User talk:BKhon

Archive 1

Contents 1 Thanks- 2 File tagging and page editing 3 Scherzo No.1, Op.20 (Chopin, Frédéric) 4 Links to Categories 5 Instrumentation 6 Arrangers 7 Kleine Geistliche 8 Monteverdi: Magnificat 9 MP3 files 10 Copyright term 11 Stars 12 Max Seiffert (1868-1948) 13 PM 14 Security 15 Cleanup Pleyel Op.18 16 Dunhill? - phantasy/similar name works for the Cobbett Competition 17 Strauss: Serenade 18 Symphony Fantastique! 19 Magic Flute 20 Blocking 21 Clementi

Thanks-

will pay attention to this in future as I'd not even noticed that I'd been uploading many collections of parts at all (except for that last one, which replaced an attempt to upload 290mb worth of parts separately) Eric 22:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

File tagging and page editing

Hi BKhon, just a reminder that when we as reviewers tag files, we also need to simultaneously make sure the page to which the new file was uploaded is properly formatted with the necessary information completed. So for example with the Bruch Swedish Dances, Op.63 you tagged earlier, the plate was omitted (but visible in the PDF) and it was not sectionally identified as an arrangement/transcription. Completing this information ensures we keep those that may come behind us to do clean up work at a minimum. Thanks. Daphnis 01:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I usually specialize in other fields, and rarely will add plate numbers. Of course, my specialty being standardization, I can't believe I missed some of that stuff. I'm usually more concerned with the actual tagging when I'm doing copyright review, to ensure I don't miss tag something. Thanks for adding the plate number, but, the format should not really be ", plates 9825, 9826". There should always be a period and the plate be a new sentence. In the end looking like ". Plates 9825, 9826." Just keep this is mind for future edits. I've revised if you need to refer. Thanks, BKhon 01:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't look at the previous uploads. Daphnis 01:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason to deprecate Plates 9825-6 in such a case? Eric 02:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

That would probably be best, and if it isn't in the style guide, is something that also needs to be standardized. Since we follow Chicago style for much, the proper format for sequential plate numbers would be 9825-26. Daphnis 02:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes... I agree fairly much with what Daphnis says. It is standard (and should go in the style guide). The only issue is that it may cause numerical confusion. Perhaps broach the issue, and bring it up with Carolus and Davydov for absolute certainty. BKhon 02:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Scherzo No.1, Op.20 (Chopin, Frédéric)

Hi BKhon, I noticed that you altered the plate number for the Kullak edition to S.7294-95. The actual plate number is S.7294(5). All of Volume 9 is identified as plate S.7294 and each individual piece is identified by the number is parentheses - scherzo no. 1 being the 5th item of volume 9. Thanks. --Cypressdome 03:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, you're right. Just remember to capitalize "Plate #.", and follow proper formatting. Thanks for your efforts on IMSLP, BKhon 03:08, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Links to Categories

There are at least two ways I can think of to link to composer categories- one is [[:Category:Schumann, Robert|Robert Schumann]], the other is {{LinkComp|Robert|Schumann}} (then there's LinkCompS which just produces "Schumann" for the visible bit, and a few others) Eric 22:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much, but I don't recall ever asking. Am I forgetting something, or am I not doing something correctly? Thanks, BKhon 22:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

No. Feel free to blank the section. (Actually, if they'd put in a proper category tree on the templates, they wouldn't take long to find and learn here. Wikipedia does pretty well there. But that's another matter.) Eric 22:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Interesting you should mention that - I actually did just put in a fairly comprehensive category tree...see Category:Templates. KGill _{talk email} 01:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Nice work, KGill. BKhon 01:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Instrumentation

If you'll point me to the preferred format, I'll be happy to use it for all later additions. I will also change it for earlier additions but it's not a high priority for me at the moment.

