IMSLP talk:Categorization/Project Members/archive5



Everybody should remember that "done" categories do not stay finished...we should revisit every now and then-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Pedal Piano

Some Schumann is a-waiting...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 23:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

"pfped" will be the tag to use... — P.davydov 21:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


In theory the concertos are all done, but an awful lot were misclassified by the original uploaders, so some might still crop up in other sections.

Incidentally, we're now up to 41% of works tagged — not far off the magic 50% threshold when the full force of Feldmahler's Category Walker is due to be unleashed :-) — P.davydov 21:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hammerschmidt, Erster Fleiss

Fleiss translates as hard work, presumably in this case just "work" as in "first work". I've tagged it "pieces", unless someone has a more accurate translation?

Purcell, Fantazias and In Nomines

The fantasias are easy to tag, but will In Nomines be just 'pieces'? These are instrumental, not vocal, for viols.

Multiple instruments where no number is given

Satie's Les Fils des Etoiles, Grove lists instrumentation as “fls hps/hmn”, Whiting feels that the instruction “flutes, harps” might have been stops on a harmonium, since in another piece (Upsud) the flute parts exceed the range of the flute. In any case, neither Satie or Grove have specified how many flutes or harps might have been intended (if Whiting is wrong), so this is difficult to tag. I've tagged it “incidental music ; fl hp ; harm”, but this indicates single flute and harp, which wouldn't be correct. Any better ideas?

Electric guitars and basses

St. George Tucker, Laudate Dominum uses both electric and acoustic guitar, plus an electric bass. I've tagged it 2gtr db, but there might be some feeling that this isn't quite kosher. Any opinions?

2 languages, both needed in the piece, as opposed to one or the other

In a couple of pieces, 2 languages are both used, one after the other, with no alternative given. Is there a difference between "la en" as opposed to "la ; en"?

Because the category walker can be used to identify works in more than one language, we don't need to do this by combining the tags, so "la ; en" would be correct — P.davydov 18:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


In Leonardo Boero's Le temps et son double.

Yet another exotic instrument  :-) Let's give it the tag "oca" — P.davydov 23:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Schumann, supplement

I took the contents off another website, I will check next week that it's all accurate. In the meantime, there is one item that is a theme without the usual variations afterward. "Pieces"?

Yes, that's fine. It would have been helpful if the original uploader had split the files into separate works — P.davydov 18:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Bach, JS or WF, BWV 1070 Ouverture

The rest of Bach's orchestral "ouvertures" have been tagged as suites, and they are known under both names. I have tagged the BWV 1070 as a suite as well, since it is the same type of work, and "overtures" doesn't seem to be appropriate, since it usually means, well . . . . . an overture! (in the opera sense). I am also wondering if it shouldn't be cross-referenced to WF Bach, since some people feel it was by him, and there seems to be general consensus that authorship is questionable.

Isn't the argument that we should be tagging works under the terms in the actual title given to the work, rather than forcing it into a different category? It is common to find works in both earlier and later eras given descriptive titles that “don’t seem to be appropriate” to a 19th-century-centric view, e.g. “symphony”, “sonata”, “concerto”, and “overture” are often given to quite differing work types. It is quite common to see “Overture” at the head of an orchestral suite (without any title of “suite” by the composer) since the same type of movement (an introductory movement) can be used to preface either an opera or a collection of orchestral or concertante movements... Philip Legge @ © talk 03:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I can easily change it back, but I first want to check the urtext Bach edition when I get in to work (it might not even be there, if they felt it was by someone else) (Steltz)
More on this, the Bach Gesellschaft Ausgabe lists all of the legitimate suites as Ouvertures as well, though whoever tagged them here tagged them as suites, not overtures. Probably this was because the uploader listed them as suites, but they have been labelled as suites on recordings (as well as Grove), even though the BGA doesn't use that word at all. A similar situation is cropping up with Couperin's Les Gouts Reunis, Concerts 5-14, because they also have an overture with several movements afterwards, and there is no clear tag in the title, so this ends up as "pieces". Technically, since "suite" isn't in the title of the Bach BWV 1066-9 set, these should also be "pieces", as well as the spurious BWV 1070 and the Couperin. Comments?
I don't see a huge problem with using overture for the whole work in the absence of a title (which is a synecdoche, or the practice of using a part to name the whole), as in my opinion this would be ostensibly less wrong than the default "pieces". I'd also prefer "suites" ahead of pieces (even without the word "suite" appearing in the title) to indicate a group of pieces that are to be played together rather than separately. To my mind a "collection of pieces" doesn't infer the same connection between the parts, even if they are matched as a set. Philip Legge @ © talk 00:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I would agree wholeheartedly that "pieces" doesn't infer connection between parts, which is why I am reluctant to use it. From the rest of your comments, can I take it that your preference order would be "overtures" "suites" "pieces"? I think mine would be "suites" "overtures" "pieces". I take your point that the "overture" is used because it's at the head of the suite, but I also think that when people browse for overtures, they are looking for the "before an opera" overture, not a suite. When they want to look for the Bach-type items, they are more likely to look under "suites", unless they already know the history of the titles. Does anyone else want to weigh in on this? It will affect quite a few suite-type Baroque works, so we all have to know what to do when we encounter them. (Steltz)
I think it would be good idea to tag "overtures ; suites" for the works known by both titles. A useful future project would be to get people to go through the works of a particular composer to make sure that the information IMSLP gives on each work is accurate and complete, following either a recent thematic catalogue, or an up-to-date listing in Grove or similar sources. So anything we might not get right during the tagging process (despite our best efforts), will have a chance to be corrected — P.davydov 13:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Good idea! (Steltz)


