User talk:Carolus/archive24

Contents

Les Contes d'Hoffman

Hi Carolus, thanks for uploading the vocal score from archive.org/U Toronto! How in the heck did I miss that one when I was mirroring the collection?!? Massenetique talk email 02:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

There's not many of those you missed! I found a couple of Berlioz items too. There also appear to be some things scanned from the Boston Public Library which should prove to be interesting. Carolus 04:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I went through a while ago and searched under Subject:Operas, very possible not everything is categorized correctly though. There are a number of scores from the NY Public Library which I did not upload because I couldn't remove a (c) Microsoft watermark, but maybe you have better software to take care of those. Good luck! Massenetique talk email 06:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The MSN scans are definitely ineligible. I don't have an easy way of removing the MS logos - they appear to be imbedded in the TIFFs or JPGs themselves. With PitStop - a ridiculously expensive PDF editor - I can actually get rid of Google logos with a single command. That all being said, I did notice a few extra things - alternate versions, usually - of items you've already provided us with at one copy of. The entries appear to be duplicates but they are actually scans of different versions of the score. Carolus 23:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Great! Glad to let you tackle the remainder - I think I uploaded over 500 scores from that collection! Massenetique talk email 05:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
BTW, I've figured out a back-door way to have the NYPL stuff without the infernal Microsoft logos: From archive.org, you can download a zip of the original JPGs. These have no logos and can be complied into a single PDF. Check out Arthur Sullivan's Prodigal Son vocal score as issued by Schirmer (a much nicer engraving than the 1869 Boosey). Carolus 00:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Gounod

Oh, ok, now I understand the timeline- I almost thought my mind was being read there :) - Happy New Year by the way... of the (strictly speaking) obscure (with dating I think mostly unknown for now, etc.?) quartets by Gounod I've only heard the A minor I believe, in the recording with Lalo and Thomas quartets. Hope to hear that 1997 disc sometime, I think- I was indeed under the mistaken impression it duplicated the A minor quartet until I looked today. Interesting yes, and intriguing...

Matesic was kind enough to remove the logos from the scans of one of the scores (1920-published) I downloaded from G. Books. and uploaded to this site after obtaining his help... (no longer downloadable in one go as a PDF because of the HathiTrust business, alas- only page-by-page, and it's a 96-page sextet- certainly grateful to him for that, much work that I don't yet think I can do myself, at best I understand the principles involved. He's also uploaded a performance of a briefer work by the same composer (the Fantasy Pieces of 1902 by Percy Hilder Miles- 1878-1922 - do need to clean up a Wikipedia stub-sketch for him I have on my Tmp-page on that latter site, and type it in sometime)). Anyhow. Sorry about the digression and thanks again! Eric 04:49, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

What's the HathiTrust business? I wasn't aware that Google books had eliminated some of their available titles. Are these for the University of MI items they scanned? At any rate, the wikipedia page for Gounod mentions the other, recently discovered quartets. I think the French page mentions them also. Happy New Year to you! (Always fun to see the red turn to green - in about a minute, I think) Carolus 04:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Google has reduced the previewability of some items, but I think they've removed the "download whole score-or-document-as-PDF" functionality of any and all items... for example it used to be if I found Miles' sextet on Google I could indeed download the score as a Google-tagged PDF - now I can read it in the Google viewer or choose a few "HathiTrust" options - and save it page by page in jpg or 1-page pdf format (and use preview to combine the 48 2-page pdfs as a single PDF - or divide it by movements as I did in String Sextet in G minor (Miles, Percy Hilder), yes, using some editing programs to handle 2-page images that contain the end of one movement and the beginning of another. Arguably I might perhaps use those editing programs on every single page and combine single-page PDFs only more conveniently for the reader- will have to consider that for a later upload... or re-practice using LilyPond and create an edition to compensate for some of the minor legibility problems of the Stainer and Bell score *sigh.* (am much out of practice using LilyPond.) Eric 05:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Further re the Gounod quartets- thought there was yet another, a quartet no.2 op.37 in A major mentioned by HMB, but that's Godard as is clear from his worklist (and the year I thought I remembered is- exactly the same. Whoops!) Should have thought since when did Gounod use opus numbers anyway?... Eric 02:51, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW, Did you get my earlier remark on the easier way to obtain Google items? The ones copied to archive.org are actually downloadable from archive.org as long as you use the "http" link to the list of downloadable formats. You don't have to deal w/Google's repeated requests to fill out captchas. The logos still have to be removed, and the scan quality is as insane as always, but the items are easier to obtain than going directly through Google. Carolus 04:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah. yes I did- I still haven't run into those captchas but probably because I haven't downloaded much from Google Books directly recently... (speaking of insane scan quality, some of the Google/MI and CA stuff is only partially usable I think... the Delius Double Concerto very much so since it's missing 20 pages of score, but also the two full-score symphonies by Fétis which have just in their first movements too many unreadable pages... (if I had the patience to save and then process such large numbers of pages anyhow... well, for full scores of symphonies that are almost unknown- one of them has been recorded - I might, I suppose. Though I still haven't gotten back to processing the Rüfer and Lachner concerto and suite last movements... hrm...) my appreciation by contrast for the Sibley scanning people etc. just grows- and their accessibility and willingness to promptly-when-possible fix problems with scans, too. (having attempted, of course I do know scanning can be hard of course!) Eric 04:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Beethoven - sonatas opp 96,111

