User talk:Carolus/archive28

Contents 1 A copyright question... 2 Tagging 3 Recordings 4 Albéniz Op.164 5 IMLSP Journal Interview 6 Guarnieri editions 7 Zelter in: Das Erbe deutscher Musik Vol.106 8 Tomás Luis de Victoria: Opera Omnia 9 3 Morceaux, Op.65 (Mertz, Johann Kaspar) 10 God Save the King, etc. 11 V vs. C 12 Mussorgsky/Rimsky-Korsakov: Khovanshchina full score 13 Catalog of Copyright Entries 14 downtime 15 Fwd: Gershwin - Swanee 16 Reger, Op.137; Lechner, Canticum Canticorum 17 Talk Page Message 18 Copyright Test 19 OnClassical 20 Sardelli 21 Peters again 22 Breaks 23 Bellini - Oboe Concerto

A copyright question...

Hi Carolus. I recently had got access to a book called '100 years of popular music - 1900' published by International Music Publications. It's a reprint of many pre-1923 stuff and I think it would be great to upload them. But, for all pieces there are guitar chords above some notes which I don't think it was included in the original publication. Are these pieces also in public domain? Thanks..--Notnd 16:35, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there an editor or contributor listed as author of the guitar chords and copyright claims on the first page of each piece? It could be a problem if there is. If not, we're probably OK as the guitar chord symbols by themselves are not up to the originality threshold. Of course, with any songbook of this nature, you must check on the dates of the librettists was well as all composers involved. Some of the songs can have as many as 5 or 6 names connected with them. The dates have to be checked for all - otherwise it's US server only (assuming they were published before 1923). Carolus 00:54, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Tagging

Hi Carolus. I happen to notice that you changed the tag to this piece from "waltzes ; pf" to "waltzes , orch". Thanks for pointing out the instrumentation mistake. Just to let you know, if you ever want to change tags in the future, they are separated by semicolons rather than commas. This caused an error in reading the tag (which there is luckily a page for, for so trouble caused!). Cheers, Lndlewis10 23:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I typed in comma by accident. Carolus 00:52, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Recordings

Thanks for uploading the Debussy – I have a few missing of Book 2 from my Debussy collection and am grabbing the whole Ilic set. I notice we are past 100,000 files of scores + recordings, so is there a reliable counter for the number of recordings somewhere? Cheers Philip _{@ © talk} 06:01, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The only recording counter I know of is the one that appears on the front page. We'll be hitting the 100,000 file mark (officially) very soon, which is something of a milestone. BTW, I was wondering if it might be time to think about adding a new optional field to the normal score-file template for "Engraver/Scribe" - this info is a lot more common than I realized (irishmeastro's latest uploads made me think of it). Carolus 06:06, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Albéniz Op.164

Hi Carolus, sorry - I didn't see that CR notice at Violino 1 (direction). --Ralph Theo Misch 07:13, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

At least it's available on the EU server. Schott rarely missed a renewal, however, so probably tied up in USA. Carolus 07:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 07:19, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

IMLSP Journal Interview

Hi Carolus! To continue to interview series for the IMSLP Journal, I was wondering if you would consent to being interviewed. I have a set of questions ready to email to you, and you can take as much time as necessary to answers the questions. If you are too busy or are not at all interested in being interviewed, let me know and that would be fine. Hopefully, however, you are up to the introspective challenge! Cheers, Lndlewis10 03:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

You can e-mail your questions. I will be very busy until August / September, so you probably will not get your answers until then. I am fine with being interviewed. Carolus 03:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Previous interviews with likely suspects are available for your entertainment. Philip _{@ © talk} 03:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Guarnieri editions

Hi Carolus. I was just wondering if there is a particular reason this edition was tagged as V for both Canada and the EU? Did Guarnieri make no contributions worth mentioning? Thanks, KGill _{talk email} 20:04, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