I just noticed there was a glitch in the tagging table, both "pavans" and "pavannes" being used. I've standardised this to "pavannes", because there were more entries for that version. No need to go back and correct any works already tagged — I'll take care of it, as it was my mistake — P.davydov 16:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

My Oxford dictionary prefers pavane/pavan, with the following etymology: from French pavane, from Italian pavana, feminine adjective from Pavo, dialect name of Padua (whereas another dictionary traces an etymology from the Latin name for peacock Pavo via Spanish pavana). What would be the argument for going for the doubled consonant if this is not the common English form of the word? Philip Legge @ © talk 03:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

In accordance with PML, especially since Pavanne is actually a rather "rare" form to find (I notice we have chaconne instead of chacony etc. but minuet instead of menuet or minuetto :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Just following the MLA list, which unfortunately for me confirms that "pavan" is the standard form, so I'm going to have to go through and change them all :-( — P.davydov 18:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Don't forget, though, that the tagging system was designed for exactly such things: if you find that there are two tags for the same thing, you can simply merge them (i.e. use the same categories for each). You can even separate the "deprecated" tags into a different section on MW:G. Of course, if you have a very strong perfectionist impulse it may be irresistible to fix them, but if there are too many I would just merge the tags. --Feldmahler 00:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
You make perfectionism sound like a bad thing :-) But that aside, with 1650 tags at the moment things could quickly get out of hand if there were multiple alternative tags meaning the same thing. Just as in library cataloging, the idea is to have only one 'correct' standard version that everyone uses. In this case I just deleted the "pavanne" tag from MW:G, so that the affacted works show up on the "Unknown tags" list, and can be changed to 'pavan' from there — P.davydov 09:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


Can anyone tell me what this is? It came up in a piece of traditional military music (Parademarsch der Spielleute), so it might be a fife, but I'm not sure. (Steltz)

Open instrumentation where even the number of instruments is open

I am encountering more than one piece of music where it could be performed by 3 or 30. It can be solo or ensemble etc. The St. George Tucker pieces aren't the only ones, but in order to get clarification where there is none in the instrumentation field, I contacted the executor of her estate. His coments on Indian Summer were "This piece is like Terry Riley's "In C" in that any number of any kind of instrument can participate depending upon the circumstances. I would therefore put it (if possible) in several categories depending upon what's most all encompassing (i.e. orchestra and chorus, chamber ensemble and chorus, mixed instruments and voices)." Do we have an open designation where even the number is variable? (Steltz)

I think the most practical solution in these situations would be to use "open" without qualification, which will cause the work to be listed under "Scores with open instrumentation", without specifying the number of players — P.davydov 13:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Hoffmann, Seefelder Geschichten am Klangbaum

In this piece the clarinetist doubles pan-pipes. If I tag the pan-pipes, it will put the piece under 6 players instead of 5. Also, he lists a conductor, which probably is necessary to keep things together, but at one point, the conductor is actually playing on a mouthpiece of some sort (probably brass, but I don't know). So technically, I suppose there are 6 players. Suggestions?