The RSS feed/website "The Concert" just posted a concert from the Isabella Stewart series with another Creative Commons-available mp3, this time of a concert with Beethoven's sonatas no.10 for violin and no.32 for piano (the former at least we don't have a recording of yet I notice :) )- just thought I'd mention for when and if you have time and if you want to upload it (I will learn sometime how to upload audio in a way that I'm sure gets it right). MP3 of entire concert (needs to be divided into the two individual works, so not yet ready for upload to IMSLP actually) here, at Tapestry Room of the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, violinist Corey Cerovsek and pianist Paavali Jumppanen according to the author of the RSS feed. Eric 03:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it will have to be split. ISG usually ends up doing that themselves, so I'll probably wait for them. Glad to see they are continuing this series - which has been quite wonderful. Carolus 03:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Templates

Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 04:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Just makes the redirects happen a bit less often. Carolus 04:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Denkmäler deutscher Tonkunst Template plate number style

You changed this from D.D.T. to D.d.T. a while back... I've never seen it like that - i.e. always in upper case. I've changed it back. (N.B. the Tonkunst in Öesterreich... series does use lower case in it's plate numbers.) I hope that's ok. --Homerdundas 05:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Did I do that? I think it might have been that way on a couple of the earlier issues - or perhaps I saw it transcribed that way in Heyer or something. At any rate, no problem - use the most common form. Carolus 05:30, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

String Quintet No.3, Op.97 (Dvořák, Antonín)

Dear Carolus, could it be that the download of the Eulenburg score doesn't work? Well, I've made a mistake by uploading the files, last day. Maybe that's the reason. Sorry! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

It downloaded fine for me. Odd score, not even engraved but produced from a copyist's manuscript. Probably actually issued in Leipzig - before they fled to London in 1939. It's a fairly large file for the relatively small number of pages. It took about 30 seconds for it to download for me. Carolus 01:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I've scaled the pictures down to 600dpi. I think the loss of quality is rather limited. Feel free to remove the older upload. Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 08:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyright Office/renewal

I got your message. I'm busy tomorrow night, but perhaps we can talk about it after I am finished with the server migration hopefully this weekend. The project sounds very interesting. --Feldmahler 02:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

RE: Die Hohe Schule des Violinspiels

Happy New Year, Carolus! Thanks for the encouragement! The whole edition (2 volumes, CS, VP) includes ca. 400 pages. I'll go ahead and make a remark at IMSLP:User scanning queue next day - I'm sure I'm not the only one who owns that collection. Otherwise it would take a long time for this to complete... I'll do my best. Cheers! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

It will be really nice to have the entire thing available. There are several editions of it which are free also. Carolus 00:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hm - just recognized: Caprice in D major (Locatelli, Pietro Antonio) is part of L'Arte del Violino (Locatelli, Pietro Antonio), Concerto XII, Il Labyrinto Armonico (#20529 p.90, #88), Capriccio 1. I'd like to redirect it to that page, but David's arrangement would take 6 =s to be correct: Arr. and Transcrs., Concerto 12 (Il Laby...), Capriccio 1, For Vl and Pno. I don't know what to do :( BTW: David's arrangement seems to have monopoly status (Youtube) --Ralph Theo Misch 00:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Sonata for Violin and Cembalo in E minor (Veracini, Francesco Maria): Even the violin part bases upon David's arrangement. - I'll scan it in the next session....--Ralph Theo Misch 01:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Google logo admissibility question

The finale of Suite for 3 Cellos (La Tombelle, Fernand de) is causing me a problem- I only know how to remove the logo by cropping the page at this time, and cropping the logo off of one page of the finale will remove important tenuto marks from the bottom cello part of the last system. I could also just let a little bit of the Google logos at the bottom peek through. Is even a bit (I could upload the partially-cropped single page for later deletion I suppose, or mail it, to demonstrate...) too much of the logo, however? I don't think the former is acceptable and doubt the latter is, but the finale can always be found elsewhere and scanned in later if need be... (or i can try to use it as the basis for a Lilypond file, if I'm good enough, once back in practice. There's that too. Not a long movement.) Thoughts? Eric 16:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