This is an interesting question. First of all, the full score for the overture at the top of the page is definitely not a Breitkopf engraving. It looks very much like a Ricordi engraving, which makes me wonder if it is actually a reprint of the Guarnieri score as Carisch would probably have done their engraving at Ricordi's facility in the same city (Milan). I don't think there is a Ricordi edition of the overture, but we should check. Kalmus is sometimes not very accurate about whose edition was reprinted. Dover can slip up here as well. I do note the bowings, etc., which make me wonder about the nature of Guarnieri's edition. The engraving of the Kalmus reprint of parts attributed to Guarnieri is different from the score also. I think I put in the Guarnieri attribution based on the Kalmus website. I'm re-tagging these as C* for Canada and EU for now until additional information surfaces. Carolus 01:02, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Zelter in: Das Erbe deutscher Musik Vol.106

Dear Carolus, the editors are Reinhold Kubik (born 1942) and Andreas Meier (born 1954?????). 'Meier' is such a name as 'Miller' and 'Andreas' is as common like 'John'. So I couldn't find out anything exactly. --Ralph Theo Misch 23:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

When was volume 106 issued? My Heyer book (from 1965) only lists to volume 58, issued 1962. Was 106 issued 1985 or before? Thanks, Carolus 00:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

It's from 1995. The reprints are facsimiles. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:07, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

If they're just facsimiles of older, obviously public domain issues, the "editorship" is confined to their prefaces and commentary, which can easily enough be omitted. Carolus 00:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I omitted any editorial material as well (Henle!). --Ralph Theo Misch 00:16, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Tomás Luis de Victoria: Opera Omnia

I've already scanned Pedrell's preface. It's interesting of course, but I don't know where to put it. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

It's only 14 pages. You could attach it to the volumes or reasonably large segments you plan to upload. If you're planning on splitting the volumes into individual works, we might have to think of something else. Carolus 00:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

If I am correct, we have mainly those works of Vol.5 (apart from the masses). But I'll see... Thanks again! --Ralph Theo Misch 00:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

3 Morceaux, Op.65 (Mertz, Johann Kaspar)

Hi Carolus. Do you think there's a possibility that the edition uploaded here is actually this? The time period of the engraving fits, as does the language and the presence of an editor (in this case, one who is still alive). Thanks, KGill _{talk email} 01:41, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That's a very strong possibility. It's not plate engraving, but something produced by a stamping method, which was being used starting in the post-WW II era up through the early 1990s. There were quite a few editorial additions also. Good detective work! Carolus 01:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :-) I guess I'll go ahead and remove it then, to be on the safe side. Cheers, KGill _{talk email} 01:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That's definitely the best thing to do in this case. Carolus 02:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

God Save the King, etc.

Please see my note on KGill's talk page. Thanks. Olmsted 02:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I put in two Burmester vol 1 files by accident. Didn't notice there was a mutliple upload page. WBunting

