Saving this as it's a handy tool for checking items that Amazon and SMP links are needed for. (Thanks Leonard)
- Couldn't you just use Special:IMSLPTagFinder/-/nq/-/-/l/i/?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
That one works too, though it's a little more cumbersome to navigate. I'm almost done with that project for now anyway. Carolus 04:00, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
PLP
Some new ideas:
- Faure: Complete Song Cycles
- Berlioz: Les Nuits d'ete (piano and orchestra versions)...amazing that Dover let that go out of print...
- Palestrina's Pope Marcellus Mass and the Lamentations of Jeremiah
- Basically, make sure it's a wide group in addition to rare.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 15:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Also, my copy of the Dvorak Op. 72 is missing the A♭ Bell in the instrumentation. :)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 17:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Can that be fixed?-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it will take a couple of weeks. Thanks for pointing it out. Shall I send you a corrected copy when done? Carolus 03:14, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
It's fine...I don't care that much about Glockenspiele ;).-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- I got the instrumentation from Kalmus' website. I'll have to tell them they're missing the Bell in A-flat from their listing. Carolus 03:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
And these ideas? I just found an eulenburg of the Berlioz, so that might not be as necessary as I thought it was (and I thought it wasnt available like that). However, that kind of faure compilation hasnt really been done.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 03:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Bump-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 15:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
PLP is on hold for the time being, though recommendations are always welcome. The problem with Faure is that most vocal music is offered in full 9 x 12 size, which is not available at the printer used by PLP to get into the whole Amazon network. Pope Marcellus is interesting. I was also thinking of a study score Mahler's Des Knaben Wunderhorn - which Dover has also allowed to go OP. Carolus 03:24, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, song of songs and Jeremiah might be better, as there is a very nice norton critical (I just picked it up) of marcellus. The Mahler sounds fine (I don't like Mahler, so I can't really...well...).
If Henle can offer study score of piano music, then...
And why is it on hold?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I've always wondered about those Henle study scores of piano music. They're really quite unusual - though Lea Pocket scores did something similar many years ago. The Glock in Dvorak has been marked, BTW. Yes, I am also aware of the Norton Pope Marcellus score, which is fairly reasonable in price. The PLP sales haven't been very brisk - but that's not unusual with music scores. Sometimes it takes several years before even one a month is sold. Got to go... Carolus 03:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
- I do know someone who purchased the Henle; they can't play the pieces, but can read the scores, and it's cheaper in that form...
And what do you mean, they haven't been brisk. I bought two ;)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't have the figures yet, but should soon. I'll ask what they think about study scores of piano and vocal works. I noticed that the Schubert songs had been issued in study score form by both Kalmus and Lea Pocket scores. Perhaps this practice is more common than I realize. Carolus 07:00, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, Kalmus printed complete works in pocket format, so that isn't reliable. That's the only way I know Lea, so I couldn't say.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:39, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Les Troyens
Should be completely up soon...might we re-activate for this? I'm sure Serenessima might covet a rather rare score :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed it is now all up!-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- And now for the million dollar question--Is there any way we could justify marking the NBE 1969 print of the full score as free in Canada and the US? I'm fairly certain it wouldn't be entitled to 50 years in Canada, but how about the US? Daphnis 14:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Since it was published after 1963 - the last date renewals were actually required - and no doubt bears a fully compliant copyright notice. I don't think we could do it without actually going to court to prove that the edition failed to meet the threshold of originality established under the Feist vs. Rural decision. The fact that it was actually published in its complete form by Berlioz himself - even as a vocal score - would bolster that argument. The other possibility would be to contact Hugh MacDonald. He might be able to persuade Baerenreiter to grant permission for the USA, which is basically the only country in the world where it is actually protected. Carolus 14:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Then I wonder if it would be worthwhile to contact him seeking permission. If such permission is granted, then I would most certainly scan it. Otherwise, I see no reason to spend countless hours on something no one can use. If you think there's a good shot at convincing him and Bärenreiter, could either yourself or Philip (if you'd be interested) draft a letter? Daphnis 14:21, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I have a contact at Washington University, which is where Hugh MacDonald teaches. I will ask if this is a possible avenue to pursue. It would certainly be a wonderful addition. Carolus 14:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it certainly would. Thanks and keep me posted. Daphnis 14:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I’m late to the party, it seems. What I’d be worried about with the NBE (a fair amount of which is now PD in Germany, the country of origin) is that Bärenreiter obviously