Talk:Parlour music

Merge?

My feeling is that these 2 pages need to be merged and then the whole thing completely re written. Trying to fix this with 2 seperate pages is simply going to get too confusing as there are parts in both which are useful. The main problem I can see is how to explain a relatively complex subject in laymans terms without the whole thing becoming one big mess. Bassmonkey 17:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. Exactly the same topic. Only question is which direction. I'm a Yank, but I don't mind if we end up with "parlour". - Jmabel | Talk 07:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this article should be merged with "parlor music," because it deals with a somewhat different repertory, and its approach is idiosyncratic to van der Merwe. Actually, the two different spellings should be kept: the article on "parlour music" represents a European viewpoint and repertory, the one on "parlor music" is oriented towards American practice.

What two pages? What is complex about the subject? Hyacinth 02:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Both articles refer to the same subject albeit with differing viewpoints. It is confusing to have two different spellings of the same term. It would make far more sense to put a subheading in the other article to deal with van der Merwe since both articles are about essentually the same thing! --Lendorien 23:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Revision

This article needs revision to make it easier to understand for the laymen. The content needs to be re-worked and expanded, and the sentence structure needs to be simplified. - Simon, August, 2005 [deemphasized by Hyacinth 02:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)]

What is difficult to understand? Hyacinth 02:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Chord based vs melodic clarification

In contrast to the chord-based classical music era, parlour music features melodies which are harmonically-independent or not determined by the harmony. This produces parlour chords, many of them added tone chords if not extended such as the dominant thirteenth, added sixth, and major dominant ninth.

This paragraph makes little sense to me. The two examples show melodies with very clearly implied (and quite simple) harmony--the Mozart example is little but arpeggiations. Might the article be discussing two separate meanings of "parlour music"? EldKatt (Talk) 17:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

van der Merwe

Why is this identified as "Peter van der Merwe's term"? The term predates him by decades, probably by a century. - Jmabel | Talk 07:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Please cite an older source using the term popular music. See #Um...WHAT? below. Hyacinth 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

General comments

Parlour/parlor music is music composed for, or arranged for, performance by amateurs in their own homes. The author of this article has expanded the term to cover many styles and genres: band music, choral music, operetta, folk music, even parlour/parlor music itself. What she is really writing about is not the specific genre of parlour/parlor music, but a much larger repertory of what a Swedish musicologist calls "Middle Music," falling somewhere between popular and classical music. It's simply not true that this music "features melodies which are harmonically-independent or not determined by the harmony;" the author's own musical examples defeat this point. Nor has van der Merwe concept of "parlour chords" been accepted by any other musicologist or music theorist. I suggest that this article be rewritten to deal specifically with parlour/parlor music, or that it be given a different heading. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.170.79.119 (talk) 18:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Who is "she"? Please cite a source for that definition of parlor music. Hyacinth 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Um...WHAT?

Seriously. The article is a mess. Granted it's been a while since I've had music theory, but it's even too much mumbo jumbo for even me to read. In addition, it sounds like the term coined by some guy (whose article has a single line stub), rather than anything accepted as a standard. I'm gonna find a couple tags to add here, as I'm not positive it fits deletion criteria, but....seriously. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 16:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

What parts are "mumbo jumbo"? See the argument above ([#Chord based vs melodic clarification]) that it is not Van Der Merwe's term but a much older term. Hyacinth 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Seriously!! The problem with this article is not that it's too technical, but that's it's hopelessly confused, and out of touch with what scholars of the subject consider to be parlour/parlor music. SEROUSLY -- the article should be deleted.

Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 02:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, and more importantly, feel free to describe what other scholars write about parlor music. Hyacinth 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I have eliminated the entire paragraph referring to Van Der Merwe discussion of "parlour chords" and also the musical examples because not a single scholar of popular music or music theory has accepted the claims made in this paragraph, and the musical examples do not support the points put forward in this paragraph anyway. User:greenmountain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.79.17 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 7 August 2007

Please do not sign your posts with a user name when you not logged in. There is not way we can know if User:greenmountain is you or not. If that is your user name and you want us to know that it is, then please log-in and sign your above post using ~~~~. Thanks. --Parsifal _Hello 04:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk page

This talk page is not understandable. I recommend the following:

• Do not attempt to emphasize your point by making your message stand out by extraneous formatting. I removed this formatting and retitled some headings to indicate the topic under discussion and not the first opinion presented.
• Provide context. If you think two articles should be merged, say which ones.
• Everyone must sign their comments in some manner.

Hyacinth 02:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediant-octave mode examples

Should this section really be here? Since:

• this mode apparently applies rather more widely than just to parlour songs
• many of the examples listed are not from parlour songs and so do not belong in this article.

I suggest it is moved to another article concerning modes, or to its own short article. Ben Finn (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision needed

A reference to "mediant-octave modal frame" in the entry The Battle Hymn of the Republic links to this page.

The term "Parlour mode" is a virtually unkown term in musicology, which from discussion above apparently originates from one writer, and has not been taken up within the wider musicological community. It needs at least some editing to remove the impression given that this is standard accepted theory.

In addition, some statements are particularly questionable:

"the chord-based classical music era" might be reasonable if the reference is to Classical rather than classical, and is suggesting structure which is primarily harmonic rather than contrapuntal, but the argument which follows seems to suggest that something else is intended.

"parlour music features melodies which are harmonically-independent". This is by no means standard analysis. The hyphenated term "harmonically-independent" requires clarification.

"mediant-octave mode" is a term unknown outside the writing of the musicologist on whose writing this article draws too heavily. Quickest (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2011 (UTC)