- 1 Delivery
- 2 Year of First Publication
- 3 Classical Pieces for Viola and Piano (Klengel, Paul)
- 4 Chopiniana, Op.46 (Glazunov, Alexander)
- 5 Glazunov Organ Works
- 6 'Sinfonie et Gagliarde' (Rossi, Salamone)
- 7 Translator, add please?
- 8 Zanella, Oriental Fantasy for six 'cellos
- 9 Mignonnette, Op.61 (Chesneau, Carl)
- 10 Composers with the same name
- 11 Piano Sonata No.3, Op.14 (Schumann, Robert)
- 12 Cui and The Beauty of Belaieff
- 13 Dowland Lacrimae
- 14 unless, as is possible, I am misreading from lack of sleep
- 15 12 Sonatas for Violin and Continuo, Op.2 (Leclair, Jean-Marie)
- 16 Symphoniae sacrae I, Op.6 (Schütz, Heinrich)
- 17 License
- 18 Schaffe in mir, Gott, ein rein Herz, BuxWV 95 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)
- 19 Librettist
- 20 Aus der Tiefe, Op.30 (Henschel, George)
- 21 Chopin-Friedheim Complete(?) Works
- 22 Alain recordings
- 23 Les paladins (Rameau,_Jean-Philippe)
- 24 Hoerée arrangement
- 25 Enoch plate harvesting
- 26 19th century US copyright
- 27 Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach
- 28 Moelling Battle of Richmond
- 29 Shaw
- 30 Hedien Miniature Suite For Keyboard
- 31 Cover "thumb"
- 32 arrangements
- 33 Arthur Farwell - American Indian Melodies, Op.11
- 34 Erm... White-Smith
- 35 Bach - Oboe d'amore concerto in D major (recons. Mehl, reduc. Winkelhofer)
- 36 Dessauer
- 37 Missa St. Crucis, Op.151 (Rheinberger, Josef Gabriel)
- 38 HMB template.
- 39 A new source again?
- 40 "Les Trios d'anches de l'Oiseau-Lyre"
- 41 6 Sonate a tre strumenti (Delange, François)
- 42 Carl Friedrich Abel at archive.org
- 43 ThULB
- 44 Question about translation the IMSLP page into Slovak, Bulgarian and Hungarian languages
- 45 Concerto for Flute and Oboe in E minor by Stölzel
- 46 Brahms Violin Sonata, Op.78 arr. by Klengel
- 47 more positively about LoC
- 48 Les musiques bizarres de l'éxposition
- 49 Grand duo concertant sur des thèmes de Robert le diable, B.70 (Chopin, Frédéric)
- 50 Kodaly Sonata Op.4
- 51 Album
- 52 Templates IU, Levy
- 53 Postel Oboe Concerto
- 54 Russian publishers
- 55 Mendelssohn op87
- 56 Victor Ewald: Brass Quintet, Op.6
- 57 Johann Christoph Bach
- 58 Shaw (not Seb.)
- 59 Schoenberg / Belmont
- 60 RE: Biblioteca Digital Hispanica
- 61 Grund
- 62 Suppé, "ein Morgen..."
- 63 Composer holograph/manuscript page positions
- 64 sibley tag
- 65 6 Sonatas for Bassoon and Continuo (Galliard, Johann Ernst)
what means deliver / delivery in the sentences
"Works that were first published, performed or delivered between January 1, 1961 and July 24, 1997 are therefore protected for 50 years from the date of first publication, performance or delivery."
on the site "Public domain? Do you know a good translation?
--TobisNotenarchiv 12:06, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Tobis,
- "Delivery" probably would not apply very much to music. It most likely applies to paintings, sculpture and other artwork - though it could apply to printed copies of music or discs with music encoded. The English word "delivery" is similar to the words "transmission" or "distribution", but most often refers to a physical object while "transmission" or "distribution" can refer to both physical objects or ideas and concepts. This section of Canadian copyright, which deals with posthumous works, states that if a work was first published, performed or delivered (transmitted or distributed) between January 1, 1961 and July 24, 1997, it's 50-year term starts at the date of first publication, performance, or delivery (transmission or distribution). Most musical works were performed at least once in their composers' lifetimes, so this provision only rarely applies. Carolus 02:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for this definition. This helps me to translate the text. --TobisNotenarchiv 19:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Year of First Publication
Hi Carolus! I couldn't help but notice that on several of my submissions you are changing the formatting for the first publication field. I just wanted you to know that I am following the format given in the IMSLP:Score submission guide/General Information. Thanks! --Cypressdome 03:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I was going to mention this to you. This is because the field is actually "read" by the wiki to generate copyright warning boxes. So, I like to make sure the date actually comes first in that particular field on titles from around 1900 onwards - and especially on anything after 1922 - so we don't end up with something missing the appropriate warning box. The date of composition will be read if there's nothing in the publication field, while the first performance (another date field) is not read at all presently. If you notice, I've been listing first performance dates as "1 May 2011" but try to put the year-date first in the date of publication field. I'll have to look at the submission guide to see if this was mentioned and change as needed. UPDATE: Yes, I now see where the confusion arises. I'll give Feldmahler a ring to confirm that the year has to come first in order to be read and change the guide as needed. Carolus 03:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, the cleanup mark is a voluntary declaration. I've already started with Bach. But all other pieces: It's a more or less funny guesswork to find out to which work(page) they belong. I'll continue next night. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
P.S.: Thanks for specifying the date of Mendelssohn's Arr. of his Op.89! Today I've found a publication by Breitkopf in the same style - dated 1876. I wanted to correct my tag, but you've been quicker...--Ralph Theo Misch 23:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, I'm sure you'll split them up perfectly as you always do! No rush - and a welcome addition. Breitkopf started their volksausgabe series in 1876, and they were fast about re-issuing a number of their earlier titles in the series. I think they came out with something like 300 items in the first year. Leipzig must have been an amazing center of music publication back in that era. Carolus 00:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes. And SBB has got them all (apart from those war losses): About 1905 SBB requested all German publishers to deliver a copy of all their editions (Deutsche Musiksammlung) - and they obeyed (Prussia!). --Ralph Theo Misch 23:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Carolus, would you please have a look at the 4th movement 'Walzer'. While the other 4 are reprints of the old edition, this one is a more recent engraving (of 1979). Maybe we can tag it as C ? If not, please delete it.
Any news regarding this? Hobbypianist 19:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Check the page I just updated. It was apparently added later at Fokine's request for performance in the first version of Les Sylphides.
For the Siegfried Wagner symphony, it would appear that the 1984 score is the first publication as we normally use the term. However, under Canada's law this is trumped by a performance in the composer's lifetime, and in the EU we can at least tag as "V" since the score has a 1984 claim. The claim on the score trumps what appears in a CD booklet, so it's almost certainly free in the EU (more than 25 years). Upload away. Carolus 06:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Excepting the parts of the symphony used in other works (as described in the Siegfried Wagner en-Wikipedia article for instance) but if that counted the law would be, if that were conceivable, even more complicated. Not even composed until 1925/1927 or so anyway I see so likely would be waiting awhile for it to be PD-US... :( Eric 12:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Glazunov Organ Works
Pub. 1960 (plate 3515, catalog 192) as edited by Marcel Dupré. Any chance this was faulty or not renewed? Daphnis 22:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- No renewal online. (Everything 1951 onward has renewals online - though those from 1964 forward are automatically renewed). It deserves at least a "C" in USA. Carolus 05:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Glad I asked! Coming soon then... Daphnis 17:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Dear Carolus, that upload is dedicated to a friend of mine who unsuccessfully tried to purchase anything (chamber music) by Rossi. And here is the preface. --Ralph Theo Misch 22:37, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, it's definitely urtext. Unfortunately Giesbert's descendant Margit Becker renewed the US copyright in 1984. EU server only. Carolus 23:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
I could easily make some typesets of idividual pieces...--Ralph Theo Misch 23:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- There's absolutely nothing to stop you from doing that, of course! Carolus 23:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
I'll start next day :))--Ralph Theo Misch 23:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
P.S.: Just found an Urtext of Vivaldi's 'Il Pastor fido', op.13 (by Nicolas Chédeville). I'll see tomorrow.--Ralph Theo Misch 23:52, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- A difficult birth...--Ralph Theo Misch 23:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it the Baerenreiter edition? I think that one has been reprinted by Masters (a division of Kalmus). Carolus 23:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hm - I can't see any more than you could regarding my file(s). And the preface gives no more information about your question. But I'll make a scan.--Ralph Theo Misch 00:10, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Et violà! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. Free in the USA. All six sonatas are available from Masters. Carolus 00:20, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
That's fine! - I'll continue next night. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:24, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
- Just found a recording of the 4th sonata at mediafire via FilesTube. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Translator, add please?