have an interest in selling their stock, and their full score (admittedly with all the appendices and critical apparatus) is not cheap at €546—. I imagine they are quite glad of the US status for their post-1963 stock. What might be of help is that several years after the NBE edition came out, Eulenberg obviously obtained permission to reprint miniature scores of the main musical volumes (2a and 2b), but this score must have rushed out the door like hot cakes and is presumably only available second-hand these days. Rather than allowing Serenissima to do a similar reprint, the Bärenreiter view might be that this is something they want to do bring back “in house” with their Taschenpartitur series (of which only four of the Berlioz NBE scores have so far been issued, even though numbers in the series appear to have been reserved: the Symphonie fantastique, Requiem, Messe solenelle, and Roméo et Juliette). I’m happy to help draft something but I’m not sure whether we’re angling to host a PDF here or do a PLP print run. Philip Legge @ © talk 00:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Look, something is better than nothing. I honestly would prefer a no-strings-attached PLP score to a barenreiter reprint which might involve a licensing fee.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 14:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- @PML. I wasn't thinking of asking for reprint permission at this stage - which could only come from Baerenreiter anyway - but only for permission to post the MacDonald's NBA Les Troyens volumes (including preface, etc.) here on the wiki. Obviously, we'd be perfectly fine with including a Sheet Music Plus link for the scores so that those interested (who have that much money for pocket change!) could purchase them. Printing out a score of that size is not a task for the feint of heart in any case. What about the possibility of having a locked PDF available whose printing features were disabled? The Choudens/Kalmus score of Les Troyens à Carthage is really a pretty rough copy over and above the numerous issues documented by PML. At any rate, I've left a message for my contact in the music department so I'll soon hopefully be able to get a sense of how approachable MacDonald might be towards having his work posted here. Carolus 16:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi guys. Any word on Mr. MacDonald? Daphnis 15:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- No word yet, but I am somewhat hopeful as Mr. MacDonald has a reputation for being very congenial and helpful. If he can persuade Baerenreiter to relent and grant permission, I might work. Carolus 15:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Prokofiev Polnoe Sobranie sochinenii index
Do you know where to find the complete index? WorldCat is a bit spotty. Daphnis 00:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you have access to a recent edition of Anna Heyer's book Historical Sets, Collected Editions and Monuments of Music, that should have a decent listing. My edition (from 1969) is too old and is very spotty in its listing. Carolus 00:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I do. Thanks. Daphnis 00:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I found Heyer useless since she doesn't index the complete works but rather lists the individual volumes reprinted by Belwin along with their catalog numbers. It isn't even a full account of the reprints! Daphnis 21:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- That's unfortunate. I thought the later editions of Heyer would have done a better job. You might try asking Davydov. Carolus 00:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
In any case, the 5 concerti are a great addition! :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 00:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- You might have seen the link I posted on P.Davydov's page...just bringing it to your attention...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Carolus 02:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Just bringing this to your attention. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi, do you think you can identify this edition? Looks like some kind of complete-works-edition urtext, but I can't tell. Definitely not Supraphon, though. Thanks, KGill talk email 01:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Penthesilea by H. Wolf
Hi Carolus, a user asked for the full score in the forums. Well, I scanned it some time ago, but I'm not sure about the cr status for Canada. It's vol.16 (1971) of the Wolf Complete Edition, but with no complete cr notice: "c Copyright by Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag, Wien". A comment on the first page says "..nach der von Prof. Robert Haas 1937 veröffentlichten Ausgabe". And in Worldcat you can read about the 1937 edition: "Nachgelassene Werke 3. Folge, Instrumentalwerke. T. 2, Penthesilea ; vollsständig nach dem Original vorgelegt von Robert Haas". The original is then probably by Lauterbach & Kuhn, 1903, I guess. Supposed the 1937 edition is just a new engraving with insignificant editing work, can I post it? Do you know more about these editions? So, if the notice is incomplete, it won't suffer the [TB], will it? (I mean, if the 1937 ed. had a valid notice they would have put it also on the 1971...). Thanks. Hobbypianist 18:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am fairly sure that the Haas edition is free in the USA. What you describe appears to be a defective notice, which is fatal with respect to critical editions like Haas'. The 1937 score would be ineligible for restoration under the GATT/TRIPs amendments due to the fact that it was more than 25 years old in 1996 and therefore public domain in the country of origin. I have downloaded a copy of the Lauterbach & Kuhn score which is available here in the USA from Google. I think the 1937 score, which has reprinted by Kalmus, is actually just a corrected reprint of the 1903 original. Carolus 19:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the info.....I've uploaded the 3 parts. Maybe you can compare it with your scan of the 1903 edition. If there are significant additions feel free to delete it. Hobbypianist 19:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
How to change file?
