Category talk:Beethoven, Ludwig van


Piano Sonatas, as edited by Franz Liszt

A must for IMSLP. Published by Leipzig: Bosworth & Co., [ca 1910] (556 pages). Expect these during the course of 2-3 months. --Funper 15:45, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

Slight difference in sonatas

Have anybody compared the "original" edition on IMSLP with the ones on SMA? There is a slight difference in some sonatas. By the way, are the SMA editions already submitted here or should/could(?) I submit them? --Funper 21:01, 1 March 2007 (EST)

The SMA edition is clearly a different print from the Universal Edition on IMSLP, but maybe they are based on the same edition. The fingerings are different. Ask Carolus for the identification of the edition - he's the expert...
It would be nice to upload them since they are different. IMSLP tries to acquire as much editions as possible, so please do not suggest to remove an other edition ;) Of course, two different scans of the exact same edition is redundant.--Peter 12:02, 2 March 2007 (EST)
I have uploaded the scores from sheetmusicarchive, they are different from the Universal Edition (like some chords in the 4th movement of "Piano Sonata No.1" are just written out as singel notes in the Universal Edition, or something similiar). But I have noticed that both have the same page count (616 pages for all 32 Piano Sonatas). I will ask Carolus if he is acquainted with these new additions. --Funper 16:06, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

Symphony Transcriptions

There are some "liszt"-transcriptions on the symphonies. I have found two of them from sma which I will upload later this week, I will try to look after the other 7, unless anybody else have them? -- Funper 19:13, 7 June 2006 (CDT)


Does anyone else think it would be a good idea to rename peices to always use 2 digits for numbers so they order correctly on these pages? eg: Piano Sonata No.01 instead of No.1 would list in correct order. -- Steve 23:20, 16 July 2006 (CDT)

I'm almost always in favor of such things. I like automatic sorting! --Emeraldimp 13:41, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
I was going to comment on the numberings myself. I think that it is a great idea, unless the sorting system itself can be edited. That would be better. Asmeurer 20:11, 16 January 2007 (EST)
You should not rename the title itself, but edit the category entry. I did this with the piano sonatas yesterday, so you can see how it is done. (sorry i'm in a hurry...) Cheers, --Peter 02:48, 17 January 2007 (EST)

Composer classification

I see that user Marcus2 has heroically changed all of Beethoven's classifications from Classical to Romantic. I'm not really sure that's appropriate. While Beethoven certainly bridged the gap between the two periods, and there is some room to argue, I think the majority of musicians and music texts classify him as a Classical era composer. Any thoughts? --Goldberg988 10:43, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

I've already left a note on his talk page. The work pages should definitely be labeled Classical. Now begins all the reverting work... --Feldmahler 12:08, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
I agree with both of you. Everything before the Third Symphony (Op. 55 - 1803) is usually listed as classical in style. Some of the late works, like the String Quartets and Sonatas after 1815 or so, take on a certain Romantic quality. Carolus 04:51, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
And the Grosse Fuge is contemporary :D (dixit Stravinski) Peter talk 10:50, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
I only edited all of the existing compositions in the database, that which belong to Beethoven's Middle and Late periods, from "Classical" to "Romantic". Most, if not, all of them are more Romantic in style than Classical. That's why I did it. Since musicologists are actually divided over whether Beethoven is Classical or Romantic, I think that "Romantic" suits a lot of his work. Marcus2 17:53, 18 June 2007 (EDT)
I agree that musicologists are divided, however, I don't want the library part of IMSLP to turn into a debating ring for musicologists. I would encourage discussion about this topic (maybe the forums?), but not by changing the library structure itself. --Feldmahler
I would reiterate that this discussion (which has reared its head again recently) ought be taken to the forums to be thrashed out in detail, rather than turning the Wiki into a debating ring. My own thoughts, are that a lot of Beethoven's œuvre (when considering the WoO as well as works with op. nos.) leans to the classical, but it is also obvious that the most influential works also tend to be the transitional works to romanticism, and classification of them is not clear-cut (as say for other transitional figures). Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 04:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Its too debatable... --Philip Addison Jones

Piano Sonatas in Opus numbers as well

Why aren't the piano sonatas in opus numbers as well? --Funper talk 14:50, 24 June 2007 (EDT) I suppose because they are the earliest works Feldmahler added - Piano sonata no.1 has the honour of being IMSLP#00001! The String Quartets and Symphonies haven't got numbers too. If you feel like renaming all of them, well go for it! Peter talk 12:10, 26 June 2007 (EDT)

String Quartets intersection

I noticed that the intersection for String quartets is completely blank. Could somebody add those, please? Also, I think that the Grosse Fuge should be included in that listing.--Snailey 23:35, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Finished adding the category to all 17 pages.--Snailey 14:29, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Rondos in C & G, op. 51 no. 1 & no. 2

Just added the first rondo. --Aewanko 21:21, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Appreciated. Great! :) --Funper talk 21:24, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Added the second rondo. --Aewanko 19:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah! Perfido (Aria), opus 65

Could someone, please, find a solution to the mess I have just created with Beethoven's Opus 65. It seems there was already an existing article for the specific work and I created another one for the aria's complete score. What can I say, I am new to all this. Once again, my apologies. --Meander 16:44, 7 January 2009 (EST)

As I can see, the problem is solved. Thanks very much everyone involved.--Meander 09:56, 9 January 2009 (EST)

Rondo in Bb major for Piano and Orchestra.

Hallo. I was just wondering if someone could please post Beethoven's Rondo in Bb major for Piano and Orchestra, preferably in full orchestral score.

It doesn't have an opus number; it probably does have a number on one of the other more obscure Beethoven catalogues, although I don't remember it. I believe the piece was originally intended as the finale for the 2nd Piano Concerto in Bb major, before Beethoven provided it with a new finale and made the original Rondo a separate piece. Australians may recall that its middle theme (in Eb major) was used for many years as the theme for John Cargher's very long-running A.B.C. radio program "Music for Pleasure".

This would surely be one of Beethoven's rarest scores (I've never seen a copy of it, in any arrangement, despite a lifetime of familiarity with Beethoven scores), so it would be really good if it could one day appear on this site.

Thanks. M.J.E. 05:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it was included as part of the older complete works issued by Breitkopf. It's presently available in reprint from Kalmus (Catalog A1284). So, if someone has a copy they wish to scan, we'll be happy to include here. Carolus 05:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC) (IMSLP Copyright Admin)
I take it we're not talking about the rondo WoO 06 then (which exists according to this page only in an edition by Czerny, manuscript being lost?) Eric 04:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC) (oh ok, I see, because we already have that one...)