May I be added to the list of translators? I'm currently working on the simplified Chinese traslation; a list of pages I've worked on can be found on my user page. Thanks! --Will W W 00:31, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'll ask Feldmahler to take a look, but that seems OK to me. Carolus 00:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Zanella, Oriental Fantasy for six 'cellos
Dear Carolus, a couple of weeks ago I came into possession of the scan of Zanella's "Fantasia Orientale" for six cellos. It's an unpublished work, existing only in manuscript form. As I know NOTHING about copyright laws and stuff, I'm asking you, as I'd be interested in sahring this piece with as many people as possible...what should I do? Could you please help me? Thanks in advance,
- Hello Jacopo, Since Zanella lived until 1949 all unpublished material is protected until January 1, 2020 in both the EU countries and the USA. In Canada, the work's status depends upon whether it was actually performed or not. If there was a performance or recording in the composer's lifetime or before 1961, the Fantasia Orientale would be public domain in Canada. If the work was never published, performed or delivered, the work will be protected until January 1, 2048. The work can be posted here if you can document a performance. However, it will not be available due to the work's being protected in the USA (the notorious "temporary block" we have to use because the corporate owner of IMSLP is in the USA, even though our main server is in Canada). My recommendation would be to contact Zanella's heirs to obtain their permission to make it available here under one of our licenses. This way, the work can be easily accessed by anyone interested while Zanella's heirs can still receive royalties from the performing rights society for any performances, recordings and broadcasts of the piece. Carolus 02:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus... When the score was edited by 2 publisher, is it correct to complete the Publisher information field like this :
Lyon : L. Bourguignon, Paris : Brandus, n.d.(1868). Plate B.L. 848. ? B.L. is for Bourguignon. --Squin 14:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
- The Lyon publisher (which appears to be the principal publisher from the plate number) should go on top, with a Co-issue (see page). Carolus 23:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Composers with the same name
Hi Carolus -- I am in the process of pulling a large number of scores from BNF by what appeared at first to be a single composer/arranger named Henri Cramer. There were already a few works on IMSLP by an Henri Cramer (1818-1877) but it has become clear that while some of the works on BNF are by this composer, another Henri(?) Cramer (always referred to on scores as simply "Cramer") are mixed in among them. It is obvious they cannot be by the same Cramer because they are arrangements of works written many years after his 1877 death. I am only assuming that this second composer's first name is also Henri because it is listed as such on BNF and a similar record appears on VIAF as well (Cramer, Henri - compositeur 18..?-19..?) - How should I go about creating a composer page for this second and later Henri Cramer? My guess is that he is the son of the one born in 1818 since the arrangements are in a similar vain (bouquets de melodies, etc) but I can't be sure ... Thoughts? Ideas for where to look for more information? Massenetique talk email 05:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- You might try the same thing we did with the two Otto Singers (Otto Singer I and Otto Singer II). Since we don't know the dates for this later Henry Cramer, the thing we did for the two identically named Renaissance composers (placing a "(d.XXXX)" after the surname) wouldn't work here either. I suppose you could use a simple "H. Cramer" for the later one also. Carolus 05:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Just discovered a couple of scores on BNF which designate the arranger as "N. Cramer" and they are "Bouquet de mélodies" arrangements of Lecocq from 1882, exactly the type of thing this later Cramer seems to have done exclusively. Since no score I have seen refers to him as Henri, only the library record, it seems likely that N. may actually be his first initial. Massenetique talk email 05:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- That seems pretty logical. There's also the issue which arise form the fact that "N." is easily mistaken for an "H." in a poorly prinyed or scanned score (which abound in this particular era). Carolus 05:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Very true. I will create the composer page as N. Cramer and if I can find anything more I will update if needed. Thanks! Massenetique talk email 05:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, now I'm convinced there was a whole family of Cramers writing arrangements and transcriptions of popular operas of their respective days ... There's an A. Cramer, an L. Cramer, an R. P. Cramer, and an N. Cramer -- I'm also convinced that the most prolific who goes by simply "Cramer" is indeed Henri Cramer, son of the earlier Henri Cramer. I think listing them as I and II will work well. More than a bit confusing, though... Massenetique talk email 06:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- That's incredible. Guess you've discovered the Cramer mother lode over at BNF. Great detective work! Carolus 06:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi again -- KGill has suggested using dates instead of I/II for the Henri Cramers, since we do not know if they are related - ie. Henri Cramer (d.1877) and Henri Cramer (fl.1890) - though I will have to take a look at the publication dates of everything I have for the younger to see what date works best for him ... Thoughts? Massenetique talk email 02:31, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- If we could establish that the one who was active ca.1890 was the son of the one who died in 1877, that would justify using the I and II designations. Since we have the dates for the elder one (1818-1877), it might be best to leave him as plain "Henri Cramer" and add the date to the younger one's name only. Carolus 03:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, just found a first edition of 2 alternate variations to movement III. Do you have an idea about the publisher and the publishing date? (Bärenreiter, ca.1985, I would guess). Unfortunately I've only found those copies. The other pages include the original scherzo and a painting of the composer by Josepf Kriehuber, Vienna 1839. --Ralph Theo Misch 21:28, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- This would appear to be a Henle score. The problem one encounters with Henle is that despite their use of the term "urtext", they often add fingering and other editorial material which might exempt the item from Germany's 25-year term for urtext editions under section 70 of the copyright law (and the EU's similar provisions in the copyright directives). That's not always the case, as there are some scores (like the Haydn works) which are very much in keeping with the minimalist nature of urtext editions. Piano music is particularly treacherous when it comes to Henle, though. Carolus 22:29, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! That means: hands off? ;-) --Ralph Theo Misch 22:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Cui and The Beauty of Belaieff
Hello, I added a link under Reference to The Beauty of Belaieff. Most of the listings of compositions of Russian 19th century music come from the research of Richard Beattie Davis. His reference work The Beauty of Belaieff brings them all together in one volume, which is why I feel it should be referenced in each entry for a composer whose work was published by M.P. Belaieff. The entry has been removed without any indication as to why this is the case. Would you indicate why the deletion was done and how I should create acceptable entries
- It is extremely unlikely that any our listings came from this book, as I am fairly certain that most of our contributors who add info to the publisher pages are not familiar with it. Even if one or more of our contributors had a copy of this unusual and expensive (168 USD) book, information of this nature is public domain in any case. Our plate number listings have generally been compiled from the scores actually found on this site, with some added info taken from library listings such as WorldCat. (You will note that many of the numbers are linked to their respective work pages.) Other information (like the short publisher histories) has been compiled from Wikipedia, Grove, the old Macmillan Encyclopedia, etc. The entires you added to the composer category pages were 1) for a book which is not limited to the one composer covered by that category; and 2) took up way too much space on the page - pushing the main part (our listing of available works - automatically generated) down on the page. As I mentioned over at your own talk page, there might be a case for including a link to this book on the pages for some of the more obscure composers if the book provides a type of catalog of that composer's works. This would be done in a much more concise form than the one found at the bottom of the Belaieff page. Carolus 02:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Dear Carolus, this moment I'm scanning an urtext edition by NMA Kassel, 1953 (F.J. Giesbert). It will be my last scan this week; I'll be back on monday. Shall I continue, is there already a reprint in the US? Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 21:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
- Scan away - no renewal in USA. That will be a very nice one to have, as I recall. Carolus 21:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
OK - about one hour. Thanks --Ralph Theo Misch 21:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
- Just seen: only part I of the original from 1605 (nos.1-7). So only 1 hour... Please tell me if you need the (German) preface. --Ralph Theo Misch 22:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
No need for the preface. Carolus 22:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
unless, as is possible, I am misreading from lack of sleep