Long story short, I completely forgot to put dynamics in the Turkish drum part in Michael Haydn's Turkish March. I also made a smaller but much more forgivable mistake in the second trumpet (in C) part. Is there any way I can just swap out those two files, or do I have to delete them and upload them from scratch? Alonso del Arte 20:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it's really very simple. Click on the link for the file number, then follow the link to "replace file." Once you replace an existing file, it will automatically change to un-tagged status with a [B] until one of the copyright reviewers tags it again. Carolus 23:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Dvorak Water Goblin Parts
Apparently Oboes is the Op. 110. Can you fix this? Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 01:26, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up. If I can fix it, I will. If it's a OMCDRL error, there won't be much I can do about it. Carolus 03:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC) UPDATE: Fixed! Carolus
Performer pages
Hi Carolus. I've fixed the problem with the performer categories not showing up, and now the performer category system should work as designed (see both the Chopin and Mosz concertos). When performer categories are in use, it may be a good idea to not manually specify performers, to prevent duplicate information. Of course, if for some reason the two are different, its another story. Thanks for starting to use the performer categories; we needed someone to lead the way... --Feldmahler 21:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- I see. The website field in the performer category pages appears to not be working. I put in a link for the Seattle Philharmonic's site. Since the "instrument" is already designated as "Orchestra", perhaps I should re-do the performer category as Philarmonic, Seattle in order to establish a model for future additions. Carolus 22:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC) UPDATE: I added a picture without a problem. One thing I suggest just for cosmetic appearance would be to reverse the name order on the workpage listing (so that "Philharmonic, Seattle" would appear as "Seattle Philharmonic"). If there was a long list of performers involved with a single audio file or file-group, I can see where line-breaks would be useful. Carolus 22:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Both the website field and the reversed name order are on the todo list; the current implementation was aimed more at basic functionality. There will be further features in the future, but the basic framework is set. Using line breaks instead of semicolons is easy and can be fixed at any time, if you think all semicolons should be line breaks (I think this may be good too).
- Regarding the naming of performer categories, leaving out "Orchestra" is fine I think unless "Orchestra" is part of the name (e.g. "Boston Symphony Orchestra"). Tell me if you have any other suggestions. --Feldmahler 01:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Carolus,
Thanks for the info. I will make note of that for the future.
