User talk:Pml/Archive 2

Archived Discussions of this Talk page
  1. Archives for 2007–08
  2. Archives for 2009
  3. Archives for 2010
  4. Archives for 2011
Current discussions

Contents

Berlioz scores

Hi, just a question - when you list "no scores available" do you mean that none are available at present, or that there are no PD scores available to be posted? In the case of the Les Francs-Juges, H 23: Concert Overture (Op.3), there is indeed a public domain score available - a reprint of Old Berlioz edition from Kalmus - which will hopefully find its way here at some point. Carolus 15:41, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Hi Carolus. The latter naturally, though I would perhaps have used slightly less ambiguous language if I'd thought about it. In case of the opera fragments, I seem to recall some publication (not NBE) in the 1970s, otherwise the date of first publishing would be the NBE volume of 2002. Regards, Philip Legge ♇ @ © talk 17:26, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Is there any particular reason you're tagging the Old Berlioz edition scores as "Non-PD EU"? They're urtext-type editions (even if not always done very well) that are well over 30 years past publication (the maximum allowable term for such an edition under the EU 93/98 directive). Weingartner died in 1943, so even if one were to argue for a life-plus-70, they would expire no later than 2014. Now I see. It has to do with Percy Edward Pinkerton's English text. Since he apparently died in 1946, the translations would not be PD in the EU until 2017. Thanks, Carolus 22:26, 8 January 2009 (EST)

Hi Carolus; I see you’ve answered your own question. I think I mistakenly put 2018 down as the year instead of 2017, so my arithmetic must be haywire today. Pinkerton was 91 years of age, and I only have a birth year of 1846 for the German translator Emma Klingenfeld, so I believe I'm not being overgenerous by assuming she lived to be less than a century old.
I haven't yet tidied up all of the redirects and wikilinks associated with the various uploads and moves, that will be sometime this evening I expect.Regards, Philip Legge ♇ @ © talk 22:55, 8 January 2009 (EST)
Just wanted to say thank you for all of your work uploading and cleaning the gesamtausgabe page!Snailey Yell at me Email me 16:17, 9 January 2009 (EST)

Sortable lists

Hi Philip. I'm indebted to you for your help in hiding the leading '0's in the sortable lists, and it's something I'll be using in the future on similar listings. It seems that almost anything is possible with a Wiki -- if you know where to find it! P.davydov 07:03, 9 February 2009 (EST)

Re: protecting talk pages

Look twice :) I protected the talk pages only from moving, not from editing. No good reason for anyone (except yourself possibly) to rename your talk page :) --Leonard Vertighel 07:16, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Regarding vandalism

Thank you for fighting the vandal today PML! Don't worry; you will not need to continue doing for long (I'm currently studying up on anti-vandalism procedure at Wikipedia). Thanks again! --Feldmahler 21:21, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Not a problem. S/He's a persistent troll, but it all comes to nought in the end. As soon as I saw the "you have new messages" flag appear (this page has been interestingly decorated at times today) I instantly jumped to the last 10 changes to see who I was going to have to block next! :D Philip Legge @ © talk 21:27, 22 February 2009 (EST)

6 Duets for 2 Violas (Stamitz, Carl Philipp)

Ciao Pml. I have just seen that you have marked V those duos,but I know that edition and I know for sure that it isn't an urtext edition. Lebermann put a lot of "his things" on it.So I think it should't be PD.

Ciao e buon lavoro

Carmar1791

Carmar, you're quite right, so it's no longer a question of 30y post publication but possibly 50/70y pma. I've flagged it for another review.
Ciao, Philip Legge @ © talk 18:01, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Email

I dropped you an email; respond if you will. -- Snailey Yell at me Email me 18:03, 27 February 2009 (EST)

Codex Buranus

Looks intruiging; thanks for adding it. It's always good to know that I'm not the only one doing featured scores ;-).-- Snailey Yell at me Email me 21:14, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

The ChoralWiki gets hit

[1] Letsdrinktea 21:13, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

  • The vandal seems to be vandalizing pages in the category Composers, you might want to tell them to do whatever was done here to stop the vandalism Letsdrinktea 21:21, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Spem in alium