It would complicate matters significantly copyright-wise to have a score that comprises both a historical scan and a new typeset… Perhaps crop the pages to remove the logo and note how the score has been “damaged” in the Misc. Notes field – the {{Missing}} template partially flags this as a problem, and the missing tenuto marks might be possibly restored at a later time if someone typesets the piece? Cheers Philip Legge @ © talk 20:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Hrm. I've submitted typesets to score pages already containing scans before but there was redundancy involved (no extra notes were added, the music was all there - e.g. Piano Trio No.11, Op.125 (Reissiger, Carl Gottlieb) and String Quartet in C minor, Op.10 (Jadassohn, Salomon). Assuming the problem is caused by the fact that three of the movements would be scans and one of them would be a typeset - basically. Got it, I think (though will have to think about it, the distinction I have :) ) Thanks. Will 'overcrop' and upload the finale with a note about the tenutos, then- that works. (Later today or tomorrow). Eric 22:46, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Belatedly following up on this matter of having a workpage that contains both a scan and a new typeset - I'm thinking of adding a typeset performing-edition score and parts (only 1st mvt score almost-ready for upload at the moment, and no hurry of any kind in any case :) ) of at least a movement, possibly the whole work once I'm done, to a string quintet whose manuscript parts (otherwise unpublished, as far as I can tell) are uploaded (at String Quintet, Op.99 (Mascia, Giuseppe)), but not if this would indeed cause an issue... Eric 22:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I note that the items have been tagged V/V/V, which is probably not the best, as we really do not know the publication status of this work. It would effect EU status only, as Canada's editio princeps standard is very strict and publication status has been irrelevant in the USA since 2003, when all unpublished works of indentified authors dead over 70 years entered the USA public domain. I'll be retagging this V/V/C for this reason. Apart from that, I see no problem with your creation and uploading of a new edition/typeset. The work's status in the EU is a little nebulous, but that's it. Carolus 01:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
It shouldn’t be too hard to provide a link to the Google page where people may compare what’s missing. Cheers Philip Legge @ © talk 01:24, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I can simplify this problem considerably as I have the ability to remove Google logos without having to crop any thing. Carolus 03:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Have uploaded temporarily (I get charged by my account on this site for excessive bandwidth so will take it down eventually) the "offending image" to this location (direct jpg), if it is best to do it that way and you have time and willingness to help- very many thanks. (That's the original image.) Eric 03:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I removed the Google logo on page 19 using Photoshop, which was easy enough. I cannot find the publication on Google Books anywhere. I have another program, PitStop, which can strip all the Google logos directly from the PDF file and remove all their metatags, etc, at the same time. Send me the link to the Google Books page (or is this more Hathi Trust nonsense?). BTW, Archive.org has most of the Google scores. If you click on the little HTTP link, you can download the Google score directly from Archive.org instead of having to play Google's captcha games every time you want to download a public domain file. Insteresting how some folks apparently do not regard public domain as something that actually exists, isn't it? Carolus 04:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Carolus, for an irrelevant aside: what is it with the Hathi Trust? Everything I’ve found digitised by them (despite having been in the public domain for a century or more) is usually marked as restricted and under copyright… Philip Legge @ © talk 04:21, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed this also and I really don't understand it at all. Perhaps it's another case of what we sometimes refer to as the magic super-copyright for music - irrespective of how dead the composer is or how many years ago the piece was published. Some music libraries are firm believers in this particular myth, whose origins remain a mystery. Carolus 04:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

yes, HathiTrust- I found it at their library catalog (hathitrust.org . along with many other interesting gap-fillers - like V. Novák's serenade op.36 in full score, Pfitzner's trio op.8 - 1898 pub., etc. - anyhow... starting a partial list on my user page... - so still inclined to use it so far as I can :) ... ).
I think (though I should check HathiTrust's about page and confirm this-- that scores and books digitized by Google from most libraries (other than Harvard and a few others) and some scores and books digitized by other sources now go through the HathiTrust interface for some reason not known to me - the law of infacility, I am guessing, since HathiTrust doesn't offer the PDF feature that Google does. Is PitStop a Mac program? Thank you- will incorporate the cleaned page into my others and upload it soon. Nice 3-cello suite, I think. Small genre I think- I can only think of a few quartets and suites for 4 cellos (Moór, Bacewicz, some others- I started writing one myself over a decade ago or more, but never finished it :)). Eric 04:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, PitStop is a ridiculously expensive PDF processing program for Mac platform. I had to buy it for my old job (and kept upgrading it). Despite the obscene cost, it's very good at altering PDF files. One can do almost anything to them. So, Google is funneling their newer scans into Hathi Trust, it would appear. You're quite right about the Hathi interface being not anywhere as easy, and not having the files for download is pretty annoying too. Even the big German libraries will let you download a file (despite all the crazy claims of copyright on scans of centuries old scores). Oh, well... Carolus 04:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Random transpositions by a third

Hi Carolus,

Do you have any update on this little problem? It still makes me nervous about printing other long scores you have posted. Richard Mix 23:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Better scan uploaded. No post-processing to make the staff-lines run true horizontal. BTW, this is a classic example of why music-OCR is still not ready for prime time. It cannot deal with less-than-horizontal staff lines, which was the reason an attempt was made to make them horizontal. Trouble is, the notes and other symbols didn't move in sync and a mess resulted. Carolus 00:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Christoph Ernst Friedrich Weyse