what I read inside a few of the composer categories was indeed the text [[Category:Music Publishers|Belaieff]], with the unsurprising effect of having those composers turn up at the Music Publishers page (and, in the same position sortingwise as Belaieff does.) Not necessarily what GClefpublisher - who I confirmed was the person who inserted the text - intended. it is true that some composers - actually quite a number - have self-published and continue to - of course... - so I do hedge a lot - though that wouldn't explain the use of Belaieff as a sort term... Eric 06:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- He must have done that when he put in links on all those composer pages for the book he's selling. I check the log so it must have been the ones I removed the link from earlier. In looking over the description of this book, it would appear that it contains works lists for all of the composers he added the links to. The way he did it took up a fourth of the composer page - so it was like a big free ad for the book (which is unacceptable, naturally). At any rate, I'm looking at way to include it as it is actually a very useful reference, despite being pricey (168 USD). He also seemed to have this idea that we compiled our plate number tables from his book, which is certainly not the case. Carolus 06:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that. The only plate information I've gathered from a book has been from Rapoport's on Holmboe and from the Googlebooks-available (iirc) LoC book on MacDowell 1st Editions (both quite thorough and good in my opinion, though perhaps I shouldn't say so since I know the author of the former. ), and the latter is out of copyright, while the author of the former did I think have to remind me that within limits one is supposed to use these things in/as a reference source - like his - that's what it's for and what the fair use exception is for if it comes to that. There's more a limit on how much information one can use rather than how many. As to the Holmboe, none of his published works are pre-1922, so that gave the opportunity to start entering some plate table information for Hansen post-1922 in case we should sometime want or need it - a lot more in the book where that came from in fact. (And for a smaller publisher called Viking that Holmboe used, also.) But yes, agreed, for Belaieff - pre-1923 mainly for US citizens like me - and others with a regular habit of plate-and-year application, observation was usually more than sufficient, true... Eric 06:34, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
12 Sonatas for Violin and Continuo, Op.2 (Leclair, Jean-Marie)
Hi, Carolus − I think that the score #18123 uploaded by 'Ottaviano' in 2008 is actually the DKB's scan () with unneeded margins added − and the library's stamps withdrawed. My opinion is that our file should be replaced by the original one, from DKB. What do you think? Am I able to do this? − Cheers Pierre.chepelov 19:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- Same thing on 12 Sonatas for Violin and Continuo, Op.5 (Leclair, Jean-Marie) (#18124 / ) − Pierre Ch. 19:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
I think you're correct. Go ahead and replace so we can credit DKB. Carolus 04:42, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done. (and also for one Pugnani.) − Pierre Ch. 21:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Excellent - and thank you. We have a cordial relationship with the folks at DKB, so I like to be sure their superb work is correctly attributed wherever possible. Carolus 21:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, considering the CR remark the constellation of the first 4 pages could be interesting. --Ralph Theo Misch 22:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
- I suspect Gerber's realization here falls in the same class as that of Max Seiffert's of the Pachelbel Kanon und Gigue - not very original, and something any reasonably trained 2nd-year university music student could be expected to do. I would not be at all surprised if there was software to create such realizations presently available. I will go ahead and tag as "Non-PD EU" but I suspect that such realizations fall under the EU's (and Germany's) provisions for urtext editions. Carolus 02:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. I was wondering how I might change the license from nc-sa to nc-nd. Jmpunit 04:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- You can do it after the fact, just copy the correct nomenclature and paste into the copyright field. Carolus 04:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks again! Jmpunit 04:34, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Dear Carolus, I think it's the same case as Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied, BuxWV 98 (Buxtehude, Dietrich). Just compared my copy of BuxWV 98 with that file uploaded by ctesibius: his one is a reissue or a reprint of the Bärenreiter edition from about 1934 (preface).
The realization of the figured bass of BuxWV 95 looks a bit like painting by numbers. Maybe both cantatas are first editions - I'll have a look. --Ralph Theo Misch 22:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- I think both may indeed be first editions. I wish there was something definitive about the status of continuo realizations with respect to urtext editions under the provisions of EU and German law, but neither law itself is that explicit. From what I've seen from uploads at German libraries like BSB, it would appear that an urtext edition incorporates not only the original music as left by the public domain composer, but also any continuo realization and critical notes - perhaps even the editor's preface. On the other hand, the fact that state libraries like BSB post items of this nature complete could merely indicate that they are exempt from the normal restrictions of copyright laws (a type of "fair use" exemption). This is one of the most frustrating areas in terms of trying to apply a consistent standard here. So, for now, I will tag them as being protected in the EU. Carolus 22:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, maybe the US copyright law is not the only confusing one.
Just seen: in both cases at least Willibald Gurlitt is earlier (1925, according to worldcat). --Ralph Theo Misch 22:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- I just linked to a PDF of the Buxtehude-Werkverzeichnis on his composer page, which might also have some info on first publication. Carolus 22:38, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Hm - the publications of the "Ugrinogesellschaft" ('Ugrino Society', Gurlitt & Co.) are not mentioned there. The preface by Matthaei (BuxWV 98) refers to it. I'll have a look next night. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:13, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I had a recollection which I should have checked of its being moved there when I did not do so (in cases of collections that is, not single-song workpages when it is practically always obvious how to etc), or something like that. Sorry about that...!!! Eric 02:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The reason I put this under its German title is that it was quite clearly originally written in German first and translated after; and the English translation is almost painfully ill-fitting. --Fynnjamin 08:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- I was wondering about this as you are no doubt aware of him being primarily an English composer. Did he actually compose this while in Germany? I recall he moved to England quite early in his career so I thought it was a case where it was done with both English and German texts but actually performed and published first in English. If this was an early work originally set in German then later translated we should change it back to the German. The Novello score clearly put the English title and text first but they did that with works that were clearly originally German so that can't be the determining factor. I'm not that up on Henschel's work except the basic outline - not sure where the dividing line is between German works and English. I recall he moved around 1875 (1877 according to Wikipedia) though, which was a couple of years before the Novello score was issued (1879). UPDATE: Looks like LOC is using the German - we have now corrected accordingly. Thanks, Carolus 23:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Chopin-Friedheim Complete(?) Works
Hi Carolus, I haven't been able to find any references to any Friedheim editions of Chopin's works other than the Etudes. Is it possible that Joseffy died before producing a complete edition of the Etudes and so Schirmer published Friedheim's edition to fill the gap in the Joseffy complete edition of Chopin's works? Thanks, --Cypressdome 04:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, I am fairly certain that Friedheim's edition was complete. I'll check through the WorldCat records to be sure. There's no rush of course, just thought it would be nice to have everything listed in light of the understandable confusion which has arisen over the years due to Schirmer having published no less than 3 editions of Chopin's piano works. Carolus 05:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, I don't know if I should upload the recording of the Scherzo (JA 070) - there are 2 serious mistakes. I'll see. The Choral (JA 082) seems to be quite well - but it's long ago... --Ralph Theo Misch 23:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Since you're the performer, you will have to be the ultimate judge. What you've uploaded so far is certainly very enjoyable. Carolus 23:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks!! - Yes, I know, it's solitary decision... --Ralph Theo Misch 23:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Bonjour Carolus, May you take a look at this score. It's a very interresting version I compiled with pages before and after correction from Rameau's hand on his own manuscript, he made by sticking. A sort of version 0. Look at p1,2 & 3 for a good example f the same page with modifying. But I don't know how I should correctly name this upload. --Squin 14:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- That is very interesting indeed! The English term for this is "pasteover" and Rameau used them well. This is not uncommon in manuscripts, especially older ones, as music paper was fairly expensive at the time. (It did not become inexpensive until the 1800s). An excellent addition! Great find. Carolus 01:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus. Is there any reason this is still being kept around? (Perhaps you were waiting on a reply to a message requesting permission or something similar?) Thanks, KGill talk email 01:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- No, just forgot about it! Thanks for the reminder. I'll get rid of it momentarily. Carolus 03:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Enoch plate harvesting
is now complete according to our current holdings. If you or anyone else wants to make any changes with additional information or clarification, now would be a good time. Daphnis 16:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
19th century US copyright
I notice more and more that a lot of items scanned in at the LoC (whether by the LoC or someone else is a separate issue, since they mirror several sources, but not bringing that up here :) ) have copyright in the names of their composers. I know WorldCat, for example (or rather, many of its member libraries- Worldcat itself doesn't really 'do' anything) always assumes that this is the same as copyright by the eventual first publisher in that same year (and therefore for our purposes, probable publication by that first publisher in that same year) but is this necessarily the case? Eric 17:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC) (part of the question too is whether the copyright is in the names of the composers or actually was taken out by them, of course- the question arises in the latter case, I mean.)