Would it be okay for me to post (or you, for that matter) your edition of Spem in Alium? It's a nice work and a nice edition. (BTW, found it on MIT Archive)-- Snailey Yell at me Email me 22:16, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

DONE!! Philip Legge @ © talk 14:56, 5 April 2009 (AEST)
And with interest: other ridiculously large works in 19, 24, 36, 40, 54, and 54 (yes, also) parts! Mwahahahaha... Philip Legge @ © talk 17:28, 5 April 2009 (AEST)

New signature on Viola d'amore Concerto, RV 163 (Vivaldi, Antonio)

May I inquire as to why your signature on the Vivaldi Viola d'Amore concerto (Penius)?-- Snailey Yell at me Email me 12:10, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Hi, just sheer carelessness. Using "Add a file to this page" automatically inserts the name of the active user (i.e., me) as the uploader, which was not me; hence I should have re-edited the page afterwards to correct the ambiguity.
It was User:Penius (Talk · contribs) who uploaded the score, which being edited by Malipiero (†1973) unfortunately falls in the grey area between urtext (public domain after 30 years) and editorial contribution (min 50 years pma copyright). Hence the CR tag is currently 24/57/44, but a more liberal interpretation could be V*/57/V* (which would still result in it being blocked, presently).
Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 11:10, 21 April 2009 (AEST)
As I recall, Malipiero's Vivaldi editions always had his continuo realization in the score (which I suppose doubled as a keyboard part). I doubt it falls under the urtext exemption. Carolus 20:41, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
You're quite right, as usual, Carolus. The realisation is pretty much "by the numbers" however looking a bit more closely there are a few other minor editorial touches elsewhere, bugger. Delete now, restore in 2024? Regards, PML @ © 11:30, 21 April 2009 (AEST)
Yes, I think we have to be somewhat strict on that particular issue - even though his realization is very much "by the numbers" as you say. That's too bad in a way, because I hear that Ricordi is allowing all the Malipiero editions to go out of print since they're issuing a whole new series under a different editor now. Oh well, we can only push the envelope so far. Carolus 21:04, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Haydn: Symphonies 88-92

Hi, I can confirm now that the 1964 issues from HMP are identical with the Dover reprint of the 1951 volume. They are literally exactly the same engraving. As you know from my forum post, Kalmus has reprinted these as well. Looks like we're going to have the whole collection very soon! Carolus 22:02, 16 May 2009 (EDT)

Hi Carolus,
that's fabulous news – I was initially cautious of marking the 1964 scores of 88–91 accordingly.
There are some footnotes or apparent addendums to various of the symphonies in volumes 9 and 10: there's 4 pages at the end of Symphony 86 that don't appear on the Haydn107.com website, and there's a footnote to Symphony 91 indicating some revisions on the basis of a rediscovered autograph. Your thoughts?
Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 22:14, 16 May 2009 (EDT)

I just compared. Only a couple of (minor) actual changes - a reposition of slurs of Violin I in mm.88-91 of the last movement, plus addition of ties to the upper note of Violin II in mm.87-88. Most of the footnotes mention differences between Autograph, Leduc, and another early ed. which resulted in no actual change to the score (Leduc was close to the autograph, apparently). There's no way the altering of a slur and addition of a tie would stand, especially as the alterations were made on the basis of another public domain source (the autograph). Carolus 22:29, 16 May 2009 (EDT)

Schubert without watermark

Dear Philip,

I have seen, you uploaded some autograph form schubert.at. I just want to let you know, that they store the autographs also in a folder without watermarks. The scheme with watermark is: http://www.schubert-online.at/activpage/scans/__wasserzeichen_MH_15512_D1_008.jpg_pr_resize:100_pr_ Same without watermark is: http://www.schubert-online.at/activpage/scans/MH_15512_D1_008.jpg All the best, Yours --Konrad Stein 15:22, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

Dear Konrad,
I suspected the watermark free versions must exist, but that they might not be accessible publicly from the web. I'll be very interested to obtain the alternate copies and update those scores. Best regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 22:40, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

