IMSLP talk:Categorization/Project Members/archive2


Verdi, Requiem

I took the liberty of tagging this mez vv ch orc since I think mezzo-soprano is on the speciality list, this may need a tailor made tag =)--Varnis 00:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually could you be careful not to use "vv" (solo voices) when you mean "ch" (chorus), as in this case? I've changed the tag to "sop mez ten bar ch orch", as all the solo voices have their own specialist categories. (If the ranges of the solo voices isn't indicated, then just use "vv ch orch") — P.davydov 07:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
I suppose it is a little bit late to point out that elsewhere, "vv" usually has a different meaning to the tags here, i.e. vv = massed voices, as in a choir. Somewhere like Grove in its worklists for example would make a qualitative difference between 8v (= 8 solo voices) and 8vv (= choir in 8 parts, with multiple singers to each part). I’m not complaining, just noting that for some of us the connection between "vv" and solo voices is not obvious (but I’m quite happy for it to remain, and not unduly disturbed by any cognitive dissonance). :-) PML @ © talk 8:37, 8 January 2010 (AEDT)

9 Sonatas in 1, 2, 3 Parts (Fontana, Giovanni Battista)

According to the original title, it has a 'chitarone'. Does anyone know what this is and if it should be taken into account? KGill talk email 01:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a type of theorbo, which isn't going to help much (tee hee). However, it is apparently very difficult to tell theorbs, chitarones and archlutes apart, so my suggestion would be lute. What does need to be sorted out, though, is if the chitarone is a solo instrument in addition to the continuo, or whether it is the continuo (same problem as the cello in these sorts of titles -- it's difficult to tell). Will do more research when I get to work. (Steltz)
Grove says it's a type of lute, called a "Chitarrone" in English, so the tag should be "lute" — P.davydov 08:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
In fact, there is no mention of continuo in the parts for this. It has three parts. Part I is the Violin I part and has all 18 sonatas. Part II is the Violin II part, and contains sonatas 7-8, 11, and 13-18. Part III is mostly the fagotto part, and contains 9, 10, and 12-18 (although 16 is the Violin III part). Sonatas 1-6 are solo violin (i.e. unaccompanied), Sonatas 7-8 and 11 are for 2 violins (no bass), Sonatas 9-10 and 12 are for violino e fagotto, Sonatas 13-15 and 17-18 are for 2 violini e fagotto, and Sonata 16 is for 3 violins. The alternate parts are only mentioned in Part III and then only on Sonata 9 ("fagotto o chitarone o violoncino con violino o cornetto") and Sonata 13 ("fagotto e dui violini or cornetti").


Can anyone help clarify the instrumentation of this piece? — P.davydov 08:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I've downloaded it and had cursory look at it. I need to look closer, so I'm going to leave it till tomorrow -- it doesn't seem to be logically laid out, for a start. Will get back. (Steltz)

Voices and Choruses

We haven't done many vocal works yet, but I've amended the guidelines to allow for more precision when it comes to solo voices, so we can have tags for more sophisticated combinations like "3sop 2alt ten bar bass". But if the ranges of the voices aren't specified, or there are multiple characters in operas etc. then "vv" can stil be used to cover two or more solo voices (but "vv" shoul never used for choruses).

I've gone back through the few works that already had "vv" in the tags and filled in the extra information where required, so you don't need to worry about any works you might already have tagged in this way — P.davydov 13:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Basset horn

There's a new tag for this instrument ("bst"), which is a type of clarinet rather than horn. I'm embarassed to admit that I didn't know that until today (!) — P.davydov 13:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

12 lashings with a wet noodle to you!! :) Just to confuse you further, there is also a basset clarinet, which is an A clarinet with extra notes at the bottom so we can play to a written low C. The basset horn is a lower instrument altogether, pitched in F, and it looks like an alto clarinet, just a little smaller. I don't know if we will need to specify basset clarinet ever (although it is likely this is what Mozart's concerto was written for), but could I suggest "bsth" rather for basset horn, and if we ever need basset clarinet we can use "bstc"? or something like that -- bsh and bsc? (Steltz)
As these are fairly uncommon (as you say) why not go the extra letter for bsthn and bstcl. My reasoning is that both of these instruments are similarly named, so the bst in both cases is basset; the two remaining letters for hn and cl specify the same abbreviation as the actual instruments (horn and clarinet) that the basset horn/basset clarinet partly borrow their names from. Otherwise, you would have to remember that "horn" or "clarinet" are abbreviated differently when appropriated by these instruments. Regards, PML @ © talk 8:28, 8 January 2010 (AEDT)