To be a little bit clearer (though not much- I need to work at that) - copyright dates on a score, in some cases is not in itself great evidence of publication date, I think- I may be wrong and I am no one's idea of an expert. (But if I am throwing out guesses, they are ones that are beginning to be educated, not totally random ones :) ...) So in some cases one may need - I think - to check contemporary sources for reviews-or-advertisements-...etc. to help confirm actual publication. Especially if the copyright is to a person rather than a publisher. Another completely, totally unrelated thing- noticed that Sydney Smith Archive has a long, interesting list of publication dates for the works of that composer. I was wondering how it was they knew so surely when e.g. Hofmeister MB produced fairly consistently a list of European first publication dates that were a year or two later than the first publication dates they had (except of course for those works by Smith that were first published in Germany etc.) I think I found the answer awhile back- if you don't already know (I expect you do- sorry!!) - they may have used back issues of the Musical Times and similar journals where many of those Smith publications are advertised, as new publications, in just the years they list (for the few examples I tried- I certainly didn't check anywhere near all 200-plus.) That, or their contacts :) within the British Library may have been helpful. Eric 23:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- In the USA, it was absolutely critical - an explicit legal requirement - that the date of first publication appear in the notice of copyright. The reason you see some cases where the composer is listed as the claimant is most likely a case where the composer paid to have the item engraved and printed himself, only later selling it to the publisher. Only some composers were this astute however, others (unwisely) sold their entire interest in the work permanently to the publisher for a few dollars, or even for 100 printed copies of the work (Sousa did this for some early marches, for example). So, the printed date is indeed most likely the actual first publication date on USA original issues, even if the copy in hand was a later printing. When it comes to US issues of European originals, the dating gets a bit more irregular. Until 1891, nothing published outside the USA was even eligible for US copyright protection. So, American publishers sometimes claimed a date of publication which was actually the first date they sold scores imported from Europe and stamped with their own imprint. Others went so far as to credit American "editors" - who did little if any actual editing. Others merely reprinted the European scores without notice of any kind, while their competitors actually re-engraved the score with a real US editor. Using the sources you have been - Hofmeister, etc. - is still best for European scores as there were very few European publishers who operated in the USA also (Schuberth being the major exception). Hofmeister, etc. might have a significant lag in the dates given for USA and Russian scores, as the dates reflect when the item was made available in Leipzig - not the original city of publication. Carolus 02:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach
Hello! Sorry if I bother you, but I'm noob on IMSLP. Due to some problems with the soprano's key of the original manuscript, I uploaded too many versions of this piece, could you delete all those? So I load the correct and final score.--RiccardoP1983 03:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, It takes a couple of hours (at least) for your latest version to actually appear in your web browser. At any rate, I'll go ahead and delete the actual file this time as I see you've replaced it a number of times. Carolus 04:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! :) --RiccardoP1983 04:05, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
Moelling Battle of Richmond
yep- JHU has a scan of the original 1863? (can't quite read that number but that sounds right, given the date of the battle and other things) score with the correct (354, rather than 10354) plates which otherwise is identical except for that 1893 "copyright" notice of course. I should have uploaded that instead, really... might upload it in addition but later today or tomorrow (if only because, well, once done with the next - am barely awake I think. ) Thanks! Eric 06:12, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Might be interesting just for comparison. Carolus 06:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Odd- I thought I did find reference to them as a NY and Chicago publisher in a NY Times article from December 22 1897 (byline December 21) but may not have been reading carefully enough (the link is very long but can probably be found in a search engine search - the title is "W.F. Shaw's Chicago Branch Closed.") The latter section of the article refers to the stock as 230,000 (250,000? scan is a bit scrunched) pieces of sheet music. Eric 06:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- That's interesting. I had not seen any references to a Chicago branch. It's not totally surprising as many publishers in the USA would open branch offices in the larger cities as their catalogues grew in size. Ditson ended up with branch offices all over the place, and some of them even produced their own issues (New York in particular). Shaw is a pretty obscure publisher who I don't know much about - except that the principal office was Philadelphia. Carolus 23:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hedien Miniature Suite For Keyboard
Just so you know, I added the Miniature Suite For Keyboard to the Mark Hedien Composer page. I am the composer and the Creative Commons License is fine. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks again for your hard work on IMSLP. Glad to see the website survived its most recent challenge.
I jut tried to add a thumb of the cover for Hubay Variations op.72. I cannot figure out, what I did wrong - filetype?
Help appreciated--Kalliwoda 06:50, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, I found the instructions and uploaded a jpg. And Ralph Theo Misch added another within seconds of my last modification. Only have to ask that you kindly delete the three unneccessary files I created
Thank you--Kalliwoda 07:22, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- (I'm not Carolus, but) all three of the files have now been removed. Cheers, KGill talk email 18:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
what sorts of things determine the order of arrangements within a subcategory (if a particularly complicated page like one of the Beethoven symphonies, order of upload, order of publication, sub-order by movement, ...? ) Thanks! Eric 15:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Four equal-sign hierarchy - sections of a work or different versions (not different instrumentations) trump the arrangements, which are five equal-signs. Thus arrangements of the complete work go on top with those for largest ensembles (orchestra and band) highest and those for solo instruments at bottom within the section. If there are multiple arrangements within a section for one particular instrument they are stacked in alphabetical order of the arranger's last name. Carolus 00:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! ... further on, I'm not sure who I ask about this (and since this thread is already open here :) ) - do you know whether continuo realization counts as editing or arrangement, or who I should ask about that? (Shades of Sawkins vs. Hyperion Records, come to think of that, if only because continuo realization turned out to be important to the judge(s)' reasoning, if I remember.) Eric 14:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC) (only asking though for our purposes whether it should count as a linkEd or a linkArr. the last bit was a typical tangent...)
- Hi Eric, you’re asking about rôles people play… and for a variety of works, the answer is that the one person may be wearing multiple hats: if it’s a modern edition, the person may have personally done the typesetting using one of the current notation packages; the remainder of the work aside from the continuo may have required editorial expertise, thus qualifying for the LinkEd template. The continuo realisation is strictly an arrangement task, though it may involve a limited quantity of original composition, so the LinkArr tag is used for that. However, where the person involved has done both the editorial and the arrangement tasks, we usually go with the LinkEd tag as of the higher importance.
- On a page like La menace des Francs, H 117 (Berlioz, Hector) where I uploaded some of my own typesets, the full score was tagged with the LinkEd template, and the vocal score (incorporating a piano reduction of my own devising) was tagged with the LinkArr template. If there had been a vocal score only, I would have tagged LinkEd as the priority.
- Cheers, Philip @ © talk 00:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
This wearing of multiple hats gets quite complicated when it comes to trying to determine what falls under the urtext rubric of EU copyright law. From what I've seen of the BSB site, the folks in Germany appear to take the view that everything associated with the edition, including prefaces, critical notes and continuo realizations, fall under the 25-30 year term. Is that really fair in the case of an editor whose realization is truly more of an arrangement? On the other hand, should a simple, perfunctory realization - one that any second-year theory student should be able to do, like Max Seiffert's for the famous Pachelbel Canon - really be eligible for a life-plus-70 term? Think about this stuff too long and your head begins to spin! Carolus 01:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Arthur Farwell - American Indian Melodies, Op.11
Hi Carolus, I was getting ready to post this under Farwell but I see on the cover that he is listed as having "edited and arranged for the piano" these melodies. Each of the pieces is listed as being "harmonized by" Farwell. So, if I should post this with Farwell as the editor under which composer does it get posted? Perhaps, some version of "Various"? Thanks! --Cypressdome 03:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I think these are most widely known under Farwell's name (they are listed under Farwell in the Masters Music catalog at present), which is entirely unfair as he really did do quite a bit of arrangement with these. I would also like to see us not end up with a "Various" category that reads like a telephone book. I have been thinking of setting up some pseudo-composer categories using the rubric <Folk Music, American Indian> or something similar. I'd like to have a discussion of the issue on the forums and see what some of the other contributors think about it. If we do end up adding the different categories of Folk Music, we can move the work to it easily enough when the time comes and leave Farwell listed as arranger (which really is the most accurate description). Thanks for the VW Phantasy Quintet, BTW. It's long been a favorite piece of mine. Carolus 04:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Carolus. I'll put it under Farwell for the time being. The folk music pseudo-composer categories sounds like a good solution. Hathi Trust has Alice Fletcher's works and I've seen some early African-American folk music collections over there that would make nice additions. Thanks again! --Cypressdome 22:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
White-Smith Publishing Company, one of the two parties in that legal case, existed from 1840-something until 1940-something and seems to have been a separate company from White, Smith & Co. which I think existed only from 1867-odd to 1895 or so? Eric 02:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- The White-Smith in the court case was a music publishing company. I'll look at the decision itself, but the case was over a piano roll of a copyrighted musical work published by White-Smith. It seems unlikely there were two firms named so much alike in the era, though not completely impossible. Carolus 03:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC) UPDATE: It does not answer the question directly, but I expect that the company name was changed to White-Smith Music Publishing Co., sometime after the death of the last surviving founder in 1892. I'll do a little more research, specifically on the two pieces mentioned in the case.