New Template

I created Template:PopSection to try to stop people from creating redundant sectional work pages. I implemented it for Le Cygne (Saint-Saëns, Camille), as an example. Feel free to mess with it!-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 20:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Berlioz Catalogue

Thanks for the link. I'm sure that will be useful for when Daphnis scans the old complete works edition next year (exciting!)-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 00:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

And I fixed the rest.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 00:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd be perfectly OK if you changed everything to Holoman numbers exclusively. Even though Berlioz approved the first 25 opus numbers, they seem to be more confusing than useful for a number of his works. I'm still looking around for the Choudens full score for Les Troyens, which is not easy to find by any means. Carolus 04:35, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

For the titles which are on the shorter side and where the opus number is unambiguous, I've included both. Actually it's up to opus 28 he (HB) appears to have approved, I was typing from memory; the earliest assignment of "29" is 15 years posthumously. But yes, I think its obligatory to include the Holoman numbers for (almost) completely unambiguous reference. Philip Legge @ © talk 04:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Article in October edition of ABC "Limelight" about IMSLP

Have you seen the latest (October 2009) edition of the ABC "Limelight" magazine? I just bought mine today. There is an article on page 14 entitled "The End of Music Stores?" which has quite a write-up about IMSLP. It ends by saying "What was the domain of princes has now been gifted freely to students and music lovers the world over. What better way to change the world."

I was going to send you a link but there is no access to the text of articles on the ABC Limelight website. See if you can find a copy, or I could scan the article and email it to you as a .pdf attachment (slightly naughty from the copyright point of view, but it is for private research and critical analysis after all). Aldona 12:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to add it to IMSLP:Press coverage. --Leonard Vertighel 18:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Aldona; no, I wasn't aware of it. I only tend to buy limelight (with lower case) when I notice something particularly interesting on the cover. I'll have to rush out and snaffle a copy sometime over the weekend... Philip Legge @ © talk 01:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Schoenberg - Gurre-Lieder

Philip, I recently started an intense study of this spectacular and massive work and had recent occasion to use your expertly-prepared and very well typeset choral score as a reference and wanted to add my personal thanks and congratulations on a (formidable) job well-done. I've decided to now work on scanning the full score from the 1920 Universal Edition copy, for which I was able to get my hands on the A3 sized full score, and will be scanning it in very high quality, hopefully making yet another great addition to our collection soon. I felicitate you for your work and providing me the inspiration to work on this project myself. Daphnis 02:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear Daphnis,
a scan of the epic Gurre-Lieder would be another wonderful addition here. The choral score was commissioned for a performance back in 2003 but ended up being something of a labour of love, since the choruses are not only wonderful pieces in their own right but given their difficulty aren't adequately served by the existing chorus parts. It's one of my favourite pieces of music for the richness and imagination of its orchestration - the change in style caused by the later completion of Part Three brings a chamber music sensibility to what could have just been an essay in 20th century giganticism and monumentalism, given the size and scale of the piece.
A scan of the 1912 facsimile of the fair copy of the manuscript full score would be just as valuable to have, even if it doesn't record the later small modifications to the score - however as it was issued by Universal Edition in a limited edition of only 500 copies, it is probably very difficult to get hold of except in the form of the 2003 reprint in the complete works edition. Schönberg was a skilled visual artist and the full score is a demonstration of his calligraphic craftmanship as well as his musical artistry. There's barely a note or line of ink out of place, page after page. You can see why it inspired Webern and Berg to implore Schönberg to finish the work. Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 08:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Parts II & III available now, Part I coming tomorrow. Daphnis 23:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Mozart Symphonies

Dear Philip Legge,
I have seen your comments on Gory's talk page. I am currently working on a project for all of Mozart's symphonies, and would like you to help. Do you know any software to convert files from PDF to MUS?
Thanks, ClassicalComposers 04:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I can answer that: Finale comes with something called SmartScan, which does OK optical recognition, for starters.-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 13:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Uh... I couldn't find that under any menu. My version is Finale 2010, FYI. ClassicalComposers 22:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

JE Bach picture

The picture of Johann Ernst Bach came from the "BrightCecilia" forum's composer gallery - I should have spotted it, as it is quite obvious when you point it out. (in fact, they have a coloured version of exactly the same picture directly below it, labelled "CPE Bach"! Feel free to delete it and/or replace it with a more appropriate pic.