OK then, I've updated the list to use "bsthn" and "bstcl" for basset horn and basset clarinet respectively. No more basset hounding! :-) — P.davydov 22:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Brandenburg Concertos

Hi P.d, these admittedly should be categorised as concerti grossi, but I think it is a mistake to gloss over the obvious concertante parts. JSB’s works aren’t quite as self-effacing as some of Vivaldi’s concerti grossi in concealing the obvious virtuosos he had available.

BWV 1046 (No. 1): violino piccolo, and perhaps the horns and oboes 1–2, i.e. “concerti grossi ; vn 2hn 2ob orch bc” or just “concerti grossi ; vn orch bc”
BWV 1047 (No. 2): quartet of trumpet, flute, oboe, and violin, i.e. “concerti grossi ; tpt fl ob vn str bc”
BWV 1049 (No. 4): trio of violin and 2 flute, i.e. “concerti grossi ; 2fl vn str bc”
BWV 1050 (No. 5): trio of flute, violin and cembalo (which is concertato as well as accompagnato), i.e. “concerti grossi ; fl vn hpd str”. I don’t know where the idea of a second harpsichord came from, you definitely play this with the solo player also providing continuo in the tuttis.
BWV 1051 (No. 6): the viola da braccios should be vla, not vn, otherwise it does become a little unplayable!

Also, Bach’s bc is vc, vlne and hpd, explicitly so in some of the concertos: in no. 1 it is “Continuo e Violone grosso” with a separate cello part in the first movement; elsewhere the formula is often “Cembalo e Violone”, or “Violoncello e Cembalo” plus separate violone part. Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 8:11, 8 January 2010 (AEDT)

Thanks for the clarification. But could you advise how, from a cataloguer's perspective, we should go about identifying the solo parts in such pieces without necessarily being familiar with the score? We need to be able to do this (or not do this) consistently — P.davydov 22:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
That is a perennial difficulty! If I had an unbeatable solution I imagine I would be a hero to librarians the world over, but sadly I don’t. Possible methods:
  1. Use a reputable worklist (Grove or MGG) which hopefully will include enough pertinent details of concertante instruments for concertante works!
  2. In lieu of looking at every single piece in a composer’s œuvre, look at a representative sample and look for anything unusual as clue to the composer’s methods of working.
Certainly some issues require you to look at a score (the violas da braccio in No. 6 are notated in alto clef, which is a bit of a giveaway that they’re not suitable to be played on violin) but in order to find solo/ripieno divisions you often need to browse through the entire score – and with a pile of 20,000 works I’m not sure how (a) anyone is supposed to be familiar with it all, and to have time to use eyeballs on music as occasionally required (b) the process is quality assured? (We need experts for every facet.) Regards, PML @ © talk 11:25, 8 January 2010 (AEDT)

I have been relying heavily on Grove elsewhere, but foolishly didn't check with them on the Brandenburg Concertos, where it turns out that they do helpfully show the instrumentation. When I get back from work tonight (sadly real life must intervene for a few hours), I'll update the tags in accordance with Grove. In any other cases of uncertainty, where Grove can't help, maybe people could post the details here so that we can come to a collective decision... — P.davydov 06:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Electronic compositions such as this have no tag available, perhaps elec for generic electronic instruments, i am assuming this was meant for a synthesizer, but it does not specify. In addition I marked one of the other works seq for sequencer. --Varnis 22:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

For unspecified electronic instruments you can just use "elec". If it's specifically a synthesiser then the tag "syn" will place it in both electronic and keyboard categories. I've tagged the two you pointed ouot, and we'll deal with any others as and when they come to light — P.davydov 22:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Baroque choral works

What is to be tagged for works with Cantus, Firmus, Bassus etc when it isnt clear what modern voice type the Cantus would be? In the case of Begräbnis-Musik_über_Friederich_Lente_(Becker,_Dietrich) the cantus is in soprano C clef, but the cantus 2 (Tenore) part is too? Do we use can and fir, or update to modern ranges where appropriate?