In these situations I'd suggest ignoring the doublings and just thinking about the clarinet and pan pipes as separate parts. If the conductor's instrument isn't specified, then you could either ignore it, or treat it as an 'ad lib.' part — P.davydov 13:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Telemann, Getreuer Music Meister

I see a huge future problem with this page. It was a periodical that eventually published many works. Musicologically, it would be nice to tie them together, but if I tag the 6 pieces that are there, when someone adds another one, it won't pop up as an untagged work. The page, in perpetuity, will only have the tags I give now. Also, the works were never really meant to be performed in a concert together (I think there were over 60 anyway). Should these pieces not be given separate pages with one of those lists at the bottom like the symphonies lists? (Steltz)

If you check the talk page, you'll see Rarus's answer to this question. (Not proposing this as the final answer, just to highlight another argument.) KGill talk email 16:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The more I research this, the more I think we need to separate these (simple now since very few of them are here), and use the unifying list at the bottom of the page. Two reasons: 1) the sheer number of pieces involved means the page will eventually be way too long to navigate effectively, especially if we complete the set, and 2) it turns out that Telemann didn't just stick to his own works. Though most of them were his, Grove says "he also included works by J.S. Bach, Zelenka, Pisendel, Weiss and other leading musicians." These can't go on this page anyway, so the full set will never be on one page. (Steltz)

National anthems?

The guide page says not to use 'anthems' for a national anthem, but in that case, what should be used? KGill talk email 01:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It depends on the work type (e.g. the Chinese national anthem on IMSLP is tagged as a 'march'). Which one have you found? — P.davydov 06:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Österreische Nationalhymne (Scherrer, Heinrich). (Actually, now that I look at the score, it's an arrangement of Haydn's original, which we do not have a page for.) KGill talk email 14:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone think it would be useful to have a separate tag for national anthems? — P.davydov 23:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes - PML

Yep (maybe the Beethoven Opp. 107 and 110 (is that right?)) could also get that ;)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 00:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC) OK, there seems to be broad agreement that "national anthems" is needed. I'd recommend keeping it strictly for the anthems themselves, or at a stretch a set of variations on the theme. (I'm not sure the Beethoven examples would qualify, as only a handful of the 'national airs' in question are anthems) — P.davydov 21:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I think anything given the tag should actually be playable as a national anthem; Berlioz’s arrangement of La Marseillaise (despite having so many verses) would qualify as it is easily tailored to fit a ceremony demanding the anthem, whereas you can't extract God save the King from Beethoven's Victory Symphony (Wellinton’s Sieg) to serve as an anthem... Philip Legge @ © talk 01:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

New Instrument Tags

Two new ones have recently been added to the list:

  • saxh - for saxhorn
  • toys - for toy instruments (as in Reinecke's Kinder-sinfonie)

Tiento XXVI Super Philomena, Francisco Fernandez de Palero

Mr. de Palero was an organist, and he is in Grove, except not with a works list. The problem is, the uploader made the file name "keyboard", but the piece is a 4-stave score for cantus, altus, tenor, basso. Do organists read 4-stave music? I've tagged it "pieces ; org ; open sop alt ten bass" as it could also be like a canzona played by recorders or cornetts/trombones. (Steltz)

JS Bach, The Art of Fugue, BWV 1080: ostensibly yes, on occasion :) Usually the reason for exploding the music out from two staves onto four is to clarify the part-writing (and the organist has to work out voice crossings and other details in his or her head). Philip Legge @ © talk 20:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Baton, 6 Sonatas for Vielle

Grove defines a vielle as a hurdy-gurdy or other various string instruments. Would viola da gamba be dissimilar enough that we should consider a different tag? (Steltz)

Yes indeed. Bachman stresses that point in An Encyclopedia of the Violin to no end...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
How about "vll" with a note that it is for vielle, hurdy gurdy, or any similar instrument. (Steltz)
OK, I've added this to the list of tags under "vie" (just in case anyone confused "vll" was "violoncello"). Incidentally, 48.4% of all works have now been tagged... — P.davydov 22:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

cantatas vs songs

This is going to be a really dumb question, but what is the difference between a secular cantata and a song? (Steltz (obviously not a vocal person))

If it's called a cantata in the title or sub-title, then that's how we tag it  :-) — P.davydov 11:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Then the next part of this is, if there's nothing in the title that indicates a cantata, and nothing that says "song", what will the default generic be? (Steltz)
In those circumstances "song" should be used (it's the vocal equivalent of "piece" for an instrumental work). If there's a chorus involved, then either "secular chorus" or "sacred chorus" is the default, depending on whether the text is religious or not — P.davydov 20:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hammered dulcimer (hackbrett)

Found in Aurad (Hoffmann, Norbert Rudolf). I guess it would be tagged as a normal dulcimer, and that raises the question of whether there should be a tag for dulcimer? KGill talk email 13:57, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