I haven't disappeared off the face of the earth, just have even less time to contribute (I didn't think that was possible!) But on a brighter not, it is not all work, some of my computer time has been replaced by music practice. Aldona 20:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

PM

Hi Philip,

I tried to send you a personal mesage concerning the mass of Hofer. Did you receive it?

Notenschreiber 16:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Notenschreiber,
I don't have any new PMs on the IMSLP forums, nor do I have any new mail from IMSLP (using the "Email this user" feature), so I'd say I haven't received it...
May I trouble you to send it again?
Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 20:52, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

A. Soler's Sonatas

Dear Pml, will you be kind enough as to help me convert files from .SIB to .XML? I really need your help on this. Thanks! ClassicalComposers 16:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Pml, thanks for what you did to the page numbers on Keyboard Sonatas R.1-10 (Soler, Antonio)! Can you do the same with the next to pages? Thanks! ClassicalComposers 21:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi CC, that's done. Why are you shy of the "Uploader" tag? It is IMSLP policy that the uploader of a given file is identified in the upload field, and unless I am very mistaken, you are not logged in with the username of "Uploader". Anyone visiting those pages can click on the direct link to the file to see who it was that uploaded it, or see your username via the page history, so you are not really hiding anything!
By the way, the format for Work Navigation Boxes is to follow the formatting of work entries, therefore Template:SolerSonatas should actually be located at Template:Keyboard Sonatas (Soler, Antonio), and the works pages reference {{Keyboard Sonatas (Soler, Antonio)}}. Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 21:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I realise that, both of them. I located the template at the first page so it can be used without the trouble of typing out the full page name; I will move it to its new location after it is completed. Secondly, I did not use my user name on the Soler sonata uploads because the file shows as 3 lines (instead of the usual 2) with my complete username included. And besides, I have nothing to hide anyway. ClassicalComposers 22:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You may not have anything to hide, but reverting one of my edits after six minutes, and archiving most of your talk page including part of a current discussion didn't exactly demonstrate that to me. :) Your username doesn't actually cause the file template to be displayed as three lines, unless you are viewing the page at less than the standard resolution. The template displays your full username quite comfortably with two lines per file, at the default size. By the way, you can just simply copy and paste {{Keyboard Sonatas (Soler, Antonio)}} from the Template page into each of the Sonata pages, rather than mucking around with redirects. Philip Legge @ © talk 22:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
It's just that my computer screen is very small. (1024 x 768) ClassicalComposers 23:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
If I had to hide it, I wouldn't have written "Part 2 of 2" in the subject line, would I? :)
You may have a small computer screen, but with respect, that's your problem, not everyone else's :). You should use links to Keyboard Sonatas (Soler, Antonio)} rather than {{SolerSonatas}} to match the remainder of the Work Navigation Boxes style. Also, you might want to bear in mind "Please note that all contributions to IMSLP are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." when you include comments such as "Please don't alter this title". If you wanted consistency about that title heading, why didn't you put it in the template?
As for the Part 2 of 2 in the subject line, yes it was obvious what you had done, but equally unhelpful seeing as viewers of your talk page would have had to link to another page to see the history of that conversation. Philip Legge @ © talk 23:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Mozart - Church Sonatas, Numbering.

Hi, I note that there appear to be some different systems of numbering these sonatas from the one initiated by Breitkopf as part of the Alte Mozart Ausgabe back around 1880 - which is still widely encountered. I'm almost inclined to use the following schema: "Church Sonata, K.###" or "Church Sonata, K.###, Key" for these. What do you think? Carolus 06:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The numbering is mostly sensible and the same as the NMA except for Nos. 15 and 16 interposing between Nos. 8 and 9, so I'd be tempted to leave them – there's more wrong with the piano sonatas or concertos... Regards, Philip Legge @ © talk 06:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Upon further searching of library records, I think you're probably right. The old Breitkopf numbering, like the old numbering of Dvorak's symphonies, just takes a long time to vanish. Carolus 07:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://imslp.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Pml/Archive_2&oldid=820859"