Hi Doug,
in practice with voices in early music we don’t actually record the original voicing, otherwise for sacred music we would have to exclude female singers and use boys (and the tags would be cch mch rather than ch). Matching staves to voice-parts is usually quite safe (but see below for an exception):
Clef Usual part name, or applicable voice range Preferred
G2 Treble, also Triplum: these days usually sung by female Sopranos S
C1 Canto/Cantus, or Discantus, Superius: Soprano S
C2 Medius/Mean (also Cantus, Altus occasionally): might be more of a Mezzo-Soprano (Mez) S / A
C3 Alto/Altus/Contratenor [altus] (also Tenor occasionally): usually sung by female Contraltos A
C4 Tenor/Tenore: usually sung by male Tenors T
C5 = F3 “low” Tenor or “high” Bassus: would be more of a Baritone (Bar) T / B
F4 Basso/Bassus [= Contratenor bassus]: Bass B
F5 Bassus, usually a basso profundo: Bass B
Generally, although a six-fold breakdown of voice types (male/female × high/middle/low) would be much more advantageous for mixed-voice choirs nowadays, unfortunately tradition has been firmly set on the side of the the four-fold SATB division, and it is not a good idea to depart from it except under extremely special circumstances. (I’m talking choirs here, not soloists, who are their own kettle of fish; the part in question would have to display specific soloistic features as well as problematic range to justify the variance.)
That said, parts in the C2 clef (Mez) may be better marked A rather than S, and parts in the C5 or F3 clefs may be better marked T rather than B, but usually S and B are the defaults; it will depend mostly on tessitura, also bearing in mind there may be a general transposition of written pitch to performing pitch. (e.g. A lot of English renaissance music is performed nowadays a minor third higher than written.) Occasionally a tenor part will be relatively low to be singable by a bass, but generally the designation shouldn’t be changed on account of range; i.e. follow the clef.
The exception I mentioned before is a particular type of renaissance clef configurations called chiavette (or, “high clefs”), where you will usually find all of the part name designations corresponding to a clef one or two places higher, e.g. Cantus = G2; Altus = C1 or C2; Tenor = C3; Bassus = F3 or C4. As I said, the fact that the part names systematically seem to correspond to a higher clef is usually the clue here – along with the absence of a true bass clef (F4). You will probably rarely see this in any late Baroque piece, but the practice continued well into the early 17th century and the early Baroque.
One other thing that carries through to the early Baroque: in the Renaissance, part books were often written down in a particular order (Cantus [= S], Tenor, Altus, Bassus, Quintus, Sextus, etc.), and extra parts beyond the normal four with numeric names rather than range indicators (Quinto / 5th, Sesto / 6th) are quite often (but not always) a second Tenor and second Soprano – and the part(s) will usually have a clef in common with one of the named CTAB parts.
As for the specific piece by Becker – it’s a transcription rather than the original, and the editor seems to be under some puzzlement about “Cantus 2 & Tenore”. I’d suggest that the clefs (C1, C1, C3, F4) are simply SSAB – but I wouldn’t rule out that the original clefs were actually C1, C4, C3, F4 (i.e. STAB, in that order) and the editor has turned a tenor part into a soprano part by putting it up an octave higher. Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 13:21, 8 January 2010 (AEDT)
Thanks Philip, that's extremely useful! — P.davydov 06:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
It comes from about 20 years of accumulated wisdom and familiarity with early music, but even so I’d still expect to find oodles of pieces that don’t fit so neatly as above! (I amended a few things above.) Regards, PML @ © talk 11:22, 9 January 2010 (AEDT)


I'm almost done with sonatas, I just have a dozen or so that are slightly problematic. After much thinking about "basso" (not "basso continuo"), I would like to ask what people think of using violone ("vlne") as the tag. These pieces can be done either with or without keyboard, so if I use "cont", people looking for 2vln vc pieces would miss them, and vice versa if I use "vc". Both are too specific. Since violone was a bass instrument, and very well might have been the choice for "basso" in most of these pieces, it seems like a good compromise. This will come up a lot under Baroque duos and trios, so the few I have left under Sonatas are probably the tip of an iceberg. Also, if we can put up a search hints guide, a section can be put in about searching Baroque pieces. Keyboard players who can work out figured bass without numbers should look under hpd, cont, or vlne in order to not miss anything. (Steltz)