V vs. C

Hi Carolus, nice to see you back! I have just added this section to the CR guidelines page on Max's request, since the differences between V and C can subtle and rather confusing. Could you take a look at that section and see if it is OK? Thanks, KGill _{talk email} 01:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. Max is still doubtful about the EU urtext thing - in his interpretation, "Some EU countries have not specified any duration for copyright on urtext editions, and this "might" mean (subject to interpretation) that the 30 years maximum applies." I am not completely assured on this point myself, never actually having done research into the specific statutes of different EU countries and their implications. Would you mind maybe sending him a message about it explaining the reasons behind your own interpretation of this (i.e., tagging V* for urtexts between 25 and 30 years of age)? (Maybe that would be something else to put in the V/C tagging guide, now that I think of it...) Thanks, KGill _{talk email} 01:40, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. The wording in the EU directive makes it pretty clear that it's about a maximum term, so I'll send him the links. UPDATE: See my further thought on this at Max's talk page. It might be a good idea to use the C* tag as he suggests since laws of this nature can change without our knowledge. As it stands right now (as far as I know), the maximum term for such editions is 25 years (Germany and UK). That said, if Italy decides to up their term from 20 to 30 years, it would be a few months before we'd find out about it in all likelihood. Carolus 01:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Is this enough of an issue for us to go back over old tags (e.g., all the NLA uploads) to change, or should we just worry about it for new stuff? KGill _{talk email} 02:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Just worry about the new items. We've not had any whines over this issue, interestingly, so I'm pretty confident we're observing the rule (25 years) presently being observed in the EU. Carolus 02:27, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Carolus & KGill for looking into this subject. The new section about the difference between V and C clarifies a lot to me, and I'm OK with the last sentence about the use of C* in the 25 to 30 years interval for urtext editions. Then C* should be changed to V* at the end of the 30 years term, so older items and newer items will get all aligned to V* eventually. Have you considered this migration from C* to V*? Would it be automated, or shall we do it manually once a year? Do we need any tools for doing it? Max a.k.a. Choralia 08:46, 13 July 2011 (UTC).

I think updating manually should be fine for now. There will not be that many items to deal with. Carolus 04:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Mussorgsky/Rimsky-Korsakov: Khovanshchina full score

Apparently, the only full score issued for this was by Bessel, which was subsequently picked up by Kalmus and reprinted in the late 70s as catalog A4601. Is there any more you can tell me about this? Can you locate a record in WorldCat or elsewhere detailing the Bessel print? I'm going to be doing this one fairly soon, so any info is welcome. Thanks, Daphnis 15:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, after I did some more digging and found what looks to be a miniature reprint by MPH of, presumably, the full score, the notes indicated the source was Muzyka from 1973. It would appear Kalmus' page for this is then incorrect. Also, there should be 462 pages in total and not 356 as at least 2 WorldCat entries suggest. Daphnis 16:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, now I'm not sure. Aside from the huge difference in pages, I highly doubt the Muzyka score was translated into French, which is what the Kalmus records indicate. Little confused here... Daphnis 16:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I am pretty certain the Kalmus page is correct here. It's one of those Bessel scores that was lithographed from a copyist's manuscript, like the one we have for Boris. I'll see if I can obtain. Carolus 04:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I think I can get a copy of this, I was just curious as to if there were two different versions: Kalmus' Bessel reprint and another by Muzyka? Daphnis 04:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Muzyka did almost all of Mussorgsky's work as part of the series started by Lamm in the 1930s. There were quite a few offprints later on also. I expect the Muzyka score would be a nicer engraving than the Kalmus reprint of the Bessel. Carolus 04:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, the thing is, I think, that Muzyka issued scores for both the Rimsky-Korsakov (de)construction and Shostakovich's subsequent REconstruction. The piano/vocal score to the latter was the only one made by Lamm, so far as I can tell. WorldCat doesn't give me a straight answer on these scores, so I guess I'll have to try and place my mitts on some to see what they're all about. Daphnis 04:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

WorldCat can be very confusing about this type of issue, so having a copy in hand is indeed indispensable! Carolus 05:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

On another unrelated note about this composition, have a look at the work page. Why is the full score, currently under the heading "For Voices, Mixed Chorus and Orchestra (Rimsky-Korsakov)" in the Arrangements sections not put in the full score section? Is there something I'm missing here? This was actually the Muzyka 1973 score in 2 volumes to which I was previously referring. Now all that's left is to see if I can get the Kalmus plus probably a couple copies of different versions of the vocal score. Daphnis 18:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

That threw me for a loop at first also until I realized that Mussorgsky left only a substantially complete vocal score at his death. He never orchestrated the work (ditto for Sorochintsy Fair and The Marriage). All full scores would necessarily be arrangements by others. Carolus 01:05, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this is so, however so would everything else that isn't Mussorgsky's extant vocal score (which, by the way, do we even have that in a printed form?). This includes the current vocal score I imagine. I wondering if we should make an exception for this piece, for clarity's sake, simply because we just don't have any of the original material. The work is known today either through Rimsky-Korsakov's work or Shostakovich's. Daphnis 01:42, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