White, Smith (sans Perry who left in '74) stopped publishing Folio in 1895 and I don't know if they were publishing much else at all by that point - little seems to show up in Worldcat anyway, but need to keep checking. You may be right about that. I need to see if I can get access to the -whole- of the article referred to at the bottom of the page (the Jstor one) at the Cornell library next I'm there (if they carry that magazine's archive- I think they do). May clarify this... as is, since I'm no longer student, staff, fish or fowl at the uni, can only see the first page really. :) Eric 03:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Additional update: From the Macmillan Encyclopeida - Founded in Boston by Charles A. White (1832-1892) composer of semi-popular songs and piano music. Publisher of Charles Wakefield Cadman, etc. The composer of the two songs involved in the case was Adam Geibel (1855-1933). The first title, Little Cotton Dolly (plantation song) with text by Richard Henry Buck (1870-1956), was published in 1897 by White-Smith Music Publishing Co. of Boston, plate 10343. The second song, also with words by Buck, was Kentucky Babe (plantation lullaby), issued the previous year by the same company, plate 10083. Here's a link for a C.A. White song issued in 1891, plate 8174, with the imprint "White-Smith Music Publishing Co." Here's one from 1884, plate 5612 - note the imprint: White, Smith & Co. Carolus 03:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
VIAF goes with 1832 too for Charles Albert White..., unlike H Earle Johnson. Got it... Eric 03:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- The plate numbering appears to coincide. Items were naturally reprinted with the name change (ca.1889) from before. Here is an item from 1885, plate 5731. This is almost certainly same company involved in the court case, and even more strangely, the imprint appears to have been in use up through the 1980s. Carolus 03:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Bach - Oboe d'amore concerto in D major (recons. Mehl, reduc. Winkelhofer)
This reconstruction by Arnold Mehl and piano reduction by Friedemann Winkelhofer was published in 1983 by Kunzelmann. I can't find anything on these two characters. Clearly, this would be copyright in the US, but how about Canada and the EU? Daphnis 19:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- If it's a reconstruction it counts as an arrangement. I'll see if I can find anything, but if it was a new reconstruction done in 1983 it will not remain here for long. Carolus 22:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC) UPDATE: Mehl is still alive, so don't bother posting unless it's another case like Fischer's below. Carolus 23:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- In that case, you may also want to scope out the concerto for oboe and violin that I posted to ensure it, too, is kosher. Daphnis 22:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's a bit confusing. Max Seiffert (or some unknown arranger) clearly provided solo part reconstructions for oboe and violin in the International reprint of the Peters ca.1920 score on the workpage. The orchestra is presumably the same as in Bach's own transcription. So, if Fischer's concertante reconstruction is different from the ca.1920 one done by Seiffert, it would be protected in the USA. However, if there is no difference, I might be tempted to challenge their 1970 claim of copyright here. Do you know the two scores well enough to give a quick assessment? Carolus 23:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe the result list of SBB give some help:  --Ralph Theo Misch 00:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK, so now we have a Max Schneider reconstruction to throw into the pot. In any case, the "first publication" of 1970 claim strikes me as dubious. (First publication of what?) Carolus 00:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Could we acknowlege Heinrich Dessauer's arrangements please.
Can we ask contributors to look out for the following?
Boccherini, L., Sonate No. 3 (G) p. Vla et Piano transcr. p. H. Dessauer. Mainz, Schott r 1899.
Bruch, Max, Adagio aus dem Violinkonzert, Op. 26, f. Vla (Vla alta) m. Pfte übertr. v. Heinrich Dessauer. Leipzig, Siegel. 1894.
Grieg, Edvard, Op. 13. Sonate (G) f. Pfte u. V., f. Vla u. Pfte übertr. v. Heinrich Dessauer.. Leipzig, Breitkopf & Härtel. 1895.
Bargiel, Woldemar, Op. 38. Adagio (G) f. Vcello m. Orch. Ausg. f. Vla (bearb. v. H. Dessauer) m. Pfte.. Leipzig, Breitkopf & Härtel. 1894.
Corelli, A., Op. 5. Sonate No. 12 (Follia) p. Vla et Piano transcr. p. H. Dessauer. Mainz, Schott 1899.
Francoeur, Fz., Sonate No. 4 (E) p. Vla et Piano transcr. p. H. Dessauer. Mainz, Schott 1899.
Hollaender, Gustav, Op. 3. Spinnerlied f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinrich Dessauer.. Leipzig, Rob. Forberg. 1894.
Hollaender, Gustav, Op. 12. Wiegenlied f. Vla u. Pfte bearb. v. Heinrich Dessauer.. Leipzig, Rob. Forberg. 1894.
Hollaender, Gustav, Op. 36. Cavatine f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinr. Dessauer. Leipzig, Hug & Co. 1894.
Hollaender, Gustav,Op. 37. Gavotte f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinrich Dessauer. Leipzig, Hug & Co. r 1894
Leclair, J.B., Sonate No. 3 (D) p. Vla et Piano transcr. p. H. Dessauer. Mainz, Schott 1899.
Neruda Bercuse Slave Op 11 f . Vc m. Pfte f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinrich Dessauer Rahter
Raff, Joachim, Andante aus dem 1. Violinkonzert, Op. 161, f. Vla (Vla alta) m. Pfte übertr. v. Heinrich Dessauer.. Leipzig, Siegel. l 1894.
Rentsch, Ernst, Op. 6. Romanze f. V. m. Pfte, f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinrich Dessauer.. Leipzig, Hug & Co. 1894.
Wilhelmj, August, Romanze (E) f. Vla m. Pfte arr. v. Heinr. Dessauer.– Berlin, Schlesinger. 1894.
Simon, A., Berceuse f. Vla m. Pfte bearb. v. Heinr. Dessauer. Leipzig, Hug & Co. r 1894.
Marie Elisabeth, Wiegenlied f. Vla m. Pfte einger. v. Heinr. Dessauer. Leipzig, Leuckart. 1894.
- William, Are you wanting these arrangements to be posted here? Or, is this a list of items arranged by Dessauer you wish to be credited as such? If it is a case of you wishing for the arrangements to be posted, I recommend you post a message on this thread over at the forum. Thanks, Carolus 22:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.
Dessauer does not have his own page under arrangers. Can this be made?
Following your kind advice, I posted a request for the Dessauer works on the score requests page. However, based on past experience I am not very hopeful. Thus I thought it might be better to directly ask a proven contributor of similar material. Since I have no access to large European libraries, all my contributions are from my own small collection.
- If there are any Dessauer arrangements already here, a page can be created for him. Since he died in 1917 there will be no type of copyright issue either.