Sorry for posting here without being a member of the tagging team, and you do a great job! If you use vlne or vc or hpd you already interpret (and change) the instrumentation. If I look through the about two dozen ob'damore manuscripts I have as copies, almost all just list "basso", a few even with figures, and for these works it is clearly basso continuo.Therefore I would propose to use B.c. or similar for all baroque manuscripts labelled basso --Kalliwoda 11:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi Kalliwoda, I agree that basso should first of all be tagged as bc unless there are specific known data for the composer to suggest (s)he had intended something different from normal. There's no hard and fast rule to this however – all six of Bach’s Brandenburg Concertos spell out in full exactly the instruments you might expect to have playing basso continuo (violoncello, violone [grosso], cembalo, and in No.1 also a bassoon): whereas often composers simply wrote "continuo" or "bassus generalis" and left matters open to interpretation, others would write down the instrumentation in greater detail.
The use of bc is preferable because it doesn’t prescribe what type of keyboard (e.g. hpd or org) is used – or if there is no figuring, whether a keyboard is omitted in preference to a string bass; nor whether the string bass used is a bass viol (cello pitch) or violone grosso (double bass pitch), and for some composers, the bc is supposed to be a moveable feast; you can chuck in harps, lutes, and bassoons as well if they fit in with and contribute to the musical effect. (e.g. I have a recording of Biber’s Mystery Sonatas which has about seven different players contributing in parts to the continuo: harp, org, hpd, viole da gamba, vc, vlne, plus a theorbo and a lirone!) Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 11:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

pieces vs. other categories

If a piece has nothing in the title that leads to a tag (like the reveries or the sigla), would 'duet' or 'trio' be preferable to 'piece'? I tagged sigla as a piece, but duet might be more preferable, and this will come up a lot now under the other chamber music categories. People might search more for a 'duet' rather than a 'piece', so what do you all think? (Steltz)

Actually it would be better if you carried on using "piece" in these cases. Firstly, because this will include all sorts of miscellaneous types which, if they become large enough in number, could be given their own labels. And while there are a vast number of works for two, three or four instruments that are not called duets, trios, quartets, etc., the tagging/category system works in such a way that all works for groups of instruments can within a matter of minutes be placed into categories for duets, trios, quartets, etc., if that's what we want.
Putting in additional tags can interfere with this process, so it's best that we stick to the original plan. You'll see why when Feldmahler's new "category walker" comes into operation. This is remarkably powerful, and will allow for all types of searches on any combination of instrumentation/work type/composer/language! — P.davydov 17:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Will do. Just to clarify, then, duets should only be used if the title says "duet" or "duo" (as in Grand Duo Concertante)? (Steltz)
Yes, that's right. Thanks — P.davydov 18:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
And just to carry on from that, the Beethoven Allegretto for piano trio should be allegrettos because that is more the title than the "for piano trio" part? (Steltz)
Yes (see also my comment in the following section) — P.davydov 10:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Trios ≠ Sonatas?

I just did a move of Schubert’s “Sonatensatz” Piano Trio movement (which despite being a Piano Trio, and titled Sonatensatz (Sonata movement), had been slightly obscurely filed under "T" for Trio). Even more confusingly, it wasn't marked in the genre Trio, but “Sonatas (other)”, so it's been duly tagged as "sonatas ; trios ; vn vc pf". Are we categorising any work in sonata form as “sonatas”? (Yes, this question is slightly begging an official pronouncement; I would be tempted to remove the "sonatas" tag, but I don't want to tread on Steltz's toes, since Trios is his bailiwick.) Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 10:35, 9 January 2010 (AEDT)

