Talk:Minuets in G major and G minor

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

Ambiguous

Beethoven's Minuet in G is also extremely famous, no? Is there some way we can disambiguate this piece? Its tricky since its spurious so its not really appropriate to include a (Bach) in parenthesis. Maybe Minuet in G major (BWV Anh. 114) as that allows for that? Perhaps somehow linking or even redirecting it to the Notebook for Anna Magdalena Bach? DavidRF (talk) 20:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I stumbled onto this page looking for Beethoven's; however, I'm not an expert at Wikipedia editing so I don't know how to disambiguate--but I support it. --Coching (talk) 05:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is another Minuet in G in the Notebook for Anna Magdalena, namely Minuet_in_G_major,_(BWV_Anh._116). This sounds as if it might also be by Petzold, but it's hard to find information about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.96.174 (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The copy of the notebook I have (ABRSM 1997 ed Richard Jones) lists it as anon while giving the 114 as Petzold. Until people make a definite attribution, we'll have to leave it unidentified.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify, please-

The article says "The Minuet in G major is found in the 1725 Notebook for Anna Magdalena Bach, where it appears with its companion piece, Minuet in G minor, as a pair to be performed da capo."

Is the "companion piece" Anh 115? The wiki article "da capo" doesn't specify exactly what the term means in this context. Does it mean that the two pieces are to be repeated in their entirety, in the order 114, 115, 114, 115? Would that entirety include the internal repeats in each piece? Or does it mean that 114 is played, then 115, then 114 again? And then what of internal repeats? What reference shows that the pieces are paired, and exactly how? Thanks for any light that can be shed on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnOFL (talk • contribs) 22:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"da capo" means "from the beginning". How you interpret that is up to you. sugarfish (talk) 07:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it necessary for the composer's name to be on the title?

Maybe it can just be Minuets in G Major and G minor or Minuets in G Major and G minor, BWV Anh. 114 & 115? The name between brackets' more likely to be used when there're other songs of the same name. The fact that these minuets have been wrongly attributed to J.S. Bach for such a long time wouldn't be enough for the real author's name to be on the title: that's something the reader will find out by reading the article. Besides, the reader would wrongly think the article's about other minuets in G major and G minor. u v u l u m (talk) 21:24, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Minuets in G major and G minor: your proposal had wrong capitalisation of "major". --Francis Schonken (talk) 04:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Another possibility would be Minuets BWV Anh. 114–115. Any objections? --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've just noticed this. I can see the rationale for the above, yet the result is still unsatisfactory, imo.

The name between brackets' more likely to be used when there're other songs of the same name.

Well, my friend, there have been countless minuets in G major and minor; these two particular ones are not by any stretch of the imagination the primary ones in those keys, from which all others need to be disambiguated. Yet that is what the formatting is suggesting.

A solution is not suggesting itself to me at this point. But can I adopt my best Edward VIII voice and say "Something must be done"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re "... are not by any stretch of the imagination the primary ones in those keys" – incorrect: "Minuet in G" seems to refer almost always to one of the minuets which are the topic of this page. No "solution in search of a problem" is needed where things are thus straightforward. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong modern notation

The score for the minuet in g major in modern notation seems to have a typo. The lower mordent in the fifth measure should be on the C note, not the D. Gammaflow330 (talk) 09:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented the score example out: the "score" extension is currently disabled, so that even such simple repair is not possible (only the scores exactly as written before the extension was disabled can still be called). --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that the LilyPond score is wrong. To me, it's a correct transcription of the image above it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New recordings

The recordings in the top of the page should be replaced by a midi or a different recording for the following reasons:

1. The rhythm is unstable.

2. The ornamentation is sloppily performed, particularly on the 31st measure of the G minor minuet.

3. On the 25th and 26th measures of the minuet in G major, the lower voice of the bass clef is notated as a half note, but is released as if it was a quarter note in the recording.

4. Audible changes in position; the person is not comfortable playing the pieces.

5. Uneven finger strength → unnatural changes in volume, in particular on the 24th bar of the G minor minuet.

6. Missed trill on the 2nd beat of the 22nd measure in the upper clef.

As I see it, these videos are meant to be unbiased "glass-enclosed" exemplars of the written pieces, and this recording does not accurately portray them. 92.34.137.195 (talk) 13:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]