- btw a Worldcat search suggests that Heinrich Dessauer penned two books, not presently available online, but which if someone obtained them and scanned them in would be germane to the site etc. (Die Skalen und Akkorde und andere technische Materialien für die Violine. Heft 1, Leuckart? n.d., and Die technische Grundlage des modernen Violinspiels : fortschreitende Uebungen für Violine von der Mittelstufe bis zur Virtuosität Leuckardt 1897?. With either of those scanned and uploaded Dessauer could have a proper "composer page" and all the other issues would be finessed ;)) Eric 04:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- And until then, poor Mr. Dessauer will remain "in the red (links)" Carolus 05:26, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, I know that these copies are an affront. Nevertheless, also the Basses want to be free ;-) --Ralph Theo Misch 22:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 23:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
eventually a somewhat more general template may be useful in my opinion (I have found other sources to of course be both useful and necessary though how to make a template work for several of them at once would bear thinking on if possible at all, depending on any commonalities...) but if I understand right an HMB-link template would both be very useful and serve an expanded educational purpose for those who don't see the information about the various HMB-related sites on the other-libraries-page - so seems really a very good idea to me. Eric 05:45, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for the input. I'll see what Cypressdome has to say also, but perhaps it's time to ask one of our master template makers (Perlnerd and KGill seem to be very well-versed in creating them - with all sorts of if/else arguments) might have time to whip one up. Carolus 05:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I think setting up a template for links to the Monatsbericht images at the Austrian National Library would be a great idea. Currently, if they should change their url structure we'd have broken links that would all have to be updated individually. If we had a template then hopefully we'd only have to update it. Would using a template allow us to enclose the date in brackets as opposed to parentheses as we currently have to do? If so, then we'd be able to move back toward that particular standard. The ANL's url structure for the images appears very straighforward. Excluding the zoom options there are four variables. Both "aid" and "teil" remain the same for all volumes of the HMB. "Bd" equals the year and "seit" equals the actual page number displayed on the image. That being the case a template should require us to only enter the year and page number which has the added bonus that if ANL ever took down the site we'd have an immediate reference to the exact volume and page on which the work is cited. The only other Hofmeister reference that gives us the exact year of publication is the Verzeichnis. Unless someone knows otherwise only Hathi Trust has these volumes online (with gaps and theirs includes the few that Google Books has posted). Hathi Trust's url for each volume is problematic as each book is identified by an alpha-numeric string in the format of abc.######## in which the first letters identify the donating institution while the numbers just seem random. I wouldn't think there'd be an easy way to create a template for these. Furthermore, I'm in the process of uploading all of these to IMSLP and once done I will probably upload them to archive.org which can give users the page-by-page display that IMSLP doesn't provide. I can post those with a standardized name such as hofmeister_verzeichnis_YYYY which, should we want to link to them, would make them template-friendly. Is there anyway we can query the publication information field to return a list of all pages that have a link to anno.onb.ac.at? Thanks! --Cypressdome 16:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Here you go: Template:HMB Cheers, KGill talk email 15:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Awesome! Thanks KGill! --Cypressdome 00:55, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hear, Hear! Outstanding. Carolus 02:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
A new source again?
Dear Carolus, I've found it via europeana.eu: ThULB. Cheers --Ralph Theo Misch 00:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. Upload away. Carolus 00:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'll spread that (those?) good tidings and endeavour myself... --Ralph Theo Misch 00:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
"Les Trios d'anches de l'Oiseau-Lyre"
Around 1947/48 a number of trios for oboe, clarinet, and bassoon were published by L'Oiseau Lyre or Dryer first. Several of these (Ibert, Sauguet, Auric) are public domain in the US and were reprinted by Masters, I guess because they were not renewed. The others in the collection (Canteloube, Barraud, Milhaud, and Lesur) apparently are not available from Masters, but I'm wondering if you can determine if they, too, are actual public domain by virtue of either faulty registration or non-renewal. I ask because for several of these (Ibert, Auric, Canteloube), no scores were ever produced, and I'm in the process of typesetting one (Ibert) right now which could go on the US server. At least these previously-mentioned three are fairly commonplace repertory for this combination and I know scores would be quite useful to more than a few. Thanks much. Daphnis 00:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- I happen to remember when Masters reprinted this. They definitely checked on the whole series and reprinted only those items which were not renewed. Some composers (or heirs) in the series were on the ball and renewed their works, meaning they would be free in Canada only in some cases, in others still protected worldwide). I remember that Clark McAlister, the vice-president there, was irked that some of these folks dropped the renewals while others were right on time. Another thing - there were (I think) a couple of cases where the composers or heirs actually filed NIEs for restoration - forcing Masters to take the item out of print, so check to make sure it's still available on the Masters site. Carolus 00:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I have checked Masters' site (where and on what machine is the Ludwig Masters site hosted? It responds like it's behind a 56K line!) and it appears that Ibert, Auric, and Sauguet are still available. I'm uploading the Sauguet score and parts now and will produce scores for at least Ibert and Auric. Canteloube, while apparently not free in the US, still is in Canada, so that will likely be last on my list. Daphnis 00:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, unsurprisingly whois masters-music.com says that Kalmus (in Boca Raton, Florida) is the registrant. Eric 00:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- Masters (now LudwigMasters) is a division of Kalmus, as is Klavier records. Carolus 00:48, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
We really need to do something about that...thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, she's never gotten back to me on this. I'll take it down in a minute. It's been hanging there long enough. Carolus 03:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Carl Friedrich Abel at archive.org
Hm - that video seems to be contributed by the performer (the ogg file is of poor quality, the MPEG4 file is much better). But I can't find any licence. Shall I upload it? --Ralph Theo Misch 23:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, the lack of a license means we have to assume that all rights are reserved by the uploader, which means you have to ask him if we can upload here. Carolus 02:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, I have discovered your template. I would like to apply it, but I'm not very smart of it. The first and only application (Suite, Op.50 (Taubert, Wilhelm)) refers to Volkmann's Op.17. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
- Just use the 8-digit number and it should take care of the rest. For some reason, the Op.50 did not have the correct number. Carolus 00:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ah - thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 09:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Question about translation the IMSLP page into Slovak, Bulgarian and Hungarian languages
I would like to help you to improve the IMSLP web site. If you want I can translate it into Slovak, Bulgarian and Hungarian languages. But I wanted to ask you if someone will pay for the translation to me, or not? Or it is just a translation for free so you will be not paid for it?
Thank you in advance for your answer
--Zdenko Dzurjanin 07:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
- Dear Zdenko, All translation here is done by volunteers for no payment - as indeed everything here is done. The only people who are paid is the company who hosts our servers. Carolus 04:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Concerto for Flute and Oboe in E minor by Stölzel
Hi Carolus, the score of the above concerto is available at IMSLP in a new edition by
Thomas A. Schneider, based on the parts of the SLUB. Now I realized, that this work is protected
as "Erstausgabe" (Verlag Hofmeister, Leipzig), see http://www.vg-musikedition.de/. Has this
legal consequences for us? BTW, I had the same problem with an oboe concerto of Reichenauer.