--Tyler
Sources Consulted
For Bach Cantatas, which I will soon resume, I have been consulting Duerr's book (Oxford ed.) in addition to Wikipedia and bach-cantatas (which, incidentally, he puts in the bibliography!), but I can't link to it (obviously). Need I cite?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- There's certainly no harm in citing it, just as we have done with Grove for the publisher histories, etc. Duerr's book is considered the best current authority as far as I know. Carolus 02:41, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
OK. I'll add it to each page.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- All fixed (you can see the format there). I should get cracking again seriously tommorrow, so get your vocal scores ready! :D-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
I made a couple of minor changes (see Cantata 1), including putting in an Amazon link (since our server bills are going to be going up soon). Having the links to the bach-cantatas page is a good idea also, as there's quite a bot of detailed info to be found there. Carolus 03:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- OK. I'm modifying my Amazon template to be able to handel a second input for a link title of this sort.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Good idea. I have to go. See you tomorrow. Carolus 03:21, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- The functionality is now online, complete with a shiny new manual :D. I, of course, fixed all of the old citations (italics and all :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:40, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Superb - we're looking like a high-class establishment! Carolus 17:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how useful this will be anyways. I did BWV 12 and 13 if you're interested in checking :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 18:09, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
And 14. Vocal scores...hmm...(note the third movement...wow)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- The detailed section listing is great, but are the descriptive statements like "The middle section takes a somewhat festive mood..." copied from Dürr's book? If so then we might unwittingly be infringing his copyright, whereas we're on safer ground confining ourselves to purely factual data about titles/keys/instrumentation. Or am I worrying unnecessarily...? — P.davydov 07:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Christmas Oratorio
It's not 1, but 6 Cantatas! :)
Could you find precise publisher info for the parts? I found something that looks right, but the date is way off. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- As I recall, JSB put it together himself from six previous Cantatas (which still exist as separate works). I think there were some modifications made to create the oratorio. I'll take a look of course. Carolus 21:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes indeed (5, but who's counting?). It is speculated that Picander and Bach worked together to create a text that fit the old text...
Interestingly, I recall finding (and then reading about) on a facs of the manuscript, the first line "Jauchzet, Frollocket" miswritten is "Tönet ihr Pauken" which is the original text...to my shock an horror. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Speaking of JSB, we just obtained a fairly decent audio of French Suite No.6. Carolus 03:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Listening...quite!-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:19, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's a nice performance. Pity the audio quality isn't better.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Considering the price, it's not bad at all. See you tomorrow. Carolus 03:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looking a gift horse in the mouth, I suppose I am...the Grieg is nice too! Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and it looks like the Easter Oratorio also needs to have the publisher identified.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 23:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you!-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
When your adding pagination on the Ruth Dana pages, could you let the existing ones remain? They're that of the volume, not of the score. I try to include them on every entry, since each volumes in the Ruth Dana collection includes continuous pagination in pencil. The pagination of the score could be added before that of the volume if necessary. --Funper 03:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I am aware that the pagination you inserted was for the volumes in the Ruth Dana collection. The manuscript volume information - which is indeed important to have also - is not lost by any means. All I did was move the volume foliation to the "Misc. notes" section while giving the printed foliation in the pages field. The pagination for every other score on this site follows what is printed on the page by the publisher - not what has been added later by someone else in manuscript. I would really prefer that we not introduce a huge (in light of the sheer size of this collection) inconsistency of this nature. Also, since the field already states "Pages=" it is technically redundant to use "p.106-205" which is why I employ the symbol "#" (meaning number, or numbered) instead. (This is not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out there there are usually reasons that things are done the particular way they are.) I see absolutely no reason that our pages for the Dana-Liszt collection cannot be superior to those found on the Juilliard site in terms of depth of information, context and (especially) links to additional information (like the pages of the operas and other works Liszt arranged). It is important to keep in mind that most visitors will not have anywhere near the level of knowledge of Liszt and his practices that you do, so the information should be presented in a concise and consistent manner. Carolus 16:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well they should! :) Sorry, didn't see that you placed it in the misc section instead, but I have followed the principle of consistency on the rest (i.e. putting the foliation in the misc section). --Funper 19:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm curious too.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Seattle Philharmonic
Hello,
I just noticed that you uploaded a few old recordings from the Seattle Philharmonic. I am a former member of the group, so I am pleasantly surprised to see the SPO represented! Are you affiliated with them?
