I really tried to argue hard against the use of the appropriateness of the Arrangements and Transcriptions schema here (after all, for starters, why not Quartet, arranged as quintet? It's hardly clear which one's the arrangement). Eric 05:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- We don't know for sure which came first. The problem is that there is simply a huge number pieces where this argument could apply just as easily - for example the countless piano-four-hand arrangements composers did at the the same time they did the original piece. Was the four-hand actually the original? or was the full score first? The typical first editions of Brahms, Dvorak and Tchaikovsky included full score, parts and a four-hand arrangement. That's why P.daydov argued that we should use "Arrangements and Transcriptions" unless there is a really different version (added music or re-written passages) involved to justify the level-two hierarchy (4 equal-signs). There's also the whole issue of double tagging something instead of allowing the walker to read the arrangement tags. Carolus 05:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I think that makes sense...Eric 05:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