Just observed that P.d’s proposed tagging for the Beethoven piano trios was just “trios ; vn vc pf”. Okay then, does the title “Sonatensatz” merit a “sonatas” tag for what is a piano trio? How many composers were perverse enough to use a title such as “Sonata for 2 violins, viola, and cello” rather than “String quartet”, or “Sonata for orchestra” instead of “Symphony”? On a (slightly) more serious note, Haydn and Mozart were a little freer with titles (as the new classical forms were then nascent), so that often a “divertimento” is actually a string quartet. Hmm... PML @ © talk 10:41, 9 January 2010 (AEDT)
It's important to distinguish between work types called "Trios", and works for three instruments (or three voices), as the two sets are by no means identical :-) But provided we tag them correctly, people will be able to find all of them, either by searching for work type or for instrumentation — P.davydov 10:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I tagged this as sonatas because of Davydov's answer to my previous question, so I am assuming that if a word is in a title, it must be given a tag for that title. However, this specific work has a [TB] block on it, so I can't download it and check what's on the title page. I think my university library may have a copy of this, but I will only be able to check on Monday. If the title page doesn't use the word Sonata or Sonatensatz, I will remove that tag. In the meantime, if someone is looking for piano trios, they are likely to look under instrumentation, and this piece will definitely come up. If they know of the piece specifically, and want to look for it, they are more likely to look under Schubert.
On the other comment here, there are lots of inconsistencies in what genres uploaders gave their works. Lots of Trio Sonatas are under trios, and lots others are under Sonata (other). I was under the impression that the genres would be removed once we are finished with this, so it seems a bit immaterial. (Steltz)
As you say, Steltz, there were lots of inconsistencies! That's what we're trying to fix, so "Sonatensatz" is indeed tagged as "sonata", and the tag "vn vc pf" will be part of the category "Works for 3 performers", so there should be no misunderstandings (hopefully) — P.davydov 12:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
No, Steltz is quite right, Schubert’s title is indeed “Sonatensatz”… but the type of work is functionally identical with three other works that Schubert titled as Piano Trios: the Notturno D 897, and the two big four-movement works, D 898, and D 929. Fabulous pieces, all of ‘em! Philip Legge @ © talk 12:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Mozart’s early violin sonatas/piano trios KV 10–15

As hopefully the last word on the topic immediately above this one, I believe the titles given to these works are rather misleading, but it revolves around the ad lib cello part. It seems to be one of those questions, "is the custom more honoured in the breach than in the observance"? The NMA assigns these works to the volume of Piano trios.

I think however, that Steltz has the tag absolutely correct: the titles are "sonatas", and there are four possible performance options, i.e. "vn pf ; fl pf ; vn vc pf ; fl vc pf". Even thought the cello part is self-effacing, it does make it suitable for beginners. I seem to recall reading somewhere the Mozarts played these themselves, Wolfgang playing the violin, Nannerl taking the piano part and Leopold the cello, but my memory might be lying to me. Philip Legge @ © talk 12:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

If I could just put 2 cents in here as a bit of background history, I was more comfortable tagging these because I actually know the works. They are effectively solo sonatas, because the cello part is (more or less) a continuo cello part, and given Mozart's age at the time of the commission (8!), there was still a lot of Baroque influence hanging around. I realize the NMA assigns them to the trios, but I feel they are intrinsically solo sonatas, although I also find them very useful in training young chamber music players precisely because of the simpleness of the cello part. The "Sonata" title makes it easy to avoid having to peg it as a solo piece or trio, and the nice thing about this new system is that we don't have to peg it.  :-) Although a commission from Queen Charlotte, it is very likely that the Mozart family tried them out before sending them off, and they may very well have given the premiere themselves. (Steltz)


How are we going to deal with these? Oughtn't there be a separate tag, as they certainly aren't oratorios.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 04:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I concur, they’re an important enough liturgical genre to merit the tag – though some composer’s settings (notably JS Bach, of course) go a lot beyond just the actual texts from the gospels and become fully-fledged oratorios. (The term oratorio derives from the sacred cantatas sung in a specific church (the Oratory of St Philip Neri in Rome) so its usually assumed that an oratorio is on a religious theme; the question is what should the tag be?) In such instances as the Bach passions possibly both tags, "passions" and "oratorios" would seem à propos. Philip Legge @ © talk 05:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
The tag "passions" has been added to the list, but only for those designated as such by the composers. We can retain the option of making passions a subset of oratorios, so there's no need to use both tags on the same work — P.davydov 10:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting that passions are a subset of oratorio – a passion is liturgically the specific, designated portion of one of the four gospels, whereas Bach’s works are really a hybrid of passion plus oratorio, where the narrative has been enlarged by bringing in chorales, other reflective texts that are outside the liturgy. I suppose the principle is that an oratorio is a work that you can take out of church and perform in the concert hall, but doesn’t have to serve a particular liturgical purpose; some settings of the Requiem (e.g. Berlioz, Verdi) are "concert Requiems" since they would be implausible to fit into a liturgical ceremony. A Requiem or Passion by Lassus or Palestrina on the other hand, were designed for liturgical, not concert use.
By the way, I’ve just had a bit of a browse using the Category Walker and it looks spectacularly clever for searching the works pages. Exciting stuff! Cheers PML @ © talk 22:02, 9 January 2010 (AEDT)