Hi, Carolus. As I was adding to the IMSLP Wishlist I realized that on IMSLP, the name is given as Christopher Ernst Friedrich Weyse. I've searched on Google, and it appears that he is far more widely known as Christoph Ernst Friedrich Weyse. If you could provide me some information on this, that would be great. Thanks! Neapolitan6th 00:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks like you may be correct here. This is sort of a nasty move as there are a fair number of works. It will have to wait until after the server move. I'll be taking it up with some of the librarian admins. Thanks for letting us know. Carolus 00:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks (judging from the method) that N6 is right. So says danish wikipedia too :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 00:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you for your help! (: N6 (♭IIb) 00:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
No one seems to researched this and purged it, if necessary, from the various national Wikipediæ, since the error there started with the stub article in the German wikipedia: Christopher is not the usual German or Danish form of the name (and Weyse was Danish with a strong German background). WorldCat gives the majority of historical sources as Weyse, C.E.F. (1046 records) but a significant number (143) use the full German form with Christoph Ernst Friedrich; some with the Danish version of Christoph Ernst Frederik (19); Christopher Ernst Friedrich represents four scores, and most of those citations are quite recent (three scores published in Copenhagen in 1997). Grove would be a useful source of up-to-date biographical info to shed light on this, if there have been new developments in knowledge about Weyse – though I doubt it should change the conclusions reached above. VIAF of course cites five library authorities all following the LC in using the German form, except for the Biblioteca Nacional de España, which can’t spell Friedich (sic). Philip Legge @ © talk 00:52, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
In several Wikipedia(s,e) the body now begins Christoph(er), which is somewhat better; and the move of the article from Christopher to Christoph occurred a year ago in Wikipedia-en (July 2009) - fairly recently but not yesterday. To be fair... Eric 02:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Why, surely, the title of those articles still remain Christoph instead of Christopher or, even worse, Christoph(er)! N6 (♭IIb) 03:38, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

My vote is to change it to Christoph. Like PML, I thought that Christopher was a very odd form of the name to be used by a German or Dane - especially from that era. We'll check this out with p.davydov and KGill, just in case they know something we're unaware of, but my bet is that everything will be Christoph a month from now. We really do have to avoid any big projects as the server is being switched - but after the new one is up it should be done in a day or so. Carolus 05:21, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
... I said body, not title. As in bolded words of the first paragiraffe... anyway. Eric 05:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Grove uses "Christoph Ernst Friedrich", and I think that would be a Weyse move for us too :-) — P.davydov 06:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
(Ah, Gade... have a Hart,mann. ... er... you were saying... quite right- I think. (Nielsen would rate.) (which?)) Eric 06:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Ahh... Thanks guys! BTW, would you like for me to go ahead and change the names at the bottom of pages? N6 (♭IIb) 23:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I see it's been done now... Thank you very much! N6 (♭IIb) 03:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Glad to have the right name! Thanks for pointing it out. Carolus 03:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Old Folks at Home (Foster, Stephen)

Just unlocked file #09780. Hope it works. --Ralph Theo Misch 01:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It worked fine. If you run across one, just add the little template {{PDFL}} and it will add the page to the category listing locked PDFs: Pages with Locked PDF Files. Carolus 01:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah - plenty to do. I just used this. I'll go ahead and unlock (if I'm too lazy to scan and also otherwise ;) ) --Ralph Theo Misch 01:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Ha! See, you will never run out of things to do here at IMSLP! We could all be like the Niebelungen in Wagner's operas - working away endlessly in the caves of IMSLP. Carolus 02:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes - or like old Syphilis. Or was it Sisyphos? ;) --Ralph Theo Misch 02:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Sisyphos!! - Syphilis is what Delius died from. [IMSLP != red light district - hopefully] ;)) Carolus 02:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I see - I came to the right place here :)) Good night! --Ralph Theo Misch 02:18, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Delius, Schubert, and Schumann, correct?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, probably more than that. No antibiotics back in those days. Very nasty. Carolus 02:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Scanning scores

Hi, again. When I don't have access to a scanner, would a camera and photo editing software be a good choice? Thanks, N6 (♭IIb) 03:32, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

It can work reasonably well, especially if your editing software can convert the color photo files to bitmap files of around 600 dpi. This vastly reduces file size and makes things very easily printed. Obviously, there are some things (like manuscripts) which are really nice to have as color PDFs also, but most printed scores are fine as plain old monochrome PDFs. Be sure to visit the page IMSLP:Scanning music scores Carolus 03:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Weyse, again

Not sure if the publisher info for my new uploads is correct... please check. Thanks! N6 (♭IIb) 04:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks quite nice. In the scanner field, use the little template we created for DKB - {{DKB}}. This gives the URL without you having to even think about it. We also use "#" instead of "pp." as space sometimes get limited on that line of text in the file description. You're doing great if I have to nitpick at this level. Carolus 04:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Also, is it more advisable to use German or Danish? Thus far, I have uploaded in German. Thanks, N6 (♭IIb) 01:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Unless it's a generic type of item (Sonatas, Symphonies, Concertos, etc. - for which English is employed), we generally use the original language, which could be either Danish or German in Weyse's case. Carolus 00:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Godard - Etudes, Op. 149

Can you double-check the copyright status of the first book. I believe this should be tagged as urtext in the US because of this being a governmental publication which is based on an earlier edition ca. 1890s. My request on the forums for Cambridge attendees has yielded a couple of leads who might prove helpful in acquiring many missing pieces in our Godard collection. Many of these pieces are out of print and are owned by very few libraries in the world. Thanks. Daphnis 22:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

No renewal found in USCO online records (1950 is the first year renewals are covered for). Ineligible for GATT because it's urtext. Retagged accordingly. Am I going to have to hire a security detail to protect you from Heugel sending some character named Guido to introduce you to his good friend Mr. Baseball Bat? Carolus 01:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope it doesn't come down to that, but if so I have a few friends myself :) Daphnis 01:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Numerical Notation

Hello Carolus. I have recently found a very large database which contains a lot of PD scores of Chinese composers. But, it is all in a form of numerical notation. Should I upload them directly, or should I transcribe them into the normal kind of notation we use? Thanks, --Notnd 12:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection to having them in the original notation, but I think they would find a much broader audience if they were transcribed into standard western musical notation. Ask Feldmahler also. Carolus 03:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Nielsen

You mentioned something about files going up on the FTP?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 04:17, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, now that the new server is in place and running, I can actually upload those. I have to do the locking of the PDFs, but that is pretty fast. Carolus 04:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 04:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Re new symphony 2 and 6 typeset scores from the Nielsen edition: lovely scores, lovely scans. Great idea, this agreement. ... now if there were a Czech library with a scanning program like this that wanted to do something on this order for Dvorak and Suk's complete works, for example (several fairly important ones of the former, leave alone the latter, I would say we still don't have or have in good enough condition I think?... the early symphonies and early operas, say... of course, this Nielsen project is only just begun too and there's a lot of works to go yet. Can't wait until it hits the songs and choral works, some of which are among my favorite works of his, uncomplicated though many are- still works of genius... Eric 05:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Most of the Dvorak edition (though an incomplete edition) is actually free in the USA (it's all free in the EU and Canada) - only the volumes issued 1964 and later with valid copyright notices are tied up in the USA. Suk is partially OK in the USA as well, since the copyright notice on the Supraphon scores was often the early 1900s original notice listing Simrock or UE as claimant, even though it was a new engraving / edition by Supraphon. Also, HM/Supraphon actually issued new engravings of both Suk and Janacek in the late 1940s and 1950s without a notice. These engravings were re-used in some cases for editions issued in the 1960s and 1970s (not the Janacek complete works which started appearing the late-70s, but earlier). Kalmus has reprinted a number of items of this nature. Carolus 06:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
True. Hrm. With a complete edition- I wonder if one is in progress in any medium?- we'd get works like the Dvorak A minor string quintet op.1, and others - more major in size and ambition than anything else (though interesting pointers to composerly development only available at a physical library because of late first printing, etc.) ... still, good to have for the "serious fan". With Nielsen, I wonder if they have or will have the juvenilia scanned- the piano trio, the pre-opus 9 violin sonatas, etc.- that have been recorded on Kontrapunkt once but not otherwise - I think that some of them have reached the printed ("dead tree") complete edition... or if they intend to stick to his works opus 1 and later for the most part. Well, hrm. Might say on their plan page, I should go look... thanks again. Eric 06:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I know that they included a number of early items in the Nielsen edition, plus some later items which had never been published. The site has a complete prospectus of the edition. I can't remember right now if they left anything out or not since I have snow for brains at the moment (we had a "snowmageddon" here today - 12 inches is a blizzard for this area of the USA). At any rate, the available volumes are very nicely done, so it's definitely something we're happy to make available here. Carolus 06:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Beethoven Quartet Copyright

Hi Carolus. I'm just wondering why you changed the copyright of this to V/V/V*. Did you figure it was an urtext edition? I didn't think so because of the forward. Was it not written by Wilhelm Altmann? Thanks, Lndlewis10 15:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think Altmann is even necessarily the author of the short introductions found on the Kalmus reprints which were uploaded. These might have been added by Kalmus themselves when they issed the six quartets (1937 - see Op.18 No.2). Moreover, the scores Kalmus reprinted here were probably first issued by Universal as part of the Philharmonia series (which was also issued by Eulenburg). The engraving on the 1st quartet I recognize as the work of Waldheim-Eberle of Vienna, who did a lot of things for UE (Philharmonia series). More detailed research is needed, and it might be very difficult indeed to determine exactly what version of what score was reprinted by Kalmus - and when. Unfortunately, Kalmus is notorious for not including any information at all about what has been reprinted. This was logical from their standpoint as it placed the burden of discovery on any possible challengers to their reprint. It makes it a real pain for us, though. Carolus 02:58, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Reconstruction of Bach's Concerto for 2 Harpsichords in C minor, BWV 1060

Ave Carolus! CS and parts. The editor is Max Schneider (1875-1967). There's no preface. The only remark on editorial material is (1st score page): 'The small print notes of the continuo realization are additions by the editor'. Any chance? Perhaps the parts only? It would be deplorable... --Ralph Theo Misch 23:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it appears that Schneider is really the arranger not just the editor. It's a "reconstruction" of a lost concerto by Schneider, which qualifies as an arrangement. Not PD in Canada, unfortunately. It can be uploaded to the USA server when that system is fully operational, as it appears to be free in the USA. Sorry, Carolus 05:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Then I'll wait - thanks for your reply! --Ralph Theo Misch 17:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

My Ladye Nevells Booke of Virginal Music (Byrd, William)

What is the most advisable course of action? Dover claims edits were made.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I know a person at Dover. This will be a nice opportunity to give them a call. I'll let you know - thanks for re-tagging it. Carolus 05:02, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hynais

are those the same dates that MusicSack has for Cirillo Hynais? Eric 05:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC) edit: 1862-1913 - Cirillo Hynais (1862 - 12/1913) - apparently so. Sorry I was being lazy- was also somewhat headachy as unfortunately fairly often :( .) Websearches turn up his name not often but a few times in interesting contexts- I'd never heard of him before today.-Eric

Yes they are identical - curiously. I have never seen the name as Cirillo Hynais except at MusicSack. Perhaps that's the original form of his name. I've seen it on scores as "Cyrill" and "Cyril." I wonder if the Italian reference cited by MusicSack decided to Italianize the first name? Carolus 05:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

previews

thanks re Mascia... different question: not sure if you're who I should be asking this question- I think it's a good idea (now that I know how) to create and add small-size representative previews to, say, at least one larger (or if not larger, elaborated and thought-through- I'm not anti-miniaturist... ok, this is complicated already... :) ) and important work (e.g. sonata, quartet, concerto, symphony,...) by a larger number of composers to encourage people to see if the music is in a style they'd* be interested in etc. (if no work by those composers already has a preview or music-containing thumbnail etc.) ... - does this seem a good idea or instead a waste of disc space given how many composers and pieces are now on IMSLP?...) wouldn't be spending too much time on it, but it seems worth doing. Eric 15:14, 19 January 2011 (UTC) (they - prospective performers, for instance.)

It might be worth exploring for some of the more interesting and obscure corners of the repertoire. I don't see much point in doing it for popular works like Beethoven symphonies. However, for a Raff symphony it might be worth having such a preview. That's just my two cents worth, which you can take at face value. Carolus 03:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

That would have been more my focus (well, hopefully interesting and definitely less-known :)) At least an occasional go, I think, then, though still sticking to my main projects... thanks! Eric 03:59, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Again Bach's Violin Concerto in G minor

Hi Carolus, today I received another reconstruction. It's by Gustav Schreck (1849–1918), the editor is Joseph Szigeti (1892-1973). It seems (at least regarding the piano score) that Peters reprinted their old edition by Schreck, Szigeti wrote an additional preface, and ready is a new edition - CR 1949. Am I right? Regards, --Ralph Theo Misch 23:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, this appears to be a case where Peters-NY reprinted the Schreck reconstruction, but had a famous violinist (Joseph Szigeti) edit the violin part and write a preface. The engraving in the sample you uploaded is much more consistent with something done ca.1900 than a score engraved in 1949. I expect that if you omit the preface and include the piano score only, we should be OK. Presumably, the violin part has fingerings, bowings, etc. added by Joseph Szigeti (which cannot be uploaded). Carolus 05:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Uploaded - hope it's OK. The print of the VP really looks different at all. But p. #7 of the PS also: I'm not sure about the 'ossia' remark only referring to the VP... --Ralph Theo Misch 00:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: Die hohe Schule des Violinspiels: Of course David's editions are all arrangements, but in tagging them I first of all follow the customs of the respective work page. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

It gets a little complicated in the case of composers like Corelli - and indeed any composer of that era. The originals were typically for violin and continuo, which often included a viola da gamba and violone in addition to the cembalo or other keyboard instrument. So, is David's score an edition (with a keyboard realization of the continuo part) or an arrangement? One could argue either way. I'm sure it's a question which has driven music librarians crazy for well over a century now. Carolus 00:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes - the harpsichord (etc.) was not common at David's days. And IF the piano, THEN fully grown. Let's go whole hog (?). ;) --Ralph Theo Misch 01:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

CC licenses

Thank you Carolus for this good advice. A few years ago someone has "stolen" my complete website and sold the files on a CD. I was not amused :-). I have changed the CC license at all my files. Best wishes --TobisNotenarchiv 19:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Good for you. These Ebay characters have no shame at all. At least if you include the non-commercial license, we can complain to Ebay. Carolus 01:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Mozart

Hi Carolus. As I'm going through the cleanup category, I was wondering if you happen to know which Mozart andantes these two pieces were (K. numbers). It would be nice to put them into their appropriate work pages :). Thanks, Lndlewis10 01:35, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

No, unfortunately. You can download the Köchel 6 from archive.org, which might ease the task somewhat. It's always annoying when something like that is done in a published collection. Carolus 01:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
No.2 (D major, Sostenuto)'s main theme sounds very, very familiar... I'll see if I remember it or can work it out soon :) Eric 03:06, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


... ... of course it sounds familiar, Eric. It's the theme of the Andante from String Quartet No.18 in A major, K.464 (Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus). ... still looking for the other one, using the archive.org pdf of the 1964 Koechel... (yes, as suggested) Eric 03:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

We'll have to create a special barnstar for this sort of thing. Great work. It can now be moved to its proper home! Carolus 03:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

"Amazing grace for 2 violins"

Yes, this is my arrangement of Amazing Grace. Sorry, I didn't know the melody's composer is unknown.

Thanks, that's what we really needed to know! Carolus 01:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

David's High School Dressage

I was so glad that it's completed. But spoken too soon: Neue Folge (New Series) :( --Ralph Theo Misch 00:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for some excellent scans and uploads. It's an important collection to have. Carolus 03:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Wladimir Zytowitsch

I notice this composer is published by Sikorski Verlag, and the one work for which a page of his has been created (though no music yet uploaded) - the concerto for viola and small orchestra of 1967 - is available for hire from them (here). I'm not even sure whether the composer, the company, or both hold the copyright, or what German law says about which of them can waive it where creative commons is concerned, assuming that user AcisEgis is one or the other in the first place... Eric 15:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Unless AcisEgis is the composer or the composer's legally designated representative and has Sikorski's blessing, there is no way anything is going to be allowed here. The composer is still alive as far as I can tell. This is no different than the characters who have dropped by here and attempted to upload works of John Adams or Philip Glass. I left a message on the AcisEgis' take page to this effect. Carolus 02:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

IMSLP:Ordering a Reprint from the Petrucci-Merton Booklet Service

Hi Carolus. I noticed that the PDF files you uploaded and linked to here can't be accessed without CR privileges - similar to the PDF of the CR test (ironically enough). Do you know of a way around it, or should we ask Feldmahler for some sort of fix? Thanks, KGill talk email 15:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I was not aware of this! I think we'll have to ask Feldmahler to fix it. Carolus 02:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Gershwin

Hi Carolus, I've just found this in the cellar. I'm completely hesitant....--Ralph Theo Misch 01:22, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

If Gershwin (1898-1937) had arranged his Cuban Overture for 2 pianos, it would be OK for Canada and the EU despite being under copyright in the USA. However, it was arranged by Gregory Stone (1900-1991), which means that this particular score is under copyright worldwide. Sorry, it will have to vanish. Carolus 02:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, he did so arrange it (or for piano4h, not sure), published in 1933 - it's just not that? Eric 03:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC) (New World Music/ Harms, c.1933.) ack- my mistake, that is Stone's arrangement... I'll be quiet now.

The Stone arrangement Ralph has in the cellar was published in 1944, but bears the publication date of the original orchestra score (1933) as well. By 1933, Gershwin was very busy with shows, etc. and had little time for making derivative versions of his works. Still, since he composed mainly at the piano, the publication of a 2-piano or piano 4 hands version on the basis of the original manuscript is not out of the question since the original manuscript would have been in a piano-type format of 3 or 4 staves. Carolus 03:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not so bad - a host of treasures still slumber in the cellar ;) --Ralph Theo Misch 00:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

J.Maho

Hi Carolus. - I've worked on Troupenas, Farrenc, Grus, Flaxland, Gregh... and others pages. Now I'll like to rebuilt Maho's one. He's a very interesting publisher but it will be difficult for me to improve the Lescure & Devries because Maho has not made regular deposits of the scores he edited on the national library. More, Maho joined the SACEM (Société des Auteurs Compositeurs et Editeurs de Musique) only in 1872, 20 years after the founding of the firm. Hamelle and Maho's pages are mixed now. May you separate them please ? --Squin 16:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll go ahead and set up a separate page for Maho. You've been doing fantastic work on those older publishers like Farrenc, Grus, Troupenas, etc. Carolus 02:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Pleased to have such encouragements ! I had to thank you again for your reference on the Lescure book who gave me the impulse. It takes some time to found the precise dates but this work is very interesting. With the archives I’m consulting I’m learning a lot about those publishers, family histories, relationships with composers, friendships, hatreds and lawsuits. It’s a long way before being fantastic but we’ll have in a near future a very strong and solid base (better than the Lescure) for dating all those Frenchies. I have no news from Massenetique, so now I think also about the way to re-organised the page Heugel as clearly as possible. --Squin 16:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Enescu octet

sorry- to explain, my concern wasn't whether the octet was itself PD-US (it's clear to me that it is, as it was first published ca.1904/5) but whether the edition of the score (not the parts) that was uploaded was PD-US (it may or may not be a new edition or just a reprint made to look like a new edition so that a new copyright could be stamped on by Enoch. Without a copy of the original 1905 edition to compare to- and noting that Enescu is said to have written a preface specifically for that 1950 version, though I'm not sure if he did or not - well, in all, I'm just not sure. But that is the question that occupied me :) The plate number does seem to suggest reprint though it also seems to suggest an earlier date than 1904 by a couple of years, too (otoh, the magazine linked to has (1905) pretty definitely).) Thanks! Eric 04:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Interesting point. I'll have a look - and I'll do an OCLC search for the Kalmus reprint to see of the page counts match with the score on which Enoch placed a 1950 notice. I suspect Kalmus has reprinted this very score, but I don't know that for sure. It's not always easy to date French scores from 1905 vs. 1950 as the engraving methods and even the punches used were often the same. French publishers did not move to having things engraved elsewhere until the 1980s. UPDATE: Page counts match. Also, the notice appears in the wrong spot for US copyright - it had to be on the title page and/or the first page of music. Having it on the preface, especially on anything issued before 1955, is a fatal defect. There's also the issue of corrections vs. changes. Adding new material may have justified a new copyright claim, while making corrections does not. There's also the issue of parts being issued ca.1904. Carolus 04:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that last about the parts was a guess on mine and Daphnis' parts - I think...- but the reasoning still seems sound!... Eric 16:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Haydn Oboe concerto