Also it would be good to change Special:AddWork accordingly. Currently it says "Orchestration: Shortened format for orchestra is permitted (3/3/3/2 4/2/3/1 with strings, or similar)." In fact that's probably why I've been using the slashes. Otherwise I would've put 3332 4231 & str. Alonso del Arte 22:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I'm changing those shortened format lists, starting with Michael Haydn's music. (Though I could be wrong on the capitalization--I noticed that for Mozart's 37th the list is given with all instruments capitalized). Any word on changing Special:AddWork to remove the deprecated advice I and many others have followed? Alonso del Arte 20:42, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

It would be a fabulous thing to have, but I don't have the permissions to change it. In fact, not even administrators have the permissions to change it. I will ask Feldmahler, and hopefully he will get around to it when he has time. BKhon 20:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Arrangers

Hi Ben. You might be interested in this — P.davydov 19:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Interesting... good idea. Thanks for sharing, BKhon 11:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Kleine Geistliche

Actually, the work was conceived as enough of a whole that it makes sense to keep it on the same page—like "Pièces de Clavecin" in multiple issues-- Snailey (_@/) _{Talk to Me Email me} 20:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Um... I see that I wrote that now... except that I didn't write it. I didn't even notice it. The only template I've put in was the one on the Bach (after seeing Davydov's talk page). Oh, and now I see that I put the template up the 15th of September, and have forgotten about it by now. In retrospect, I agree. Thanks, BKhon 20:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem.-- Snailey (_@/) _{Talk to Me Email me} 20:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Monteverdi: Magnificat

Did Zuzuma confirm that this was his edition and typeset? (See my note on his talk page) Carolus 23:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Ping to repeat question. If he did indicate that he was the editor/typesetter, please insert his name into the editor and publisher fields. Thanks, Carolus 22:48, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

You have not answered the question here, nor is there any sort of evidence in the file itself to indicate this new edition/typeset is actually the work of Zuzuma. It is therefore now blocked as a possible copyright violation. If Zuzuma contacted you via e-mail, please indicate that he/she is the editor and typesetter by putting "Zuzuma" in the editor and publisher fields. If there is no additional info forthcoming, the file will be deleted tomorrow under our rule for speedy deletion of typesets. This is a very nicely done typeset, BTW, so I really hope that Zuzuma is the actual editor here. However, we cannot allow unattributed new editions/engravings of pieces (even though the composer and work is public domain) to be posted as they are potential copyright violations. Carolus 05:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

At this point, it should most likely be deleted. He did not get back to me. I accidentally tagged the file, but there is no indication, as you said, of Zuzuma being the typesetter. Terrible blunder I'm afraid, BKhon 21:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

MP3 files

Hi Ben,

Some MP3 files trigger the malware warning from our wiki software due to an issue with the MIME/file type. The Scriabin files turned out to be OK and have been restored. If you look at the links KGill put in on my talk page you will see the warning on some sound files uploaded by Ralph Theo Misch (which are also fine). Carolus 05:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright term

Just a reminder: Copyright terms run to the end of the calendar year. Thus, works of Max Seiffert (d.1948) will not enter the public domain of the 70pma countries until 1/1/2019. They are protected through 12/31/2018. Carolus 01:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

You're right, sorry. I'm not quite with it today... I'll be moving soon and I'm stressed about that. I'm trying to fit IMSLP into my schedule, but (as I'm sure you've noticed) I've been close to completely inactive for the past two weeks. Once things settle down I'll be more meticulous (and significantly more active), BKhon 01:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Hope you have a speedy and efficient move! I know it can really be stressful. Carolus 02:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Stars

Belated thanks.-- Snailey (_@/) _{Talk to Me Email me} 22:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

No, thank you for your excellent work on IMSLP, BKhon 22:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Max Seiffert (1868-1948)

The Leopold Mozart editions being posted present a somewhat complicated case from the standpoint of EU copyright. If there was no continuo realization on Seiffert's part, the item is PD in the EU due to its status as an Urtext edition. However, if Seiffert added a realization (as he did on some of the scores being posted) the term probably expires in 2019 in at least parts of the EU. Carolus 04:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

PM

Hi Ben. Just checking whether you sent me a PM via the forum? — P.davydov 06:48, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Davydov, no I didn't send you a PM. It doesn't look like one was sent either (based on my outbox). Why do you ask? BKhon 19:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Someone posing as you asked me to remove you as an administrator ("...it would be a good idea for my rights to be revoked until I'm a more seasoned user"). I'd suggest changing your password on your forum account, and having a quiet word with your little brother :-) — P.davydov 19:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I wonder how my little brother got my password in the first place... I've changed it several times. In fact, something very similar to this happened a few weeks ago which prompted a password change. A message was sent to Kenneth (supposedly from me) that talked about how "terrible of a contributor" I was, and things along those lines. Do you think it's possible that there is a hidden keylogger in my composer or something? He's already gotten into my email and forums... not to mention, he probably saw the moderator forum if he was on my account... this poses a rather serious issue. I could be a huge security vulnerability... BKhon 20:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