There are 3 concertos at IMSLP, for two of them I made new editions, but I eliminated the third,
because it is listed at vg-musikedition as "Erstausgabe". Best wishes, Notenschreiber.Notenschreiber 16:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Notenschreiber, there would be no legal consequences in Canada and possibly none in the USA, but the EU is another matter. If Hofmeister is claiming first publication less than 25 years ago, Thomas (who is in Germany) cannot publish the work as he opens himself to possible action. Do you happen to know when Hofmeister claims to have published this? Generally speaking, any 'erstausgabe' less than 25 years old ties the work up in the EU. In Canada, the work must have never been performed in order for something by a composer dead over 50 years to qualify for the 50 year editio princeps term. The USA (as always) is its own circle of hell. Carolus 04:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello Carolus, the year of publication is 2007. The Reichenauer-Concert has been published approximately in the same time, so I have made the
right decision not to publish it here. Shall we let TAS know about this difficulties? He published more Stölzel´s from which other modern
publications exists, but the Concert for Flute and Oboe is the only one which is mentioned at vg-musikedition, so the publishers doesn´t claim a copyright
in the other cases, I think. (Or is a copyright for first editions coming automatically?)Notenschreiber 06:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- I will post a note at TAS's page about this issue. While it is perfectly legal for him to publish something in both Canada and the USA, he might wish to consider doing so under a different name because of the EU issue (though that might not be really needed as long as I tag such things for their EU status. Thanks very much for letting me know about this as there is no way I can easily keep track of all the things which have been published - especially the recent items. Carolus 06:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
I read your note at the discussion page of TAS. Unfortunately you have confounded the concerto for flute and oboe with the concerto for violin and oboe. The latter was first published 1963, so it causes no problems.Notenschreiber 09:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
- I amended it now, thanks. Carolus 03:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a first edition of the oboe concerto in D by Stölzel from 1953 (Editor: Herrmann Töttcher), so this is public domain now.-
I have seen, that you consequently tagged the parts from the slub of the concerto for flute and oboe as non pd until 2033. This seems to
be strange because these are sources from a public library, accessible for everybody. Moreover, seriously taken one had to tag all works of
the slub, from which there exists first editions younger than 25 years, as non pd in the EU, and these will be numerious.Notenschreiber 05:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Brahms Violin Sonata, Op.78 arr. by Klengel
Hi Carolus, This particular arrangement which is on the wish list is available on Hathi Trust, however, the fingering for the cello part was added by Bertold Hummel (d.2002). Would I have to erase the fingering in order to post it here? Thanks! --Cypressdome 03:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- To be on the safe side, yes, I would recommend that you get rid of any fingering. Carolus 03:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
more positively about LoC
one does learn a lot of history while browsing it and other national library sites. A piece written to honor the "Celluloid Piano Key Company" (uploading the piece in a couple of minutes probably) mentions that a Henry Morgenthau was the latter's secretary- just perhaps father of a very famous 20th-century name? To mention only one example. Didn't mean to suggest I found it some sort of drudgery, the very opposite in fact. Anyhow. Cheers Eric 14:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Les musiques bizarres de l'éxposition
Hi Carolus - quick question - I came across an interesting score today and I'm not sure where to post it. It's entitled Les musiques bizarres de l'éxposition and consists of piano transcriptions of the various foreign musical performances given at the 1889 Paris Exposition Universelle. The transcriber is one "Benedictus" (who I have pretty well determined is Louis Benedictus (b.1850)). Should this be posted with Benedictus as the author, or under Various, or perhaps Anonymous? Thoughts? Thanks! Massenetique talk email 07:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- I would recommend putting under Various, with Louis Benedictus as arranger, though it would be OK to use Benedictus as the author if he was the actual compiler of the collection in addition to being responsible for the transcriptions. Carolus 21:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I believe this piece was written by both Chopin and Franchomme... How do we put it under both composers names? Thanks for all your help. Generoso 22:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks Carolus 22:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks...That was fast! Generoso
Kodaly Sonata Op.4
Carolus, just a quick question, would the Kodaly Sonata Op.4 be PD? It has a copyright of 1922, renewed in 1949 and assigned in 1952 to Universal Edition? Thanks Generoso 22:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's PD in USA only. You have to upload to the USA server (see forums). If you prefer (since uploading to US server is quite different), leave a note at KGill or Schissel's talk page. They've both uploaded lots of things to the US server. Carolus 22:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Generoso 23:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
the Sibley description gives or seems to me to give it as an album of pieces all by Wollenhaupt- are there works whose attribution is doubtful? Eric 03:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- The Sibley description is a little confusing. Looking at what I can find on OCLC, it appears that Schirmer organized these collections by composer. They had ones for Chaminade, Tchaikovsky, and several other composers. They also would re-issue items put out in earlier years edited by their editorial team like Oesterle and Scharfenburg, who were both doing things back in the 1870s and 1880s. I did not find an actual entry for a Wollenhaupt Album, a Collection of Eleven Favorite Pieces but that seemed to be the general format used for this series of collections. That item you just posted edited by Scharfenberg, originally issued in 1884 as a separate piece of sheet music, was just the type of thing I was referring to. They must have decided to include it in the 11-piece album, presumably all Wollenhaupt, issued in 1900 or 1908. This can drive one crazy at times! Carolus 03:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Templates IU, Levy
yes- thanks. Templates are indeed good things to have not least for that (reminds me of why I need to learn CSS though the connection is a bit of a leap :) - the one-to-many cascading effect), hopefully those are indeed often-enough accessed sites or will be for the trouble to have been worthwhile (works the other way too, I guess, I found a good resource or two when I saw the links on the templates page, though I know there's the external libraries page for that.) Appreciated! Eric 05:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Postel Oboe Concerto
I made a new edition of an concerto for oboe and strings from Postel, a baroque composer.
One can find the manuscript in the Slub. Now I realized the following entry in the "hire-catalog" of Peters:
Postel, Christian Heinrich (1658–1705)
Concerto B-Dur für Oboe und Orchester (Chr. Mühne)
Concerto in B flat for Oboe and Orchestra
Ob Solo—Str—Bc / 11'
C F Peters Musikverlag
What about copyright? It seems to be a new edition, but I don´t know when it is appeared, and I don´t know "Chr.Mühne".
Can you help?
Greetings Notenschreiber Notenschreiber 18:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Addendum I: I found a hint, that the Slub composer is Christian Gottlieb Postel, working around 1720 at the court of Morzin.
Maybe the Peters concert is not the concert of the Slub, inspite both are in B flat major. Shall I finish my work concerning
the Slub concerto and upload it?
Addendum II: Some internet research makes me nearly sure, that "Postel, Christian Heinrich (1658–1705)" is a wrong dedication
of the oboe concert in the Peters edition. This Postel was not a composer but a librettist. So probably the concert is that of
the slub. In the manuscript no prename is mentioned. Notenschreiber 22:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- One thing about SLUB - their work pages often list people besides the composers who aren't librettists (instrumental works don't have librettists) but who might be the intended performers of the works in question, the people the works were written in close collaboration with and for- I am guessing, anyway, that this information would sometimes be on the manuscript especially in the Baroque era and would be especially of interest to scholars of all musical eras of course... (but I do very often, memory serves, hear instrumental concertos - and vocal works - of the Baroque - and Classical, too- eras spoken of with composer and intended performer rather in balance. Alfred Einstein in the 1950s I think writing on Mozart remarked that if the singer didn't like it, the composer rewrote it- not the other way around (I paraphrase.)- like the film composer's status today... Eric 00:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I am inclined to say go ahead and post your edition, unless you happen to know that it the Peters is only a couple of years old (which seems unlikely). It would be helpful if you could determine who the editor of the Peters score is if you cannot actually find the publication date. Publishers often move things like this to their rental library when they no longer wish to print copies for sale. Carolus 01:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Probably the mentioned editor "Chr. Mühne" is the Dresdner musicologist and organist Christian Mühne, who is now the leader of the Richard Wagner Museum in Graupa near Dresden. But I think, it is not helpful to ask him. In the list of "vg musikedition" of all copyrighted works in respect to §70/71 of the german "Urheberrecht" Postel is not mentioned. I don´t think, that the Postel concert at Peters was ever available for sale. But I can take the point of view, that the Peters concert is one of a certain Christian Heinrich Postel, whereas the concert of the SLUB is from Christian Gottlieb Postel. I am really not sure about the authorship of the Peters concerto.Notenschreiber 05:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
The worst that could happen is they would complain about it being the same piece and it somehow being protected under §70/71 (which does not guarantee its protection in Canada) - meaning we'd have to make it non-PD EU. As I see it, that is very unlikely to happen. Carolus 00:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Carolus, thank you so much for cleaning up the publisher info for the Russian Massenet scores I uploaded yesterday. Looking at the cyrillic alphabet is like staring at an alien language to me -- I just put up a Cyrillic to Latin chart as my desktop background so I can learn to sound the names out phonetically in the future. Thanks again! Massenetique talk email 07:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- I have to say that I am running into some names that I've never seen before with the stuff coming in from the Russian State Library. Publishing in Kiev, for example, was much more widespread than I ever realized. Who knows what other interesting items will show up. There's a whole series of scores issued in the early to middle part of the 19th century in St. Petersburg from publishers like Stellovsky that we've not seen much of so far. Carolus 00:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I've taken it on as a project to find and post as much French music as I can from the Russian State Library. Massenet's Suite parnassienne was an amazing find there -- as a Massenet fanatic there is precious little of his music I have not had the chance to study one way or another, but this piece is very late, very strange, and incredibly rare. (Worldcat shows NO record of the full score of the entire work held in any library it catalogs!) Hopefully there will be other great finds coming out of there! Massenetique talk email 01:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thanks- a personal favorite work of mine for 2 decades (ever since it was the subject of a paper for a class I took back in college. Listen to a piece of music often enough and one will probably love it or hate it...) Eric 12:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- I was surprised to discover I'd missed that one - we've got almost everything else eligible form the Gardner Museum collection. Carolus 00:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Victor Ewald: Brass Quintet, Op.6
Hi Carolus, I'm pretty but not absolutely sure about the status of that file. I've found it via scorser.com. - parts, written by hand. Some pages (e.g. file p.18) have got a CR notice, but it looks quite strange. However, I'm not sure about the ethical question... Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:13, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Apparently, only the first brass quintet was published in his lifetime (1912), the other three weren't even discovered until the 1970s (though they were most likely performed in Ewald's lifetime back in Russia). The 1977 copyright claim by Sto-Art on the linked parts makes me think that this was the first edition (they issued the third quintet in 1978, though I find no record of the fourth being issued until 1990). I expect it's free in the EU and in Canada, probably not in the USA. Carolus 01:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hrm. If the 4th quintet (related - transcribed to or from - the string quartet op.1) was considered unperformable during Ewald’s lifetime, as has also been claimed, its premiere in quintet form might well not have been until the late 20th century either. It might be possible though difficult to find records of some performance in contemporary journals or correspondence of one or more of the quintets, true! Eric 07:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- That's a point. If it was never performed, we might be up against Canada's 50-year editio princeps rule. Carolus 17:40, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Just splitted into parts and uploaded Brass Quintet No.2. I'm sure it was performed at Jurgenson's or/and Belaieff's salon. But can't prove it. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- I think the fourth quintet is the only one where there is a question about. Carolus 01:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Carl, are those keyboard concertos really Johann Christoph? (The 1642–1703 one as opposed to the other four or five possibilities.) I would have thought they have to be a later Bach than him. Cheers, Philip @ © talk 06:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- No, they're not. Our new uploader has thoroughly confused the two composers. I am now in process of redirecting some of the mess. Carolus 06:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- That explains it. Thanks! Philip @ © talk 06:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Shaw (not Seb.)
