies to all of the major ones, which signed treaties in 1891 (which is the reason many European publishers starting putting copyright notices on their scores that year). Countries like Slovenia, some of the Baltic states, etc. might not be covered by any such treaties, so the Rule of the Shorter Term applies. That's my reason for using the "C" designation in cases like this. You'll note that I leave the autotag warning in place. We should start putting the {{RoST}} template on such items to explain the anomaly. This also applies to Russian / Soviet works where the composer died before 1953 in the USSR. Those who died in the west like Medtner are subject to a full 70pma. Those who died in the USA - especially if they became US citizens (like Rachmaninoff) are a more complicated case, but I'm inclined to just say 70pma. Carolus 00:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hedien Preludes 1-10 added by composer

Just to let you know, I uploaded the piece Preludes 1-10 for Piano by Mark Hedien. I am the composer, and the creative commons license is fine.

Thanks for your help!

--Mark Hedien

Musica Viva

I'm assuming you've seen this by now...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. I note they have some performances of more obscure items, which will be very useful. I think we'll have to use the deep-links in the "Non-Commercial recordings" section as we do with Piano Society - who now has something like 4000 recordings. I might ask Musica Viva if we can copy some of the recordings of PD composers here. I didn't notice ant CC license, which is present on the Gardner Museum site. Carolus 21:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. Nice recordings.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Just talked to Carl Banner (head of Musica Viva). He's all for it! So, any recordings there of public domain works can be uploaded using the cc-by-nc-nd license. Carolus 18:42, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Great! Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)



I would like to ask about the uploaded Casadeus/J.C. Bach viola concerto in C Minor. I believe that the copyright (at least in Canada) allows for it to be published?


The work, which was actually composed by Casadesus, not J.C. Bach, is free in Canada since Henri died in 1947 (more than 50 years ago). The orchestration by his brother Francis (died 1954) is likewise free in Canada. However, it was first published in 1947 and is not public domain in the USA, where IMSLP's corporate parent is located (even though our sever is in Canada) - hence the [TB] tag, which means downloads will be blocked for an indefinite period. It is also under copyright in the EU. Carolus 21:37, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Strauss scores publ. by Eulenburg

Hi Carolus, I've uploaded a couple of full scores. They have been published in the 1930s by Viktor Keldorfer (1873-1959). Since two already existing ones had been tagged VVV (for ex. Op.333), I'm not sure how extensive and significant his editorial work was. Hence I've tagged the recently uploaded C for the EU. Do you know more about this series? Feel free to re-tag them. Thanks. Hobbypianist 16:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

With Eulenburg, it is often a case of there merely being a preface by someone like Keldorfer. When they did some of the more classic repertoire like Beethoven and Mozart, there was frequently an actual editor (like Schering or Max Unger), but the editorial work was urtext in nature. I'll have a look. It looks like whatever editorial contributions he made were quite minimal and of an urtext nature. I noticed the copyright claim on Künstlerleben. I suspect this is bogus, but will have to let it stand until proof surfaces. Carolus 22:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Píseň česká, JB 1:78 (Smetana, Bedřich)

Hi Carolus, unfortunately I don't understand that language at all. So nearly all the details I've given are a (uneducated) guess. Sorry --Ralph Theo Misch 23:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, it just says the vocal score was prepared from the full score. It doesn't appear to mention who made it. The composer is a good guess. Carolus 23:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 23:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Bote & Bock, GmbH

I haven't figured out IMSLP link standards on this - on Wikipedia, if one's linking to a page that's a redirect, the general rule is either to use the name of the actual page ([[Bote & Bock, GmbH]]) or to include a pipe to it ([[Bote & Bock, GmbH|Bote & Bock]]) - presumably so that the Wiki software doesn't have to itself calculate the required redirect (multiplied by the number of users and the number of uses, a source of slowdown being one possible reason outweighing the increase in source length.) What is the IMSLP linking policy? (The Manual of Style only covers the Add Work page, not the Add File page.) Much appreciated- thanks :) Eric 23:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, GmbH wasn't added to the name until 1904, so anything first published before then should just use the plain old Bote & Bock imprint. We don't have an actual policy on the use of direct links vs. links to redirects, but your point is certainly a good one. Since we've grown to such a great size, it might be worth bringing up on the forums. I know that I've been fairly free about linking to redirects myself on publisher names. Carolus 00:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Alfred Jethro Silver