That might be worth doing in this case. Carolus 01:45, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you suggest an appropriate and clear organization? It might also be helpful to link to the Wikipedia article on the piece as well as include mention and dates for Shostakovich's hand. My parenthetical question was genuine: Do we have an extant vocal score from Mussorgsky? I did some searching for one today and didn't find anything. Daphnis 01:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll go over there in a minute. Yes, we should always link to wikipedia articles unless they're just stubs. OK, I am fairly certain the Mussorgsky vocal score (as opposed to the re-arranged item by Rimsky issued by Bessel) was first brought out by Pavel Lamm as part of the Mussorgsky complete works in the 1930s. This is what Shostakovich used as a source for his orchestration. Carolus 01:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Then I wonder if the original source still exists as that set. I'm trying to keep track of all the different publications of full and vocal scores, but this is getting confusing. Why couldn't the man ever finish what he started? Daphnis 02:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Poor Mussorgsky was way too fond of the vodka, sad to say. Just a look at the Repin portrait - painted just a couple of days before death - gives a good indication. Carolus 04:00, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Three sections from the original ms vocal score to Khovanschina - I think (though 1925 is the publication date of the notes or something attached to it?... - this is hosted at a Michigan library and is presumably PD-US all the same... anyway- here... Eric 02:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

This is a manuscript chorus score prepared in NY in 1925 for a performance with transliteration of the Russian text. While interesting, it's not the composer's original vocal score from what I can see. Carolus 02:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

From what I can tell, Mussorgsky's vocal score might have been made available in the Complete Works edition edited by Lamm. While Lamm also made an arrangement of the vocal score from Shostakovich's version, this one predates his orchesration. I'm trying to get a copy, so we'll see what it's all about. Daphnis 03:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be a most welcome addition! Carolus 03:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Catalog of Copyright Entries

Hi Carolus! I mentioned this to KGill and he thought it might be useful so I thought I'd run it by you. Hathi Trust's collection of the Catalog of Copyright Entries has many of the music volumes from the 1940s and 1950s that to the best of my knowledge aren't available anywhere else online. If these might be useful to our CRs in checking the renewal status of works published in the U.S. after 1922 I wouldn't mind converting them to PDF files and posting them either here or at archive.org. Thanks! --Cypressdome 03:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be tremendously useful. In fact, archive.org's scroll-through reader is quite helpful, as is their search feature. I was also thinking of setting up a CCE page with a series of links to the CCE volumes at archive.org directly to the scroll-through reader files. This would provide an easy gateway for reviewers needing to search records. I know Hathi can be really pretty cumbersome and their speed is sometimes pretty slow also. Excellent idea!! Carolus 03:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll start working on it just as soon as I finish the final volumes of the Whistling/Hofmeister Handbuch series. --Cypressdome 04:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Carolus! I've added a few titles at Archive.org and set up a temporary page here to track them. I have no idea where to put a permanent page that would be easily accessible to copyright reviewers so if you do please copy the contents and I'll update it going forward. Thanks! --Cypressdome 02:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Fantastic. I will set up a category page for this and link it to the pertinent pages for reviewers and the public domain section. Once that is done, I can just copy what you've already constructed to he new category page and we'll be off to a great start. Many thanks! Carolus 02:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

downtime

thanks- I hadn't and ought to. Have been mostly tonight (a few exceptions!) checking biography-link-less categories and seeing if I can easily add to them with some of our "newer" resources but this may also be a problem in its way, haven't thought about it- may be best if I just wait of course! Eric 02:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I noticed you were the only one around besides me, so I wondered if you'd been just happily working along when it crashed. Feldmahler's working to get things back up as I write this. UPDATE: Looks like we're back up! Carolus 02:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Fwd: Gershwin - Swanee