- Greetings, No affiliation here (other than admiration for the fine performances!). These recordings are part of the Pandora archive, which have been released under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike license. They are widely available on the net, including at Wikipedia. Since we just added the ability to host audio files, I thought that these would make a particularly nice addition. If you know of any more that the orchestra would like to make available, please feel free to upload them here. Best Wishes, Carolus 21:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
More OM omissions
http://imslpforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3696. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Bump.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Also: this issue-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 23:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- The Harp parts are not present in my archive of OM files. I'll double check the DVDs sent originally by Kcleung, but I'm fairly sure there's nothing there. Carolus 02:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
OK. Thanks anyways-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- The one for the Prélude à l’après-midi is a critical omission, the piece would obviously have a large gap in the first ten bars — besides the one intended by the composer! Perhaps we need to modify the OM template so that we can easily flag incomplete sets of parts? This can be done by having an optional parameter to the template which is activated by a "switch" and registers the page with a matching category (incomplete sets of parts). Philip Legge @ © talk 03:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I did a little checking - here's the deal on the Debussy: The Harp parts were in fact included as part of the original OM set. The problem lies in what they scanned (which was actually a case of Subito breaking the law). The OM folks scanned harp parts that were edited by Clint Nieweg, upon which a 1989 copyright is claimed. I will call Clint (who I know) next week to see if he a) knows of this and b) if the OM folks have removed the harp parts. The reason the harp part was not even copied by me to the master archive from which I uploaded things to the FTP was the fact that we'd be violating a copyright. Surely someone out there has the original Fromont Harp parts. The harp (and other) parts for RVW's A Sea Symphony are absent from all OM material received. Carolus 16:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Performer Categories
I know it is a pain to create performer categories for each submission; in fact, if you are submitting someone else's performance, you do not need to create categories (nor is it recommended). The idea is that the performer categories are for submitters who submit their own work, since the likelihood of multiple submissions is high, and the idea of a performer category attractive. Since there are many more performers than composers it is probably undesirable to create categories for every one. --Feldmahler 14:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- OK, that will be a big help. Also, there are a number of performers who are active on more than one instrument. Carolus 03:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Schnabel
Non-PD EU, no?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'll have to check, but I think the term for recordings is limited to a set number of years, not 70pma. Carolus 02:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, let me know! We need to update the copyright pages for recordings, so you might want to do that :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- 50 years from lawful publication of the "phonogram" in EU. Carolus 02:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
OK. And Canada? (Again, you are probably more capable at updating the pages than I, so it should probably be you). Also, we might gently nudge the other CRs in a forum post of the rules on recordings, even if the pages are updated. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Even if recordings were 50pma in Canada (they're not), Schnabel's been dead over 50 years. Yes, recordings have two possible copyrights to consider: the underlying work recorded and the recording itself. The real snakepit with respect to recordings is the USA (big surprise) - where some still fall under the common law doctrines of individual states. Carolus 02:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Quel surprise! What exactly is the canadian rule?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- It would appear to be life-plus-50 of the last surviving contributor. 02:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Producer etc.? Could be a serious pain-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 02:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
- Not if the producer was an employee for hire of the record company (HMV in this case). It really appears to apply primarily to performers, as the section of the law is even titled "performers and sound recordings." Carolus 03:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Great! Editing and posting time, now...now that I'm done tagging and filling in info for Mozart arias...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Greetings, As you are the resident expert on PD I just uploaded a version of this nice Beethoven piece and do not have any information on the edition. Only that I took off all mentions of CD sheet music. Perhaps you know more info. Thanks. Generoso 22:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- It looks like a Schirmer engraving. I think they issued an edition by Auer (whose cadenza is included) around 1910. I already tagged it but will do a little more digging on it later. Carolus 22:45, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
- You are fast. Thanks. Generoso 22:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Reger's Op.136
I go to cover... --Ralph Theo Misch 23:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- And relieved. Regards from --Ralph Theo Misch 23:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- You're most welcome - Bitte. Carolus 23:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- :-))) --Ralph Theo Misch 23:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Carolus.
Just couple of things about this page:
- What's happening with the uploading program? I have submitted a new version of a thumbnail and it seems it doesn't work well (check the page).