How often do you clear out your browsing data? KGill _{talk email} 20:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

If keylogging is a possibility, then we might not be talking to the real BKhon now :-) — P.davydov 20:16, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I use a program called Ccleaner, which is supposed to clear browsing data from ones computer, most Sunday nights. Perhaps I should run the program daily? I've certainly cleared it since "someone" sent an email to you (Kgill). I assure you, this is the real Ben, but there really isn't a way to tell... BKhon 20:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I was almost caught by a "Phisher" once and would have been (on another site this) if I hadn't been warned of the technique the day before (I do mean the day before). People really can be looking to fake one into giving them your password and with a bit of sleepiness it's not hard to find oneself just giving it to them :(... anyway. sorry. I doubt that's what happened. (they rely on the simple fact that none- well, no one I know- stays alert all the time...) Eric 22:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Security

Hi Ben. Apropos of the above, your forum settings have been temporarily tweaked a little while you sort out the problem, and we'll see what steps we might be able to take at this end to help you... — P.davydov 21:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, now I won't have to worry about him gaining access to the ACP or moderation forum. I'll work on sorting out the problem on my end and let you know when it's over. I'm really sorry for this to be happening... as a matter of fact, it's quite embarrassing. BKhon 21:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup Pleyel Op.18

Hallo BKhon, Splitting the parts of the Pleyel 3 quintets op.18 is not really easy, in the Ob and Vc parts the works start in mid-page! A solution may be to have three workpages for B.280, B.281. and B.282, each with a link to the complete pdf file, with a note that B.280 is the first of the 3 quintets, or B.281 the second... I think I remember a similar solution was discussed in the forums a while ago for other collections but cannot find an example.--Kalliwoda 07:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kalliwoda. We could consider doing something like that, however I'm slightly hesitant to split any of the files at all. These pieces were published by Op. numbers as well as Benton numbers. I personally think we should abide by the B. numbers, because the sortable list of works for Pleyel is organized by that system. I guess it really doesn't matter though, BKhon 16:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Dunhill? - phantasy/similar name works for the Cobbett Competition

If you mean the Dunhill Phantasy trio, it was composed for the Cobbett competition, which requested the composition of 'phantasy' (sonatas, trios, quartets) - one-movement works in more or less the form used in the Tudor period (English Renaissance/Baroque, if I'm not getting my time wrong; the title is also used across the channel of course) - and Walter Willson Cobbett did specifically use that spelling; I gather most of the competition entrants did as well. (Bridge phantasy trio, Britten phantasy quartet, Hurlstone phantasie quartet, very many others - anyway. :) ... depends on the specifics of our naming policy though, of course. Eric 03:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is the one that I meant. I would have left it as "Phantasy" since it's something the user specifically wanted, BKhon 01:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Strauss: Serenade

Hi Ben, The Serenade you posted appears to be the Op.13, not the Op.7 Carolus 03:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Op.13 is the piano quartet in C minor, I thought. Hopefully I'll get to uploading more of my typesets tomorrow. They take quite a bit of work to complete, believe it or not. Especially the Strauss (not that it's high quality anyway), BKhon 03:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

(sorry to pop in) op7 for serenade and op13 for piano quartet sounds right to me too... though duplicated op nos. not unknown of course... ah. Strauss Serenade for winds op.7 - Serenade for 13 Wind Instruments, Op. 7. Completed 1881 or 1882, first performance November 27, 1882, in Dresden. (from program notes) Eric 03:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

You're right about the opus numbers. I was confusing the 13 in the number of instruments with an opus number. The chief point is: the 2-movement piece (Allegretto, Romanze) you posted on the page for Op.7 (a single movement work whose tempo starts "Andante") is not Op.7, but another work. In fact, looking at it again, it's actually the first 2 movements of the Suite for Winds, Op.4, also scored for 13 winds. Carolus 04:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Symphony Fantastique!