Hi Carolus,

I was thinking of uploading a few other scores that are PD only in the US, so what should I do? I mean, can I upload them directly to the US server or this can only be done by an administrator? Thanks! --Guifré 08:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

For the time being, I has to be done by an admin. We are working on fixing this issue so that it will work just like uploading items to the main server, but it might take a while. I've really been too bust around here to learn to do it very well. You can ask Daphnis. KGill or Schissel to do it for you. All are very experienced in procedure for adding things to the US server. Carolus 01:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've just found the ToUSserver template. I guess that by putting it to the new submissions the problem will be solved. Have a nice day!--Guifré 11:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, you should check with KGill or one of the other admins who regularly uploads to the US server before adding a bunch of things like this to the Canadian server, where they absolutely do not belong since they are quite illegal. Thanks, Carolus 04:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok!--Guifré 08:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Reger, Op.137; Lechner, Canticum Canticorum

Hi Carolus, two cases for the master detective ;-): According to worldcat
→EdPeters 3452 is fom 1914 [1] and
→Ba 253 from 1928 ([2]). Regarding other BA publications from that time (e.g. Neue Teutsche Lieder mit fünff und vier Stimmen (Lechner, Leonhard)) there may be realized a modernization of speach and style of letters. --Ralph Theo Misch 00:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

The con-men just can't help themselves, it would appear. On the Peters, I would say to remove the 1999 copyright claim (which is clearly bogus) and post it. There is no editorial claim, nothing at all to indicate this is anything other than a reprint of the 1914 score, which is quite obvious from anyone looking at it. The Baerenreiter is a little more odd. While one cannot claim that modernization of the syntax and typography is original, the engraving looks as if it were done around 1971. This still qualifies as an EU urtext item and should be tagged as such. Is the 1971 print also 21 pages? Thanks, Carolus 03:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

The 1971 print is 19 pages (+ad). Thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 09:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Reger's Op.137 is online now. --Ralph Theo Misch 22:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk Page Message

Hi Carolus. Did you see my response to the publication dates? Respectfully, Emery 03:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Just got here - had not looked yet. Thanks, Carolus 03:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright Test

Hi Carolus. I finished the copyright test (see my talk page). Sorry it took so long - hopefully my answers were OK in length. I tried my best to keep them simple and concise, but if I'm required to quote exact legislation I would be happy to write more detailed responses. I wasn't sure about the length requirement, so I decided not to write more than a paragraph or two summarizing the basic facts about each question, though if a page (or something similar) is required, I would be happy to elaborate. I wanted to ask you that before I send you the answers. I sent the answers to KGill as well, since he gave me the test. Respectfully, Emery 02:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it would need more than a paragraph or two, so go ahead and send. I'm pretty swamped with "day job" stuff right now, but I'll look over ASAP. Thanks, Carolus 02:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Carolus, I've already seen the test and graded it - by my reckoning, he passed with a nearly perfect score. Our exact scores might differ a bit, but I don't think there's any way he hasn't passed. Cheers, KGill _{talk email} 03:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

OnClassical

Hi Carolus,

I am the founder of OnClassical a resource of classical music. I would like to ask you if you are interested in putting all onclassical MP3 collection on imslp. Take care the "complete" collection is not already available through the onclassical.com site but I may send you a DVD or put a large zip file available for you somewhere. The only thing I would ask you is to put a link back to onclassical.com. Yes? Thanks.

