User talk:Sesquialtera II/archive01

Grove

The source was Private Eye, which had at least a couple of news items about this as I recall; though I expect the problems must have been reported elsewhere too. I'll add this to the article. Ben Finn 19:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hey, thanks!! That's a very pleasant thing to see when I log on in the morning. And welcome to the project--there's lots to do, and I see you have some interests that overlap with mine! The north German organ school needs to be written up in some detail, as you've noticed. I've written up some of their predecessors, and some of the earlier members already, but an actual organist doing some of the work is what we need. Oh, and thanks for making those Grove templates; I'll start using them (I must have cut and pasted 400 of the old-style template from my /sources page) Best wishes! Antandrus (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Pachelbel

Hello! I noticed your edits to Bach pages and your userpage states Pachelbel as one of the composers you're interested in. I thought I'd invite you to check Johann Pachelbel out and maybe participate in its editing - I've been working on the article a lot with EncMstr who's helping out with style and grammar, and many of the issues you mention on your userpage are addressed already. We'd greatly appreciate any input. Jashiin 16:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding :) About the recordings, I think a chorale of some sort wouldn't hurt since chorales were an important part of his output. Maybe one of the "Vom Himmel hoch" ones, they're short and more accessible.

Also, if you have the time, check the talk page. There are some technical questions there that need answers, and I believe someone with musical education can provide those easily. Jashiin 09:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grove online vs. 2001

Greetings again! Is there any reason why we can't have both? We could have a 2001 template for the 29 volume print edition (which I don't have) as well as one for the online edition (to which I have a subscription). I based my own Grove reference style on their "how to cite this website" ([1]) -- which seems the most accurate way, since I actually am using the online version. By the way I still use the 1980 print edition surprisingly often; I'm finding a fair number of articles that were either more detailed in the earlier edition, or written by a different person with a different slant. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 03:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good! I like it! ( {{GroveOnline}} ). The only potential problem I see with templates is that they increase server load (it's been discussed endlessly somewhere or other -- maybe Village Pump/technical) -- at least unless you use subst: (as in {{subst:GroveOnline}}). Even if we "subst" them though, the templates have the great advantage of making our citations consistent. Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 21:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I moved this from the talk page of the template, since I got no response there (you can watch pages by hitting the button at the top next to the move button, or next to the "this is a minor edit" box).

A big reason that people link dates is that even the English Wikipedia is used internationally, and there are different standards for the order of dates (Day/Month/year, Month/year/day, etc.), and when you go into your preferences you can set how you want to see dates. This only works when the dates are linked. It's useful because then people don't go around changing date, or getting confused if the dates are in mm/dd/yy format. So I think even for references it's useful to link the dates. Makemi 22:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC) So, if I get no further response I'll change it back. Makemi 17:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, nevermind. I thought you had changed it back, but you hadn't. Sometimes I need to remember to turn my brain on. Sorry. Makemi 19:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Organs

Hey, welcome, and thanks for your work on organs (and backing me up on Dieterich Buxtehude). I was wondering if you would be interested in looking at Portative organ and Positive organ. Their entries, plus the one on cabinet organs, in New Grove makes my head hurt. These articles seem to be taken part and parcel from the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittannica, and so are fairly inaccurate. Perhaps the answer is to simply make a Historical organs page and discuss them all at once, but I have heard numerous contemporary organs referred to as "portative", so I dunno. Makemi 21:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of works by Johann Sebastian Bach

Haha, yeah I guess I am :) And thanks for the encouragement - I was about to get really annoyed by how outrageously big the list is and was thinking about letting it go. I'll have to stop soon anyway though.. its 2am here :( Jashiin 23:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German organ schools

I found this one article titled "German organ schools" in the French Wikipedia and I think it could be useful here too. Now, I'm not THAT much of an organ expert, but I thought I might translate the article and maybe complete it and make a decent article out of it someday. I wonder if you would be interested in helping out? You certainly know more about the topic than I do. I translated most of the French article here: User:Jashiin/Translations. Some of it seems rather.. uh, inaccurate? (especially the "musical forms" bit), but its a start. Jashiin 21:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, I've added organ repertoire to my watchlist. I'm not sure if its the best solution to incorporate information about organ schools into it (rather than have a few separate articles for big schools with big lists of composers), but I guess its too early to talk about it. Jashiin 08:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fairy-Queen

It's cool that you guys are doing The Fairy-Queen. I just got out of a program that was obsessed with historical performance, so I know what they must be going through, although we never did anything costumed (because of fights with the opera dept.). Are you guys doing Baroque dance too? It's kind of interesting stuff, in a nerdy way. It really helped me understand how and beat can be strong yet not pounded (all the downbeats tend to be when you're up on your toes). I just did the article because I like Purcell and thought more of his stuff deserved articles.

Now, about those templates. Do you have access to the 2001 Grove? Because I don't, and for a couple articles, such as Dieterich Buxtehude, they have the template added, but the volume and page are missing, so you end up with the confusing and ugly {{{3}}}, {{{4}}}. showing up on the page. I guess the best fix for this is to either add that info, which I figured maybe you could do since you added the template and Oberlin probably has the 2001, or I could switch it to the online version. Whichever. Makemi 23:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bach

Hi, Sesqui

Thanks for reverting the recent insertion of 'Germany' to the bioplate in the Bach article. Am I right to make this matter an issue? I just feel uncomfortable about the culture-centric assumption that the nation state has always been with us, especially with respect to Germany.

I majored in organ performance many years ago, but I've since given up music (after years as an academic), to become a word-nerd.

Tony 23:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just had another go at the opening of Pachelbel, and wrongly cited Jashiin instead of you (and misspelt his name, as well). :-( Tony 03:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out

Organs aren't the only things that need work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_feste_Burg_ist_unser_Gott —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 21:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No prob.

Not a problem, I just replied on your e-mail so that the whole world wouldn't see it. Makemi 22:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar (for you)

I only just found out that anyone could award people with barnstars, (as in, I thought they were only for admins). I saw that you didn't have one yet and thought you deserved it. So here goes. I thank you, along with Mr. Wessler, for all your wonderful work. :-) — Trisdee 21:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Handel

I'm totally with you on this. If I were you, I would just be bold and create the new page "References To Handel" and export all the crap to that, rather than worrying about building the consensus before doing so. I did the same for Marduk and already feel much better! ElectricRay 21:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back!

Glad to have you back :) Check out what we've been doing in Johann Pachelbel, I daresay you might like it! You were the one who inspired me to create the images :) Jashiin 19:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks for the offer! