User talk:P.davydov/archive9


Error in piece title

Greetings. I had uploaded my piece called bs piece some time ago, but now see that it is listed incorrectly as B's piece Could this be changed back to bs piece please? Thanks.--Dtoub 14:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Error in artist name

Hello Davydov, I've found a work with incorrect composer name: ThisPage nedd to be moved but I'not able to (I'm not an autoconfirmed user). I didn't know who to ask to. Thank you! :)) --jeko89 21:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Jeko89. Are you sure it's incorrect? There was a composer called Jean-Louis Lully, as well as the more famous Jean-Baptiste — P.davydov 21:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes :)
In this page of BNF we can read (1st page of doc.) the name Monsieur Delully fils, so the correct author corresponds to Jean-Baptiste Lully [1665-1743] and not to Jean-Louis Lully [1667-1688].
May I have been able to convince you?
Thanks for your time!! --jeko89 23:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, that was helpful, and I've been able to confirm the composer and (shorter) library title of the work in VIAF, so it's been moved accordingly — P.davydov 08:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC) - Purcell

Hi P.davydov, (it's not urgent, but) I've switched some links to here. For Henry Purcell there are two different pronunciations: [1]. Which is the correct one? Thanks and regards --Ralph Theo Misch 22:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello RTM. The last option on that page (with the emphasis on "Pur") is the one usually heard in England. Hope this helps — P.davydov 07:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

That's what I wanted to know. Many thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 23:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi P.davydov and RTM. I wonder if we could have a built in function for IMSLP that pronounces a given composer name? I'm really not sure how much programming that would involve, but it might be a well-used feature. Respectfully, Emery 21:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I think that could be a little tricky technically, but even if that were sorted out, imagine some of the debates over whose pronunciation was 'authentic'  :-) — P.davydov 21:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


Hello, P.davydov. I would be willing to draft a catalog for John Jenkins in the future. I just want to let you know that I'm very busy with school (this is junior year) and will probably not have time until the holidays. Maybe you could ask KGill or Emery for help... Both of them are extremely competent and great users, and I'm sure either one would be able to help. I haven't even had time to do the Satie list... All I've done so far is the Stravinsky and Revueltas (during the best vacation of my life for that very reason!). Cheers, Lndlewis10 19:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Nick. There are sources for Jenkins' works when the time comes, but there's no urgency. We need to get the server problems behind us first, or we won't even be able to open the Jenkins pages to edit them  :-) Let's see what Feldmahler comes up with... — P.davydov 20:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
According to Grove over 800 of his instrumental works survive, not to mention some vocal works, making this project an order of magnitude more difficult and time-consuming than the Revueltas list. There's a partial list over at AllMusic but it's pretty disorganized and I doubt it would really be much help. What would be required for this is a thorough search through (physical) library archives, probably - unless we somehow end up with his complete works at IMSLP (I'd estimate we have around 350 so far). Either way, I don't think I would be much help. :-) KGill talk email 20:29, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
The Viola da Gamba Society (VdGS) have a very detailed catalogue on their website, and not just for Jenkins but for other composers as well. We might as well continue to use their numberings and groupings for Jenkins, even if it's necessary to split some of the larger pages for the sake of convenience :-) — P.davydov 21:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Alessandro Raverij

Hello P.davydov

I notice that you've removed the cross link to the Venetian printer, Alessandro Raverij, which I added yesterday to the work page,,_Giovanni)

My reason for having Alessandro Raverij registered as person is that the collection 'Canzoni per sonare con ogni sorte di stromenti' is an anthology encompassing many early 17th century composers, not on only G. Gabrieli. If you have a look at WIMA's Raverij page, you'll see that many WIMA scores originating from this anthology are going to be added to IMSLP during the WIMA project.

Actually I was about to suggest that the work page for 'Canzoni per sonare con ogni sorte di stromenti' should be changed to a 'Various' page like,_Ander_Theil_(Various), i.e. a page with cross references to the composers represented.

Reccmo 16:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Christian. There's no problem with publishers having their own pages, but these need to be set up in our IMSLP:Music Publishers section, and linked to in the same way as all the other publishers. The method you chose, adding the category to the bottom of the page, resulted in Raveri being credited as the composer of Gabrielli's work. (Incidentally,the spelling "Raveri" seems to be the preferred one among libraries — see VIAF).
"Person" pages are only used for composers, performers, editors, arrangers, librettists, and translators, so unless Raveri qualifies under one of these categories as well, he should only appear in the publisher section. There are existing entries there that you could take as a model, e.g. John Walsh
If the published Canzoni contain works by different composers, then the collection should be split so that the files for the individual works are placed under the correct composer, with each work under its original title. The "(Various)" option is reserved for compilations that physically cannot be broken down into separate files for each piece and composer.
I noticed earlier that you have two works by Joachim a Burckon the page for Musae Sioniae Teil VI (Praetorius, Michael), and it would be better if these were moved to Burck's category as separate pieces under their original titles. (The category you created for "Burgk, Joachim a" was unnecessary, because the category already existed under Burck, which VIAF shows is the standard library version of his name).
Please don't take this as being discouraging, as I know it must be difficult getting used to IMSLP's little ways  :-) — P.davydov 18:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


Hello again, With the advent of WIMA and literally thousands of files being uploaded here, this issue is starting to become more important. At any rate, I think the basic formula we've devised for those collections which were actually issued by the composer (or under his authority, like Vivaldi's Op.8), plus a few others that are so well-known as such they probably should be allowed to stand as listed works in a composer's category-page (like Handel's Opp.3 and 6) seems to be working pretty well. Ditto for collections under the composer "Various." The one type of collection which remains are the single-composer collections assembled by others after a composer's death. The obvious examples of these are the various volumes of the series of gesammtausgaben issued most notably by Breitkopf. I have also received a fair number of requests to make series like the Bach Gesellschaft available as complete downloadable volumes. This has always been a problem since the composer in question didn't group the works or publish them in this way. One thought that occurred to me was that we could set up a series of categories similar to what has starting to be done with folk songs. Collections, Bach, J.S.; Collections, Beethoven; etc. In addition to having the individual works from the BGA on their respective work pages, there would be a sub-category listed at the top of the composer category where one would find all the various collections which have been assembled of his works over the centuries. That way we could have a page for "Bach Gesellschaft Ausgabe" sitting in the category (Collections, Bach, J.S.) instead of (Bach, Johann Sebastian). The trick is how would we merge all the listing info presently on these independent category pages with the new pages where users could actually download all 47 volumes. Carolus 04:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of collections (see more discussion on my talk page), the 6 Concerti Grossi, Op.3 appears to have been first issued by Walsh in the composer's lifetime - twice (1734 and 1741, if you read Irishmaestro's note on the discussion page) and therefore almost certainly with his approval. It therefore qualifies as a composer-created collection, so I am removing the cleanup notice. Like all such pages, it should be limited to complete scores of the Op.3, selections of more than one work from the set, or selections of excerpts from more than one of the 6 concertos (including arrangements). I'm removing the cleanup-split notice. Carolus 00:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Davydov, some time ago user Victorio complained via pm in the forums that the page '389 Choralgesänge...' had been deleted and I explained him the reason that's usual procedure here to upload each file to the corresponding work page. Now I've seen that you are thinking about allowing pages with collections. What's the current status on this, especially single-composer collection, are there any ideas? The user insists that his files belong to such a page and I promised to check this with you. Can collection pages be created now or should he wait until a proper system/categorization is established? Hobbypianist 08:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't think we've come to a firm decision on a policy change, but there are some collections that it's physically impossible to split into their component parts (because works start or end half-way down a page, for example). We've tolerated files like these in the past, provided that there are links between the page for the collection and the pages for the individual works, although this policy hasn't always been strictly applied. I think that for moment we should continue to discourage collections unless there are exceptional circumstances, and they have cross-references to and from their constituent work pages.
There can sometimes be arguments over whether a collection of pieces constitutes an individual 'work' in its own right, and each one needs to be considered on its merits, usually by looking whether libraries treat them as an individual work or not  :-) — P.davydov 16:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

tagging for choral voices


Thanks for adding these tags, but they somewhat confusingly categorise the piece in Category:Scores featuring the bass voice "that specifically include one or more solo parts for bass." I dont know how to right things myself, but perhaps there is a way to make Category:Scores featuring choral basses the target (that name is confusing itself when one-per-part performances are considered!) Richard Mix 09:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

This is one of many cases where it is unclear whether the original work was written for a chorus, or for individual solo performers (in two groups of four). Different authoritative sources contradict each other on this point, so that's why the work's been tagged for both eventualities, with the resulting link to "Scores featuring the bass voice", along with solo soprano, alto and tenor parts — P.davydov 10:42, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Migot − "Premier dialogue"

Cher Davydov, I am curious as to how you knew this "Dialogue en quatre parties" is, in fact, the "Premier dialogue" as opposed to the later one? Daphnis 14:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the available references, the second was published as the 'deuxième', while the first was only called the "Première" after the second had been composed. So, logically, the title "Dialogue en quatre parties" must refer to the first dialogue — P.davydov 15:38, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Dual title works

Hi, Jens Peter Jacobsen has produced a number of urtext editions (part of the WIMA archive) of works by Andrea Gabrielli, Monteverdi and others where a work originally (at least it looks that way) with a sacred text had a secular text added. Wrshannon, the uploader, has created a number of pages with dual titles. I have moved the group he uploaded today to their scared (presumably original) titles, leaving the alternate title in the field we have for that in the "General Information" section. I assume this is our procedure with this type of thing. Let me know if not. Thanks, Carolus 05:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, we need to choose one as the principle title for the page, and if the alternatives are in the general information section of the page they will show up with a site search. Thanks for taking care of that — P.davydov 06:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Loeillet op.1

Hi Davydov,

there is something wrong with the page "6 sonatas op.1 (Loeillet, Jean Baptiste)" The sheet music does not contain any continuo, as mentioned in the instrumentation. The list of sonatas on this page belongs to the op. 1 of John Loeillet, I believe. Notenschreiber 22:47, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of confusion here. The first sonata was No.1 from the 12 Sonatas, Op.1, while the other seems to be No.3 from the 12 Sonatas, Op.4. I think they should be correctly listed now, but if not let me know. Thanks – P.davydov 23:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


Hi P.davydov. If you have the time, maybe you could take a look at this. Respectfully yours, Emery 00:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Lists of Compositions

Hello davydov,

Hello TobisNotenarchiv:
  • what dou you think about this site? Is it a good idea to split it as it is now or shouldn't be all works on one site as you did it at the Bach list of compositions.
I think it would be more user-friendly to have all the works on one page
So long as you're happy (as you've done so much work on it), it would be more useful to concentrate on the main list of Mozart's works.
Yes, with such a long page some computers can struggle with very long sortable tables, so breaking them up cn be helpful. Do you think it would be a good idea to move the "Compositions published in lifetime" section to the discussion tab of the page, so that the whole page would be in TWV order? — P.davydov 10:56, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Sagreras Transcriptions

Hello P.davydov. I was not sure how to put the "{{LinkArr}}" template since I got no link for the pdf file. I'll try to do my best to understand how it works now. Thanks for your help though ! First time I put transcriptions ! — Schneidy 21:23, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

It's easy once you're used to it. After you've uploaded the file of a transcription, you just edit the page to add the line with the arranger's details, like this. If you're not sure then don't worry too much about it, as it should be picked up and corrected by an administrator when the file is approved for copyright. Keep up the good work! — P.davydov 23:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Palestrina: Missa Sine nomine

Hi P.davydov, I think the key of this mass is hypodorian on (in?) G. But church modes in polyphonic music is an own theme, (in?) which I'm not well-versed. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:16, 4 November 2011 (UTC) (But I should...)

I only corrected the existing "D" to "D major", but as you've raised some doubts I've deleted the key completely for now — P.davydov 08:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I know. My 'D' was already wrong. Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 22:35, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

List of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach, by BWV number

Hi P.davydov,

on the Maintenance/Worklists site are still 2 works that are not categorized.

Hello TobisNotenarchiv. I think the "2 Chorals" arrangement is sufficiently different from the original works to qualify as a new work in its own right under the name of the arranger as 2 Chorals (Hussonmorel, Valéry). We should then put cross-references to this page under "Arrangements and Transcriptions" from the page for BWV 458, and a new page created for BWV 489.
If the Schneider arrangements can't be identified with any of Bach's works, then I agree we should treat them as independent works by Schneider, and move them to his composer category.
Sorry for the brief response, but the connection to IMSLP is extremely poor this evening, and pages are taking minutes to load instead of seconds! — P.davydov 22:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi p.davydov,

I actually recognized, that there already is a composerpage Category:Hussonmorel, V.. The work presented here is the same as the 2 Chorals. I think a clean up is necessary. But I must admit I'm not sure how to do.... --TobisNotenarchiv 14:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I've merged the two categories, so maybe you can take a look and make sure it's all correct now — P.davydov 15:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Hasse Concerto F Major

Hi P. davydov,

last week i realized that on the composer page of Hasse there two concertos in F major, which essentially refers to the same pdf file (see Could you fix this bug?Notenschreiber 15:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

choral tagging

Thanks for this. I hadn't seen the last additions. Steltz 05:24, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Füllsack (ed.), Ausserlesener Paduanen und Galliarden, Erster Theil (Various)

Hi, would you mind to un-protect the page? I would like to do a bit of editing. TIA, Ulrich. lurchi 20:06, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, the page is unprotected meanwhile. lurchi 20:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

12 Kleine Stücke Wq.81 Bach, CPE and more

Hello P.davydov,

First I want to ask why you moved the file from "12 kleine Stücke" to "12 Kleine Stücke". In German "kleine" is the correct grammatical form as adjective in front of the noun "Stücke".

But I have another question concerning the cleanup section: There are many works from the BSB library in Munich (e.g the files from Haendel). If I split the files and merge them again with PDFSAM for separating the files the quality of the files is very poor. Do you have an advice how it works lossless?

--TobisNotenarchiv 22:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello TobisNotenarchiv. On your first question, we always ignore any numbers at the start of a title, so the next word is always capitalised in the page title. One reason is that "kleine Stücke" can sort differently from "Kleine Stücke" in some categories because of the way the wiki software works.
I'm sorry I don't know the answer to your second question, as I've never used the software. Maybe someone on the forums can help? — P.davydov 09:27, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah okay, then it is okay. But for me it looks strange anyway. What do you use as software? Acrobat? --TobisNotenarchiv 15:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I do my scanning with Acrobat. Only a very basic old version though. — P.davydov 16:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


thanks :) Eric 20:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

That should keep the zither players happy :-) — P.davydov 21:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

True :) I've become interested in the scans such as there are of music for the instrument (there are quite a few at that I need to have a look at, actually) in part because I am often intrigued when instruments or pieces go from such popularity (mid-19th century to early 20th, as testified to by the section it used to have in HMB, often arrangements but a number of works originally for the instrument, often dances and potpourris but as I recall even then not always- I think I saw a couple of zither sonatas, too, published and listed during that long span...) -- to completely falling off the map (except, again, for organizations like the US Zither Society just mentioned, and similar :) ) Eric 12:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

5 Vierstimmige Männergesänge, Op.533 (Abt, Franz)

I got this from Pierre Chepelov, "Hi − You tagged this as "sacred choruses". I think it is not sacred music; only No.3 (Ave Maria, but incipit: Da kommt auf leisem Silberschuh) may have a religious "flavor" but still I'm sure it has to be considered as a secular/profane poem (somehow like Schubert's (original) Ave Maria...), and definitely not "sacred". The 4 other Nos. have nothing linked with religion. − Pierre Ch. 10:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)"

There is one movement that is entitled "Ave Maria", so I used both tags (not just sacred). I think Pierre is asking to keep secular but scrap sacred. The other option would be generic "choruses". Which do you think would be better? Steltz 11:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Hmm. We can't do generic 'choruses' as a tag, so I'd agree with what your original categorization (as both secular and sacred), to take account of the Ave Maria, which we can't really ignore — P.davydov 17:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
It would help if one could find the full text of the "Ave Maria" poem used in this set - I think our definition of "sacred chorus" for-purpose-of-tagging had something to do with the origins or maybe origins or purpose of the text (I'm not sure, though??). This isn't the standard Ave Maria/Hail Mary, and I don't know if a poem with a somewhat but only somewhat religious flavor would be sufficient. Hrm. Eric 01:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

BWV 838 Allemande & Courante

Hello, P.davydov. You added the File Bach_-_BGA_-_BWV_838.pdf to Partita_in_A_major,_GWV_149_(Graupner,_Christoph) stating that these Pieces had been formerly attributed to J.S Bach as BWV 838. But looking in Graupners Manuscript PMLP178253-Mus-Ms-1231-16.pdf I find completely different notes under "Allemande" and "Courante" than in BVW 838. Could you please clarify this?

Thanks. --HöHü 14:34, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it should have been GWV 849, not GWV 149. In fact it looks like I moved the work to both pieces two years ago, probably having misread my notes. Thanks for catching it, and it's fixed now — P.davydov 17:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

"Hotman Nicholas" Or "Hotman Nicolas" Or" Hotman Nicholas (Nicolas)"

Hello, Hotman about the first name of "Nicholas" rather than "Nicolas", I think that musicians must bear the name he took (for good or bad reasons). IMSLP also uses this principle, I see marked Jean Baptiste Lully and not Giovanni Battista Lulli.

Hotman also, living and working (as Lully) in France is known as French composer (and Grove 3 rd electronic edition ) as Hotman Nicolas.

Is it possible to support research at least to add (Nicolas) after Nicholas ?

Amicalement Marc lanoiselée

Hello Marc. It's not uncommon for people to be known by more than one form of their name, and we normally follow VIAF (an international library cataloging organisaation) when deciding which of these to take. In this case VIAF state that "Nicholas" is the preferred form of his name based on the different works they have cataloged. They do acknowledge other forms that they've seen, some with "Nicolas", some with "Hotmann" (and others besides). We list them as "Alternate Names" on Hotman's category page, so that anyone searching for "Nicolas Hotman", or any of the other recorded spellings, will be taken there anyway. We've been following VIAF for a number of years now as a way of avoiding disputes that used to take place over how people should be named in these kinds of situations — P.davydov 16:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Come Gentle Zephyr

Hi. Please check the new librettist dates. Horsley died in 1858 and the uploaded score is dated 1864. Thanks! Olmsted 06:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Assuming that Emile wasn't a child prodigy, it must be a different Raunie :-) However, he's the only person with that surname to show up in the VIAF database, so it remains a mystery for now — P.davydov 06:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Angelus ad Virginem

I see you nicely moved the large setting for chorus and brass back to the Rondeau as composer as we discussed. Even so, no good deed goes unpunished for long. Lo and behold, he's done more than one setting! (imagine the depth of my shock and awe). This one (in contrast to the other) looks like pretty much just the tune with a skeletal voice or two added (maybe from an older source) - only 26 measures long. What do you recommend for this? Should this one be moved to "Anonymous" and listed as an "Arrangement and Transcription"? A case could be made for this, especially if the second or third voices come from an older source. I'll probably have no hair left once WIMA is finished! Carolus 22:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I was perplexed to see some of his multiple arrangements of carols as well! The problem is that until now we've normally treated settings of traditional tunes as the work of the arranger (e.g. versions of the Dies irae), and we could be letting ourselves in for an awful lot of retro-cataloging work if we change that practice now. I still think that putting them under the arranger's name is the most rational course of action from a cataloger's point of view, but then we're still left with cases like these where there are multiple settings by the same composer.
So, should we choose one as the 'original' version, and treat the others as arrangements? That might be too arbitrary without any clues as to which is the 'original'. Which leaves either treating them all equally as arrangements, or all as variants of the main work. Speaking of 'main work', I have to leave in a little while to earn a living, but I'll give it more thought and have a play when I get back. If you've any thoughts in the meantime then please feel free to share them... :-) — P.davydov 06:50, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Like you, I am in a quandry about how to handle this type of case. My copy of The Oxford Book of Carols (the 1964 re-engraving of the 1928 edition) lists this carol on pp.106-108, in two settings a) single voice; b) three voices. Their version is 18 measures. They give three scources" a) BM Cotton Fragment XXIX, a fragmentary two-part conductus setting from ca.1250; b) The Dublin Troper MS (ca.1360), at Cambridge Library, which has two three-voice settings; c) BM Arundel 248 (early 14th cent.) - single voice setting only. The most recent item added is more than 18 bars, but his description makes me think he might have orchestrated what was present in The Dublin Troper. If so, I think a case could be made that it should count as an arrangement of the original (or of one of the originals). Carolus 08:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Carolus. I've sent you a PM through the forum touching on some of these issues — P.davydov 09:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Rondeau's Boyvin arrangements

Here we go again. Each of the 'livres' is going to end up with hundreds of files under the "Arrangements and Transcriptions" tab because Rondeau has arranged all of the individual suites for brass quartet. Feldmhaler tells me (and this is borne out when you go to some of the pages for the Renaissance collections stuffed with hundreds of WIMA files) that performance really falls off once there are more than 100 or so files under a tab-section. So, it would seem to make sense to create pages for each of the suites. Problem is, both livres have "Suite du Premier Ton", "Suite du Second Ton", etc. Should we set up pages like "Suite du Premier Ton, Livre 1" and "Suite du Premier Ton, Livre 2"? or "Suite du Premier Ton, LO I:1" and "Suite du Premier Ton, LO II:1" (with my apologies to Herr Hoboken)?, etc. Any of these schemes would work in terms of doing the needed job, but we need a policy or procedure for the creation of pages which are for individual works from a composer-authored collection. We already did this for the Bach Cello suites but that was a fairly easy call as each of the six suites has its own BWV catalog number. I am wondering about how to handle items which don't have a catalog number. While my ongoing complaint about WIMA arrangements is the utterly incomprehensible practice of splitting works down to the smallest possible segment for the parts (yes, there have already been some complaints about this - not surprisingly), the splitting actually makes some sense in this particular instance. I'm going to tell Mr. Rondeau to stop uploading his arrangements until we come up with a means of dealing with them all. Thanks, Carolus 00:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, after looking round the different library catalogues for possible solutions, I've split the pages into the individual suites. There's some disagreement in the sources about the correct form of the "Suite de/du..." titles (and the French versions of the ordinal numbers), so I've avoided using them, and just kept things short. What do you think? — P.davydov 11:32, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Boyvin was using an archaic version of the French ordinal numbers, as I understand it. What you did looks perfectly fine to me. Gets the job done, too. Thanks! Carolus 07:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Motets of Johan Crüger

Hi Davydov,

on the composer page of Crüger we have a composition with the name "Motets". All these motets are contained in a collection named "Erstes musicalisches Lustgärtlein". There is a reprint of exacty these 17 motets from the Carus Verlag, with the information, that the 17 motets are a selection from a second enlarged edition from 1628 of "Erstes musicalisches Lustgärtlein". (The first edition had appeared in 1622.) I think, it would be more appropriate to use the composition name "Erstes musicalisches Lustgärtlein" instead of merely "Motets" Notenschreiber 10:59, 6 March 2012 (EST)

Hello Notenschreiber. Checking through various listings, this collection seems to have the full title Meditationum musicarum paradisus primus, oder Erstes musicalisches Lustgärtlein, and is more usually catalogued as Meditationum musicarum paradisus I. The second set, published in 1626, was Meditationum musicarum paradisus secundus, oder, Ander musicalisches Lustgärtlein newer deutschen Magnificat, usually shortened to Meditationum musicarum paradisus II. I would agree that the page should be renamed, but Meditationum musicarum paradisus I might be better. What do you think? — P.davydov 17:30, 6 March 2012 (EST)

I agree with "Meditationum...I", the "Lustgärtlein..." can be mentioned as alternative title.01:12, 7 March 2012 (EST)

OK, all done — P.davydov 03:53, 7 March 2012 (EST)


Hi Davydov, there is a work page of Boismortier "5 Trio Sonatas, op. 37" with the alternativ Titel "5 sonates en trio, suivies d'un concerto à 5". On the other hand we have a workpage "Concerto à 5 in E minor". This is the above mentioned concerto à 5 op.37. We should bring this works together in one suitable workpage. Notenschreiber 18:19, 12 March 2012 (EDT)

Hello Notenschreiber. Do you known which of the 5 sonatas from op.37 is the one described as "Concerto à 5 in E minor"? — P.davydov 02:42, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

Hello, the alternativ title means in english: "5 sonatas, followed by a concerto a 5", so op. 37 consists of 6 pieces and the concerto in e-moll is op.37 No.6.

Ah, I see. I've moved the sonatas to 5 Sonates en trio suivies d'un concerto, Op.37 (Boismortier, Joseph Bodin de), which is the preferred title of the work in the Library of Congress authorities file, and have added the concerto to it. At the same time I've moved some other sonatas by Boismortier's to the titles used by the L of C — P.davydov 15:54, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

I made another observation on the occasion of the uploading of the Myslivicek Sonata for 2 Cellos and Continuo by my friend W. Jaksch. The category " 2 Cellos and Continuo" has two doubtful entries. The op.4b (the second 6 pieces of op.4) has the title "For 2 Violoncellos" and not 2 Cellos and continuo. These sonatas are published as Cello duos in the Netherlands. A similiar case is Masse, where the title says "for two equal instruments", so the the second cello is part of the continuo together with a cembalo (for example). The second cello is a hybrid: second voice of a duo and bassline of the continuo (maybe simplified by the Cembalo player.) The differences becomes quite clear in the op.1 of Berteau: The first 5 pieces are cello sonatas for cello and continuo, the sixth piece plays a special role (like in Boismortier op.37): it is for 2 Cellos and continuo.Notenschreiber 13:15, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

The difficulty with the Myslivicek piece is that we don't have enough information to identify the work, or the set from which it comes. Perhaps you could add this to the general information section of the sonata's work page so that we can look into it? Thanks for your help — P.davydov 15:54, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

Perhaps this was a misunderstanding, my english is not perfect, I know. Myslivicek has been only mentioned in order to explain, why I had a look to the category " 2 Cellos and continuo". I don´t know, if you understand some german. If yes, you may have a look to the preface of W. Jaksch in the Myslivicek Sonata. Here he explains the origin of the source of these sonatas. There is no online source for them. But they are well known, some recordings are available.Notenschreiber 16:33, 13 March 2012 (EDT) P.S. I made a little correction on the work page Boismortier op. 37, I think that´s clear.Notenschreiber 16:39, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

Sorry, I realized now, that I didn´t mention the composer name "de Fesch" , together with op.4b. There are only few entries in the category "2 Cellos and continuo", please look it up. Notenschreiber 17:03, 13 March 2012 (EDT)

I have changed the instrumentation on the Fesch page from "2 cellos, continuo" to "2 cellos". The problem was that whoever uploaded the information originally gave the incorrect instrumentation, which was followed by our tagging team (who did not have access to the original scores). Thank you for pointing this out — P.davydov 05:07, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

When the Saints Go Marching In

Hi, I thought you might want to see my post over at the forum about this. It would appear to be a composed piece, though there is some confusion about it. James Fuld - curiously - refers to it as a "Negro Spiritual", following the later appearances in printed collections. As I mentioned on the forum, a strong case can be made that it was composed by a James M. Black. As always, your thoughts are appreciated on the subject. Carolus 18:13, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

Flute d´amore

Hi Davydov, in the category "scores featuring the flute d´amore" two ouvertures of Graupner are missing: GWV 440 and GWV 463. The reason is an incorrect tagging: "flute" instead of "flute d´amore". But according to the titles and the transposed flute part there is no doubt about the instrumentation. In my edition of GWV 463 I added a flute and a oboe version as arrangements, because oboe d´amore and especially flute d´amore are rare instruments.- Thank you for changing the tagging of the de Fesch sonatas. The case the Masse sonatas is more complicated, but they are definitely not sonatas for 2 Cellos and a self-dependent continuo, the title says only "for two cellos". Because the second cello voice is figured, it seems to me, that the title means that the bass line of the continuo should carried out by a cello, resp. by the same instrument - if look at the subtitle - as the solo part.Notenschreiber 06:55, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

Hello Notenschrieber. Just to let you know that I've fixed the two Graupner works. Regarding the Fasch, though, we always treat figured bass as a continuo part, so this would have to be re-tagged for cello and continuo. Would you agree? — P.davydov 07:04, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

Yes, I would think, that is the best solution. (Not "Fasch", but "Masse"!)Notenschreiber 08:04, 17 March 2012 (EDT) In the Graupner works there remains the tagging "For flute, oboe damore, strings, continuo". Shouldn´t it be changed to "For flute damore, oboe damore, strings continuo"? Notenschreiber 08:47, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

The Graupner has been fixed, but it might take time for the cache to clear before the new categories show up for everyone. I've altered the Masse to read both "For 2 cellos" and "For cello, continuo", to cover both possibilities. This may also take a little while to show up — P.davydov 14:14, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