- Would you mind deleting a couple of files (already uploaded by me)? I have submitted a better scan of them. I considered simply uploading a new version, but the current score is in one file and the old one is in two. They are
- File:PMLP05510-Rachmaninoff-Sonata-No2-Op36-Mov1.pdf, and
- File:PMLP05510-Rachmaninoff-Sonata-No2-Op36-Mov2-3.pdf
Thany you very much! --Guifré 16:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Yes I noticed the thumbnail problem. I wonder if it has somethings to do with the server upgrade. I'll take care of the old files. Nice scan of the original version - thanks! Carolus 16:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Merci! You are quicker than the Road Runner! ----
PLP and facsimile scores
Is it possible to publish facsimile scores through PLP? I had the MSS from juilliardmanuscriptcollection in mind ; doesn't really matter which one(s). --Funper 10:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps publishing a facsimile of the manuscript of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, available on that site? The Peters edition facsimile of it costs 600 USD according to this, so there is evidence that such a facsimile would pull in a lot. Or maybe the holograph of the piano arrangement of Grosse Fuge, which was lost until recently. --Funper 21:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
That's an interesting idea. The prices for facsimile editions are frankly ridiculous. I have no idea of why they are charging so much - unless the market is so limited that they must print at least 1000 copies and sit on them for years. Carolus 21:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- One problem is that we'd need relatively large sizes, excellent scan quality, and great printing quality. Facsimiles (except for instrumental music) of manuscripts are usually very large, so that might be beyond our capabilities to print-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
That is very true. The largest size we can do at present is A4 (8.27 x 11.69 inches). Black and white only. We have a color option up to 8.5 x 11 (US letter size), but costs are nearly 10x that for black and white. Carolus 22:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Which might explain costs — also clothbinding is often used for these.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Somewhat off topic: I am about to upload the recently discovered holograph of Beethoven Grosse Fuge, op.134 from the aforementioned collection, but the file size of the scan exceeds the upload limit with circa 30 megabyte; the scan being incredibly high depth (good enough to make a facsimile with it). I don't want to split it in two since having it like that isn't as elegant. Is there any way I (or someone else) could override the upload limit or isn't it worth while? --Funper 00:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
That is a question you will have to address to Feldmahler, as I don't know of any way to override the limit. If anyone knows, he will. It would certainly be quite nice to have it in one piece. Carolus 00:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Flauta
emailed me last night to confirm that he is indeed Glenn Michael Egner. I retagged his typesets accordingly, and should probably have made that clear at that point. Thanks, KGill talk email 14:35, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I suspected as much, which is why I didn't delete them. Carolus 14:36, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Massenet Songs
Hi Carolus -- Thank you for going in and cleaning up my publisher info on the Massenet songs. I will use that template as I proceed adding more to the collection. Cheers! Massenetique 18:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nice to see you back! (end interjection)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Hans-Dieter Meyer
Dear Carolus,
I am not Hans-Dieter Meyer, but I have his permission to post his typesets here. As You might see on the first page of the files he also gave a complete Public domain-statement on this pages.
I will post the complete piano works of Carl Halle in the next days. This is a project, the Karl Halle Gesellschaft Hagen (http://www.karl-halle.de/) and I have initiated last year (http://www.derwesten.de/wp/kultur/Karl-Halle-fuer-alle-id2116143.html). The goal is, to make Carl Halles piano works accessible to everybody. If I made anything wrong during the posting process please contact me again.
Many greetings.