yes, that's precisely what I meant by historical information - but in analogous fashion to "n.d.", it's not on the score (or not on the score as scanned in) and it really did seem best to indicate that... Eric 07:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- OK. When a publisher is known (by plate number or other indirect information) we haven't been using parens, but you're correct that we're being a little inconsistent as we take pains to make sure scores with no dates include the "n.d." That probably has more to do with the legal importance of dates with regard to US determination. Sorry, I was probably being too picky in reaction to all the craziness last night with two the J.C. Bachs! Carolus 17:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
naming and attribution issues make my head spin. Eric 00:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Mine was spinning like a top last night. Carolus 01:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the tweaks to the Gurre-Lieder page. Recently I read somewhere that Belmont was Schönberg’s personal publishing company: the name of which makes perfect sense, when you think about it! For the many years I’ve admired his published work I hadn’t realised this little fact up until then: I suppose you would have been in on this little joke for some time? Cheers, Philip @ © talk 06:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, that's been sort of common music publisher knowledge for a very long time. I think Schoenberg actually started it himself - now run by members of his family. They actually do a pretty good job, too. Their prices are not ludicrous and they seem primarily interested in keeping things available. (Which is much nicer than rapine lootery.) Carolus 23:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
RE: Biblioteca Digital Hispanica
Hi Carolus, your entertaining words compensate me for the acidic work: the only format at BDH seems to be pdf and it's a complicated procedure to extract, manipulate and save each page somewhat lostless. So it'll take one or two days to complete. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:52, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you! The Gombert madrigals uploaded yesterday are absolutely wonderful and (as PML mentioned) top-notch scans which should be on the "featured scores" list. Carolus 00:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Finished. I'll dream of it tonight (hopefully in the right clefs) ... --Ralph Theo Misch 23:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
not sure I understand your edit, have tried probably unsuccessfully to explain why on the talk page (Talk:Quintet for Piano and Winds, Op.8 (Grund, Friedrich Wilhelm)).. Anyhow, of course nothing serious... Eric 05:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
In any case, I'm reminded that "arrangement" (as I keep saying in other contexts) has had several meanings- like "orchestration" or "instrumentation" without always the connotation of sequence in time, iirc. (Arrangement of notes among parts. Not being deliberately dense or didactic- I think I have seen "arrangement" used this way on some 19th century scores- especially popular/band ones- when it wasn't at all clear that they meant it directionally.) Anyhow, thanks again! Eric 13:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, yes. The precise definition of the terms "arrangement" and "transcription" is highly subjective - not just in English, either. "Orchestration" is more precise, but is it really correct to use it when a symphony has been made into a piano 4 hands score? That's one of the reasons we finally settled on "Arrangements and Transcriptions" as one of the hierarchies - most everyone seems to understand what is meant by it, for some reason. P.davydov was amazingly astute about this kind of thing. One thing he liked to mention was that while such things might appear to be nitpicks, they really have a profound effect the larger a collection becomes. Having a consistent way of dealing with things is much more important when an archive gets to the size we're now arriving at (that 100,000 files marker approaches fast). Carolus 17:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Suppé, "ein Morgen..."
I changed the name "Schneider" in the above side back to "Paulsson". The reason is a notice of Paulsson in the german section of the forums.
Mr. Paulsson is totally unexperienced with wikis like IMSLP, so he didn´t find the right way to contact you. I hope he (and you) is
content with the current status Notenschreiber 11:47, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. He sent me an e-mail already. I saw he had used his real name on at least one of the scores he contributed. Carolus 17:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Are you sure, that Schneider is his real name? In the forum he gave the e-mail adresse: "email@example.com" to contact him. Anyway,
I don´t think that something is wrong in this affair. I will change the name in the other contributions of him. Notenschreiber 19:14, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- The name on one of the score was Kurt Schneider. It might be a pseudonym. At any rate, Paulsson prefers that we use Paulsson. Carolus 23:52, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Composer holograph/manuscript page positions
Hi Carolus. Thanks for the information regarding publication date of Brahms' Op.34b. I'll try to be more cautious in the future. I wanted some clarification on the issue of the position on the workpage that a composer's manuscript or holograph should have. For the Brahms Hungarian Dances that I uploaded I left it below the complete published scores as it was only books 1 and 2 which seems appropriate to me. For complete scores at what position should undated manuscripts be placed? Since they most likely pre-date the published version should they go first despite being n.d.? Thanks, --Cypressdome 03:33, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, If the score is complete (as with the Op.34b), it should go to the very top. The Hungarian Dances positioning was correct for just the reason you mention (not the whole work). I'm working on a Morgan template which should be ready in a minute or two. Carolus 03:36, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I see you updated the page and simultaneously answered my question. Thanks!--Cypressdome 03:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Carolus, could you take a look at the Morgan template it appears to just be just sending you to the front page of their catalog. Also, could we get a template for Juilliard? Thanks, --Cypressdome 03:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm using google to find all the ones that were not uploaded with Sibley1802.xxxx in the file name. I'm going through each month from 2006 when the project started to March 17th 2009 when the first file was uploaded with the new method that labels the uploaded file with the SIBLEY1802.xxxx method. Obviously it will miss something if a person completely neglects to label or upload properly but those should be very very small in number - less than 50 I would bet). If you want to jump in and start a year or two ahead of me this is what I'm googling right now:
Uploader "December 2006" "scanned by Sibley Music Library" site:imslp.org
Uploader "January 2007" "scanned by Sibley Music Library" site:imslp.org
Uploader "February 2007" "scanned by Sibley Music Library" site:imslp.org
It gives you all the works that say "scanned by sibley" but there is no way to include specifically the month and year immediately following the "scanned by sibley" so it returns any match for "december 2006" on the same page even if it is for a different file. So you get some false matches but you can easily see that in google before clicking the link. A correct result looks like this:
Symphony No.5, Op.55 (Glazunov, Alexander) - IMSLP/Petrucci Music ...
PDF file, Scanned by Sibley Music Library Uploader: Peter (23 December 2006). Arranger: Sergei Taneyev (1856-1915). Publisher Info.: ...
imslp.org/wiki/Symphony_No.5,_Op.55_(Glazunov,_Alexander) - Cached
and a bad result looks like this:
Jeux d'enfants (Bizet, Georges) - IMSLP/Petrucci Music Library ...
Uploader: Jujimufu (26 December 2006) .... PDF file, Scanned by Sibley Music Library Uploader: Generoso (28 May 2010) ...
imslp.org/wiki/Jeux_d'enfants_(Bizet,_Georges) - Cached - Similar
So pretty easy to see the difference that way. Then I'm just writing down all the last 4 Sibley digits once i click over to the IMSLP page and after I compile them all I can remove them from the Links page and we should then there should be no redundant links so you know you're always clicking something that needs to be uploaded which should be a much less overwhelming number of files left.
--Icactus 06:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- That seems to be a very effective method of finding nearly everything. I'll probably join in and start in October 2007 (the month that we shut down) in the next couple of days (assuming you aren't up to that point by then). I have quite a bit of template work to do, external links to add, etc. along with the copyright tagging. Great work and very helpful in bringing the Sibley Project up to date. Carolus 06:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello Carolus, Actually the sonatas in F and in G are the same piece only transcribed in a different key. They are both No.3. Thanks Generoso 06:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, I saw the that No.4 was in G in the original, so I naturally thought you just made a mistake and repeated the number. Carolus 07:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)