Hallo, how sure are you about the 1920 copyright date of the Wunderer edition. I have score and orchestral parts I would like to upload, but they have a 1926/37/54 copyright notice on them, as has my copy of the piano reduction. Now that it is possible to compare to the original ms, it is clear that Wunderer didn't change much: a few bars in the introduction are repeated, and later a few repeated bars are cut. Only thing justifying copyright are part of the cadenza (1. mvmt) and the flourishes of the solo-line in the Rondo, i.e. nothing that is not already in the piano reduction.--Kalliwoda 16:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I thought this work wasn't even considered authentic now'days... they found the original ms? Eric 16:14, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Correct (listed as by Ignaz Malzat by MGG and Haynes), but I just referred to the SLUB ms now available on imslp, that was the source of the Wunderer edition--Kalliwoda 00:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

They were publishing it without a notice for quite some time, as nothing was printed in Wiesbaden until 1950 which means the Wiesbaden print we have was issued more than 20 years after the fact. I agree that the plate number places it around 1926 or 1927. Your copy with the 1926/37/54 claim is a great example of copyfraud. If they actually issued it in 1926 (with a valid copyright notice), it should have been renewed in 1954. That's unlikely, and the fact that they printed large numbers of copies with no copyright claim would invalidate any US copyright. Not really eligible for restoration as Wunderer's edition was basically an urtext (even if the work wasn't actually by Haydn) and therefore PD in its country of origin. The Oboe and Piano reduction, which is an arrangement, might be have been eligible for restoration, but there is not any record of an NIE at the copyright office. Carolus 03:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Large wind ensembles

On a second subject, large wind ensembles: The current classifications are quite erratic - Mozart Gran partita & Brauer Pan are listed with every instrument, Strauss Suite & Serenade are "wind band", and you just invented another term for the Harmonie-arrangement of Himmel Fanchon: "chamber winds". Maybe a more consistent treatment of these types of works would be to call pieces for the concert hall with more than 10-12 players "wind ensemble", and note the number of players. Distinct from "wind band" "military band" or "concert band", which typically would include several brassinstruments, euphonium, saxophon etc. --Kalliwoda 16:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was afraid of that. The Strauss as "wind band" is really bad. "Chamber winds" is being used by some publishers here in the USA, bit that's admittedly a fad as well. It's pretty vague, too. The problem I see with "wind ensemble" is the use of the term in the USA and (to a certain extent) in the UK refers to an ensemble whose basic instrumentation is similar to that of a concert band, the difference being in having one player on a part. As you know, in a military or concert band, there may be only 2 or 3 clarinet parts but multiple players on each part. I wonder if the old-fashioned term of "harmonie" might be best for the type of ensemble found in the Gran Partita and the Strauss works. Thanks for bringing the issue up. It needs to be sorted out. Carolus 03:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
I've just fixed the Strauss, and yes, the op.4 was tagged wrongly. I've done it like the op.7, which is tagging the separate instruments, since they are very definitely one on a part. As to consistency with naming, harmoniemusik is a very specific, though not well-known, word. Because it is the predecessor of the wind band (on a much reduced scale), I suppose people just think of it as a small wind band. Only partly true, since a harmoniemusik will only have one on a part, and in the Classical period, even 13 players for the Gran Partita probably was considered overkill! I think of 'Chamber Winds' as trios or at most, a woodwind quintet. 'Harmonie' is definitely at least an octet, which is how it started, only later adding perhaps a contrabassoon, or a flute, an extra pair of horns, or in the case of Mozart, a couple of basset horns. 'Wind ensemble' should only be used where there are multiple players on a part. Harmoniemusik is 8-13 winds based around paired oboes, clarinets, bassoons, horns, especially if the music is from 1780-1825. The term should be 'harmoniemusik', but to describe the ensemble, the word is 'harmonie'.
The principle we aim to follow in the tagging system is as follows:
  • Works with one instrument per part should be listed individually, as solo instruments
  • Works where a single part is played by two or more instruments should be treated as an ensemble, e.g. wind band (without percussion or strings), or military band (for woodwinds, brass and strings)
The terms "chamber winds", "chamber orchestra" and "concert band" are best avoided, since they have no generally accepted definition. If I've understood Kalliwoda correctly, in "Harmoniemusik" each player has a unique part, so each instrument should be listed individually (even if there up to 13 of them!) — P.davydov 21:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
You have understood Kalliwoda correctly, and all of this type of music is "one-on-a-part". (Steltz)

Escudier

This was a good one.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 18:34, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Excellent. Stuff I never know before. Carolus 03:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Hedien Woodwind Sextet No. 2

Just to let you know, I uploaded the score and parts for a piece entitled Woodwind Sextet No. 2 in the Hedien, Mark composer page. I am the composer of this work, and I selected the most basic of the Creative Commons licenses, which is fine with me.

As always, thank you for your help, and all of your efforts on IMSLP. It is one of the best things to ever hit the internet -- and the music community in general.

--Mark Hedien

Letovsky

re the latest Sibley uploads, Letovsky's dates are 1890-1965 according to the German Wikipedia. I suppose they could go in imslp.us. (Indeed, he was born in Nebraska, though died in Berlin.) Eric 21:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://imslp.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Carolus/archive24&oldid=639392"