- Thanks for the fast response - and welcome to IMSLP. My only suggestion is that you consider using the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 3.0 version of the license for the typesets. Otherwise, they will be duplicated and sold by the wild salesmen on Ebay. At least if we use the non-commercial or share-alike versions, they cannot sell them - but must give them away at no charge. Carolus 21:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Synthesized recordings
Hopefully this is paranoia, but can Finale and Sibelius claim copyright on their midi realizations of scores, thus making a few of our recordings unpermissible? Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think it would be a bit of a stretch non their part. I am not that concerned. Carolus 21:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Gooooood. Thanks
If you want work on American music, check out the Ives 114 songs now :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- We've got 2 very nice scores of those. It's definitely under consideration for PLP. If we pass digital certification with the printer (now that we're finally a candidate), the set-up costs go down, which will open up more possibilities for PLP. Carolus 21:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Excellent! And we now have a table of contents :)-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, so you're the one who added that! Thanks! Carolus 21:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
:P. Now for the other fifteen...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 21:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Hah! Wikipedia has such a list: here....wish I'd known......-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 00:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
WTC
Why do we have Book 1 as one page and Book 2 as two?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- I do not know. I thought it was odd, too. I tend to think that one page is better for each book, since the composer did them as two separate publications. However, with so many editions and possible arrangements, it could easily become a problem in the future. Carolus 23:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
So should we merge book 2?-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 23:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I think it would be best since the erster theil is on a single page. Carolus 00:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- The explanation is as follow: Book 1 was as two pages from the start in 2006. I recently merged the two pages on Book I but I thought it to be kind of monotonous so I didn't merge Book 2 in the hope that someone else takes notice of the difference and merges the second one. --Funper 00:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Editio Princeps
Hello Carolus, Konrad Stein sent me (beside many others of wonderful works) 3 Pieces for Piano 4 hands by Fanny Mendelssohn. It's a first edition from 1990 - shall I post it? Thanks --Ralph Theo Misch 00:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Is it really a first edition from 1990? If so, it is protected in the EU until 1/1/2016. In Canada, it could be protected until 2041 if certain conditions are in play (it was never performed in her lifetime, for example). In the USA, it is most likely protected until 1/1/2048. The short answer is "no." If you can prove it was actually printed back in the 1830s (like many of her things were), it's an entirely different story. Carolus 00:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I see. It was never printed before. Mrs. Barbara Gabler made the edition only by using the manuscript. Thanks for your answer! I'll tell Konrad. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:37, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Manuscript scans
...to continue with the topic. Hi Carolus, there's a discussion in the German section of the forums whether it's permissible to upload manuscript scans of the SLUB which might be protected by the German § 71 UrhG. I just want to summarize: a user asked if IMSLP has permission because the SLUB states that permission is needed for collections ("Die Verwendung zusammenhängender Teilbestände der Digitalen Sammlungen auf nicht-kommerziellen Webseiten bedarf gesonderter Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers.") of which pieces might fall under the mentioned §. Yes, it's true that the owner of a manuscript can claim copyright for 25 years if the piece was not published yet. However, in my understanding, the pieces/scans in question should then be clearly marked as copyrighted, which is not the case. I think, just the vague statement "permission needed" is not enough. So, our policy here is to accept and release any uploaded manuscript scan unless we get a complaint from the SLUB, correct? (By the way, if we got a complaint would SLUB then have to prove that the piece was never published before?) To make it more complicated, Notenschreiber asked if it's then ok to make a new typset of such pieces an upload them. To cite the German law, the copyright owner has the sole right to duplicate/reproduce and distribute the piece. So, should a piece really fall under ed. princeps law $71 it would not be allowed to distribute a typeset. Please correct me if I'm wrong. However, since we allow these scans, can a new typset then be posted anyway? Of course, I also like readable typesets but I think the situation isn't as simple as described with "yes, yes, yes" here. As other threads like [1] or [2] show there still seems to be some need for discussion/clarification. Maybe we can post some explanation in the thread Notenschreiber started. Regards, Hobbypianist 17:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Hobbypianist, Yes our standing policy is to accept manuscript scans as along as there is no direct complaint of Editio Princeps being made - they would furthermore have to prove that the work in question was never previously published. Under Canada's version of Editio Princeps (which is for 50 years, not 25), a musical work by a composer whose normal term of copyright has expired is eligible only if the work was never published, publicly performed, or recorded in the composer's lifetime. In other words, the bar for "unpublished" is pretty high to qualify for the 50-year term. I think it is similar in some EU countries, but I will need to do some research on the issue. While (as you know) the US law is generally insane, this is one area where it's actually advantageous: As of 1/1/2003, all unpublished works of composers dead over 70 years fell into the US public domain (those first published before that date are subject to copyright). Our only real concern with respect to manuscripts of this nature would be for any possible Editio Princeps claims - mainly for the EU - as both Canada and the US are fairly clear. If Notenschreiber were in the USA, it would be a non-issue as no permission would be necessary. However, in Germany and other parts of the EU he may indeed have to obtain permission. As I said above, I will be doing some more in-depth research on the whole Editio Princeps question in light of the large number of manuscript scans which are now here. We may have to change the EU tags, as I am not very confident that "V" is actually justified for all of these (though "C" probably is). Carolus 01:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