They are very different instruments, however. The hammered dulcimer is similar to the Hungarian "Cimbalom" (used by Stravinsky in Ragtime and by Debussy in La Plus que Lente). You might already know this very well, but I thought I make the remark just in case. Carolus 08:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
In fact, I did not realize that...*blushes* It was particularly dumb of me since on this page (where I figured out what a hackbrett was), it gives the Hungarian name as 'cimbalom'. I did know what a cimbalom (or cymbalom) was, just didn't make the connection (probably because I didn't look at the picture for hammered dulcimer). This brings me to another question: many different countries have varieties of hammered dulcimers, most of which could be considered different instruments (saltério, cymbalom, santur, khim, etc.). Should we have a tag for a generic hammered dulcimer and tag all works with these varieties with it, or have individual tags for at least some of them? And should the tag for Aurad now be changed to a hammered dulcimer (as opposed to a normal dulcimer)? KGill talk email 21:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Other (no more than 8 performers)

is now Done!! I tagged Der getreue Musikmeister as a method, since there was a clearly stated pedagogical bent to it. Hope everyone agrees with that. (Steltz) p.s. Trios should be finished next week (19 to go).

double language tag where a translation is provided by an editor?

Goltermann's Rheinfahrt has only German in the score, but in the vocal part, there is an English translation which I'm sure is by the editor. Should an "en" tag be put in or not? (Steltz)

We should always tag the work, rather than the edition, so if Rheinfahrt itself was originally in German only (as seems to be the case), then it's just "de".

Very recently it's become possible to add a language field for editions, by inserting lines like this in the score's publication details:


In future this could provide an automated way to search on languages of individual scores... — P.davydov 06:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Just to say that my opinion was based on the fact that the English is only in the vocal part and the edition was Offenbach: Johan André; the cities listed were London, Philadelphia, New York, and Paris. I will insert the language field in the edition line.
Just tried to do that, in fact it's already there as "|Language=German, English", but it doesn't show the English at the bottom, so it won't come up in a search. I tried the de and en tags, but this doesn't make it come up at the bottom either. How do I make it do that? (Steltz)
I think he means to add a language field in the file entry, not the work entry. KGill talk email 11:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
That's right. The tags showing at the bottom apply to the work as a whole, not to any particular edition. There's no search facility for the language of an edition just at the moment, but including the "|Language" field below the publisher information will allow for that to be made possible in future — P.davydov 18:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Then it is tagged as well as it can be for the moment, and the English version will have to wait for a future mod. (Steltz)

Mayseder, Trio for Harp, Violin, and Horn

The horn part is missing from this, and the only equivalent part is a hand written manuscript for cello (a transcription of the horn part), obviously not original to the set. If I tag this correctly, it needs to go as "hn vn hp" but not cello, which would be taken care of by an Arrangements and Transcriptions header. Problem is, the cello manuscript is embedded in the PDF file with everything else, so it won't come up under an arrangements tag. Suggestions? (Steltz)

It looks like the parts relate only to the arrangement for cello, violin and harp/piano, so I've changed the "Parts" heading for an "Arrangements..." one — P.davydov 18:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

zither, tag?

Canaletti's 6 trios specifies cetra, which is a zither. Is there something else similar enough to use, or does this need its own tag? (Steltz)

It's sometimes substituted with a mandolin, but we can use a "zith" tag for it — P.davydov 18:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

BGA prefaces

There are five of these pages. I seem to recall that a 'writings' tag was discussed a while ago, but it looks like it was scrapped, because I can't find it in the list. (I already tagged this one with it, though.) Should these pages be tagged, or merged with their respective work pages (as per here)? Or, following the same proposal, should the work pages (e.g. Cantatas, BWV 131-140 (Bach, Johann Sebastian)) be split, and the prefaces left alone? KGill talk email 12:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

There will be a series of tags for "Writings" (and "thematic catalogs" has already been used), but I've deliberately avoided including them because we need to decide what to do about the significant overlap with "methods", "exercises", and so on. It will be easier to decide when the musical works have been tagged, and we can get a better idea of how the land lies.
Regarding the Bach cantatas, the subject came up recently on my user talk page, and there seeemed to be widespread agreement that there should be one page per cantata. The format of the prefaces is such that they can't be easily split the same way, so the most realistic option is probably to treat them as literary works, as you suggested. I'd hold fire on that just for the moment though, until the work pages have all been sorted out — P.davydov 18:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Trios are done


Congratulations! Excellent work — P.davydov 17:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)