Alegreen 10:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

We would be quite delighted to have the OnClassical files. The only limitation would be on the works recorded which are still under copyright - unless you have a license from the copyright owners allowing for free distribution under a Creative Commons or similar type of license. Send me an email and I'll send an address to which you can send the DVD. Absolutely no problem in putting in links back to you, either. If you prefer, we can even link to items you might have available at Amazon. (Let me know if you need to get things on Amazon as we can help with that also). Regards, Carolus 02:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Sardelli

Hi Carolus. I'm just wondering why you changed all of F.M. Sardelli's works to be licensed under cc-by-nc-nd when I can't find any (glancing through the category) that actually were originally uploaded that way. Did he send you an email saying that he wanted everything to be under a more restrictive license? This is a concern because of today's upload here - if Sardelli doesn't want any derivatives made of his works, then those parts would have to be taken down unless he gives special permission. Thanks, KGill _{talk email} 00:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I recall that he e-mailed me saying he wished to use the more restrictive form of the CC license - this was a while back now. This was after I mentioned to him that the cc-by 3.0 he was using allowed for the Ebay folks to take whatever they wanted and sell it. We can ask him if he will allow this one arrangement, of course. Just block the files until he says yes or no. Carolus 02:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Peters again

Hi Carolus, it's not urgent, but may you please have a look at this?
The book contains two waltzes which aren't yet available here: Kuss-Walzer, Op.400, and Schatz-Walzer, Op.418. According to worldcat the CR claim 1929 maybe correct. But the first two pages look suspiciously. Moreover there are two different plate numbers in this collection: 10759 (pp.3-63) and 10760 (pp.65ff). The CR claim appears only on the first score page I've scanned for you. The penultimate page of the scans would also be interesting. Many thanks! --Ralph Theo Misch 23:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ralph, Good thing it's not urgent. It's been a bit crazy around here with my "day job" so I've had little time to visit here. But now that I am around, I'll take a look! Carolus 03:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC). This is a case of something from the late 1920s (plate numbers are about right) which was almost certainly originally issued without notice being reprinted by the GDR "Peters" with a copyright notice. If you can find an earlier print, the USA status would likely be proved. The other Peters (Frankfurt) was absolutely notorious for this after-the-fact trick (putting a notice on something when it is reissued, often with the date of the reissue instead of the original date). This is one of the few instances I've seen of the GDR Peters engaging in this charade. It's free in the EU and Canada in any case. Post away. Carolus 05:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer! Both Waltzes are now uploaded. The date of the reprint I took from the penultimate page of the book. I hope I have interpreted the information correctly. All the best --Ralph Theo Misch 22:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Update: Cypressdome just told me about this. So according to Hofmeister XIX Op.418's piano version was already published by Peters in 1898? --Ralph Theo Misch 23:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Update 2: see here --Ralph Theo Misch 00:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Ha! My suspicions were correct, then. Good work. Carolus 03:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Breaks

They were there to prevent it from clashing into the Les Troyens post. I guess it's more convenient without them in any case. Hope you don't mind the design... Hope it's not too goofy ;) Cheers, Lndlewis10 18:42, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I like it going down the right side the way it does. Not goofy at all - thanks for doing it! Carolus 18:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Lndlewis10 18:45, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Bellini - Oboe Concerto

Question of copyright eligibility (Canada/EU) in Meylan's 1969 rendition/edition of the concerto. In the forward he states (of the piano reduction): "In the piano score an attempt has been made to provide a simplified version of the orchestral texture." It does appear quite simple indeed. Thoughts? Daphnis 02:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The only challenge to the originality on the reduction would be if Meylan simply copied (transcribed) the Violin I part into the right hand and the Cello/Bass into the left, perhaps making a few modifications any halfway professional pianist would do at sight - more or less unconsciously. There are some reductions like that - especially going back a bit further to the Vivaldi era. My guess is that his might just stand up, even if barely. Carolus 03:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Shall I upload for your consideration? Daphnis 03:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that should be an interesting comparison. Carolus 03:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, check it out. I'll leave it untagged pending your approval. Daphnis 03:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

There is not much he did apart from what I just described above. I think Meylan should remain listed as "editor" instead of arranger and that it should be tagged C*/65/C*. Carolus 03:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Thanks, Daphnis 03:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)