Very nice typeset of a very long score! :) You should render the parts too --Funper 00:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought it would be a good idea to have the individual movements, since the full score is quite large and inefficient if you only want one movement. At some point I may typeset the parts, but it takes quite a while complete scores that large :-) BKhon 00:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Typesetting parts anew would be kind of like going out of your way. Since the full score is already typeset it mustn't be difficult to just render it it in parts too. I don't know what program you use but at least with Lilypond I know rendering parts is possible by just doing some small tweak.. Seems like a good thing to have if that's all it takes to render them :) --Funper 00:29, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I count 2 Bassoons...what are you using as a source?-- Snailey (_@/) _{Talk to Me Email me} 02:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

With horns grouped in the middle of the woodwind? o_O Has to be Malherbe and Weingartner, who assumed Berlioz scores should be laid out like Wagner’s. Berlioz usually specified 4 bassoons since the ones he had in early 19th century orchestras tended to be very weak; and all 4 are definitely required later on. I think the bar 1 should have “I” marked. Whilst quickly browsing page 1, I noticed the brass are in different crooks, you haven’t specified doublings (like flute 2/picc) and you’re missing the con sord. at bar 3 for tutti strings. Not bad though... ;-) Philip Legge _{@ © talk} 14:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW, since you obviously spent much time and care on your typeset, you might wish to change the CC license to Non-commercial, as the Ebay vultures will certainly rip the files and start selling them in hours if you do not. They might try to anyway, but at least if you use the Non-commercial or Share Alike versions, you something to stand on if you elect to file a complaint with Ebay. Carolus 02:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Carolus, I will consider it. It's a slightly armature typeset anyway, so I doubt they'd get much money for it. @ Perlnerd... You seem to be a lot more critical these days, BKhon 02:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Apologies—I like "critical" editions :P-- Snailey (_@/) _{Talk to Me Email me} 02:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

And anyhoo, Berlioz was a critic. *runs, ducks, penguins and hides.* Eric 03:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

PML is correct about the source, and thanks for the criticism. Anything wrong with the Tchaikovsky Symphony No.4? BKhon 15:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Magic Flute

Is this your arrangement? Or did you typeset one of the older ones like Moses-Tobani or Laurendeau? Carolus 00:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

My arrangement, BKhon 00:25, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Blocking

(X-posted from User_talk:Pml:) Sorry Ben, on the strength of the suggestion from Carolus that you should e-mail one of the admins those uploads that are not yours, I’ve blocked your account for 24 hours – if you want to me to remove any of them, my e-mail is philip.m.legge AT gmail (as I’m sure you recall). I imagine you’ll be able to catch up with the admin team over at the forums; we really need to sort out what is going on in Washington Crossing! Regards, Philip Legge _{@ © talk} 02:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. Unauthorized access to your account is much too risky. Please e-mail and we'll take care of removing anything not yours. Carolus 02:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back. I assume things are sorted out now. Carolus 04:51, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

As well as they can be in the circumstances – see the moderation forum thread. As a bureaucrat, there’s a matter you should attend to... Regards, Philip Legge _{@ © talk} 05:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Taken care of — P.davydov 06:43, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Without discussing the incident in much detail here, I request a few things be done. First, can someone unprotect my user page? As a normal user, I can't edit it. Also, do you think it's nessesary for my "This user is a sysop / CR" template to be removed. I've technically earned the title, but don't have the rights (for as long as 9 months). Seeing as my forum rights were completely revolked, am I to have no access to the moderation forum (and therefore no say on critical events) for the next few months? Regards, BKhon 15:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. IMO, if you don't actually have the rights, then you shouldn't have the userboxes. Cheers, KGill _{talk email} 15:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Clementi

Hi Ben. I started to work on the Sortable list of works by Muzio Clementi in order to include key signatures. Hopefully you weren't planning on something along these lines. Look OK? Lndlewis10 16:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I suppose it's fine... Wow, it seems that everybody is finishing / improving all of my sortable lists of works. BKhon 18:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. I just want to let you know that I've finished the list. See the category talk page for information as to why I changed it the I did... Sortable list of works by Muzio Clementi. Thanks for getting this started (and actually, completed!), Lndlewis10 08:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow!!! This looks good. Thanks! How long did that take? BKhon 18:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Not too long... But thanks, Lndlewis10 18:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)