Hi, if you look here, the top source says that he died 13 April 1935. Thanks, KGill talk email 01:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Of course it was in the one place I forgot to look!! Carolus 23:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

BSB copyright claim

What do you make of this, exactly? (Not sure who I should be asking - apologies. The copyright claim in question is on the first page of BSB pdfs created using their PDF tool and available here. To the extent they have some point it's in the agreement one makes in using the PDF tool, which may be a good point indeed, but aside from that, I do not know.) Eric 17:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I believe that Carolus has called this page "nonsensical" before. It should be removed.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 19:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Can believe the first part! As to the second, until I obtain software that can do that (I don't have Acrobat, though an alternative may have been suggested to me at one point, will think about this), that's the end of BSB-uploading for me then! Will check though. Thanks! Eric 20:07, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

You certainly don't need Acrobat to remove the page - pdfsam and pdftk are two free alternatives that do it just as well. I'll go ahead and remove the pages for you. Cheers, KGill talk email 20:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Carolus repeats his previous point about their claims. It is unlikely they would hold up even in a German court. CD Sheet Music makes similar claims about their scans. which are no less nonsensical. Carolus 23:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


Is there any one person in control of who gets the server password, or is the decision to give it out discussed among the admins and/or bureaucrats? I'm not interested in having it right now, I'm just inquiring into the process of how one does acquire it? Is it based off quality of work, time on IMSLP, etc? Thanks, Lndlewis10 21:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean specifically the FTP server? I don't think anyone's giving out the password to the server of the wiki itself ;-) KGill talk email 21:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

To actually answer your question ;): If you've demonstrated that you would make good use of it, and have also demonstrated a reason for which you would use it, then the password will be given out without discussion.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


Thanks. Do remember to cite :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 00:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

12 Organ Concertos, HWV 289-294; 306-311 (Opp.4, 7) (Handel, George Frideric)

Shouldn't the Bonelli transcriptions have to go, as he died in 1986? Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 14:28, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

If they're actually Bonelli's arrangements - yes. Trouble is, arrangements for Organ solo (with cues) were actually published by Walsh in Handel's lifetime. These mighht be editions by Bonelli of those arrangements, in which case they could very well fall under the urtext rubric. Carolus 16:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

True. Should we leave as-is then?

I need to look them over more, but at first glance it looks like Bonelli filled in a few chords and added a couple of fingerings. I changed them to "unknown" status for the time being. I think they're editions more than arrangements. Of course if he added enough, they have to go regardless. Carolus 20:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

True. OK, thanks.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 20:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

A few things

My email system has been very odd lately, so I'm wondering if by any chance you got my message. If not, let me know and I can try an alternative method.

No, but I haven't even checked that e-mail account today. Carolus

Also (I know this is a terrible thing to ask considering the contents of the email, but oh well) I am unsure about the following recording's copyright status: ... I know it was recorded in 1903, and Joachim is PD in Canada. I can't tell by whom this was edited by (I'm sure it was for purpose of quality). Thanks, BKhon 04:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

That's the problem with recordings - the edited one was changed and modified by someone, and the threshold of originality for recordings is considerably lower than that used for editions of music. You'd be better off using the "|NCRecordings=" feature (Non Commercial Recordings) just above the "Work Info" section. That way, it's not on our server but YouTube's instead. Carolus 04:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I sent my answers to the copyright test via email (PML sent it). Thanks, BKhon 16:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
You passed, as you can see from my response to your mail. Congratulations. Carolus 21:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
*cough* user rights *cough* ;-) KGill talk email 23:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Lemlin: Der Gutzgauch

Hi Carolus, I think Carl Thiel only set the dynamics and the key. So I didn't tag it as an arrangement. Regards --Ralph Theo Misch 23:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)