The Fascinator (Scott, James)

Hi P.d, that one actually is a rag also, despite its composer giving it a description of being a March and Two-Step. Maybe it was a cunning publisher trying to fool the gullible public that the piece wasn't one of those “degenerate” ragtime pieces? :-) Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 10:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, you're right, but it breaks our rule of sticking to the composer's designation. There were a couple of others in the same category, and no doubt if they'd been done as part of the (ahem) official tagging process, we'd have had the chance to discuss the issue here first. I suppose at a push we could add "rag" as well as "march", but that's heading for the slippery slope of stylistic tags, requiring specialist knowledge from the taggers. Let's hear a few more views first... — P.davydov

Violino Fagotto

This is marked as a bassoon on the instrumentation field, but I'm dubious, it is F4 clef on the score, and placed under 3 "Braccio" with C1 C3 and C4 clefs. Any ideas? Trauer-_und_Begräbnis-Musik_über_Johann_Helms_(Becker,_Dietrich)

This might shed light on the puzzling "Cantus Tenor" that the same editor had put in one of his other transcriptions of Dietrich Becker. Presumably there was a term in the original score of this work which likewise flummoxed the editor? Philip Legge @ © talk 11:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok... having looked at the score now, my theory is, the transcriber (Hagen) didn’t realise that members of the braccio family are essentially interchangeable with violins, violas, and cellos, so the three staves marked Braccio 1 (C1 clef), Braccio 2 (C3 clef), and Braccio 3 (C4 clef) should be a violin and 2 violas. As for stave 4, it probably listed two bass instruments, Viol… e fagotto. The fagotto is probably the same as what Becker originally wrote; if the string instrument had been listed as a [bass] viola di braccio then surely Hagen would have come up with “Braccio 4”. I’ll guess Hagen has mistaken “Violone” (yes it literally means, big violin, but that doesn’t count for much ;-) and substituted the modern term he was familiar with.
I’m tempted to suggest the instrumentation for this work would be better tagged "str bc", since the basso can admit both string (vc, cb, or vlne) and wind (bn) bass instruments in addition to keyboard (e.g. a lot of Mozart’s church works or piano concertos!), and let performers (if there are any...) worry about it. But the actual instruments seem to accord with “vl 2va vc bn bc”. Philip Legge @ © talk 12:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
PS This reminds me, in the other work edited by the same guy (link further up this page), I noticed the instrument tag there was 3 violas, which is likely wrong, since all that it said for each of those instruments was "braccio" (like here) and the clefs were C1, C1, C3 - this would likely indicate two violini da braccio (= 2 violins) and one viola da braccio (= 1 viola). Philip Legge @ © talk 12:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Category changes

Just to let everyone know that I'm replacing some of the temporary categories with new ones. This will be done in stages throughout today, so it may look a little strange for a time, but don't panic! ;-)

Fantasiestucke or Phantasiestucke

2 options here, one is to give two tags, i.e. "fantasias ; pieces ;" and the other is to create a tag for fantasiestucke. It's a fairly frequent title in the Romantic era. (Steltz)

"fantasias" certainly, but "pieces" is a tag of last resort, to be used when there's no alternative :-) — P.davydov 12:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Fantasias it is, then. (Steltz)


Here we seem to have one piece from a suite (The serenade?) which is marked sextetto on the condensed score, do we know what the actual instrumentation is, because the parts indicate string orchestra (2vn va vc db) so I have marked it suites ; str for the present.

String quartets

Ive been blithely walking through "pieces for string section" tagging quartets of the 2vn va vc where they come up, but until now I didn't realise there was a different category for these, could someone perhaps batch move these from pieces for string section to "Quartets (2 Violins Viola Cello)"?

That category will be disappearing soon anyway (along with all the old genres), so it's not really worth the effort :-) — P.davydov 23:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Ah, great, do i need to make any changes, or is it ok to leave them where they are?--Varnis 23:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
No, they can just be left as they are. Great progress, BTW! — P.davydov 23:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)