It´s everything fine now, thanksNotenschreiber 15:36, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

Duets for Viols (anonymous)

Hi P.Davydov. I was trying to enter 12 engraving files on this page amd seem to have done something wrong. I can't see what it is, but I can't seem to get back to a place to enter some more of them. What did I do wrong? --Afolop 20:52, 19 March 2012 (EDT)

We just changed the add button to the top right of the page. Carolus 21:10, 19 March 2012 (EDT)

I found it! Thanks. --Afolop 10:31, 20 March 2012 (EDT)

For 2 Oboes, continuo

Hello Davydov, I would like to suggest two corrections for the above category. It contains the following composition: Il terzo libro de varie sonate, Op.12 (Rossi, Salamone). But this is a composition from the year 1623, whereas the oboe appears first c. 1660 (Hotteterre, Lully). On the other hand a composition of Fasch is missing in the category: Sonata for 2 Oboes, Bassoon and Cembalo, FaWV N:d1. The title in the manuscript says clearly ...Oboi, Basso, 3 st. (There are remarks in the sheet music "bassoon solo" and "tutti", which leads to a classification as a quatro sonata. But this is doubtful, I think "bassoon solo" only indicates, that here only the bassoon should play and not the cembalo, whereas "tutti" indicates that both have to play.) I bougth a typeset of FaWV N:d1 from the "Fasch Gesellschaft" which is titled "Sonate d-moll für 2 Oboen und Basso continuo".Notenschreiber 04:33, 23 March 2012 (EDT)

Addendum: In the catogory 1 Oboe, continuo there are 3 flute sonatas - Abel, Hasse, Vogel - from "Det Kongelige Bibliotek, København", which are scholarly classified as for flute and bass (compare RISM). They should not be tagged as for oboe, even from a practical point of view. The parts of the melodie instrument are too high for a convenient performance with the oboe.Notenschreiber 11:29, 23 March 2012 (EDT)

All three of these pieces were labelled as being for oboe by the original uploader (User:Fynnjamin), and our tagging team relied on that information when working on the pages. I'm happy to accept your corrections, but you see the difficulties faced by our categorization team if contributors give incomplete or inaccurate information about the works they have uploaded. Even if we downloaded every single file to check its instrumentation, there would still be unresolved issues, like the ones you mentioned with the Fasch sonata — P.davydov 18:07, 23 March 2012 (EDT)

Thank you for the correction concerning the three flute sonatas. What about Rossi and Fasch? In the case of Fasch an additional tag "for 2 Oboes, continuo" would be fine.Notenschreiber 16:23, 24 March 2012 (EDT)

Wrong files

Hi P.davydov - during my current efforts to add engraving files I am finding mistakes in my original entries. In a couple of places I have entered a set of files correctly in one place but I have also entered the same files incorrectly in a different place. These latter are to be removed and replaced with the new correct files. However, the current, erroneously located files have links. An example is "Fantasias for 2 Viols (Gibbons, Orlando)". Fantasia No.2 has the set of files numbered 0751 correctly while Fantasia No.3 has the same set of files, numbered 0751 incorrectly, and should have a set numbered 0752. As a trial, I have entered the new set of files but have not deleted anything because of the link question. Is this the right way to do it? --Afolop 13:25, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

Vivian Fine Chamber Concerto for Cello and Six Instruments

Hi Davydov,

I tagged this:

concertos ; vc ob vn va vc db pf

Cello is the solo instrument plus another cello is one of the six instruments. I put in 2 tags for cello but wasn't sure that was right. Please advise. Thanks!,_Vivian)#IMSLP192702

--Rhymesandchymes 15:18, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

Thanks, I'll take a look at it. Just another 127 works to tag before I can take a break :-) — P.davydov 15:22, 25 March 2012 (EDT)
OK, because the cello is playing with other instruments that each have a unique solo part, they all qualify as soloists in this case, giving the tag "ob vn va 2vc db pf". The two cellists can decide between them which is the principal player. I've updated the tagging accordingly — P.davydov 17:11, 26 March 2012 (EDT)

Thanks very much. --Rhymesandchymes 16:32, 27 March 2012 (EDT)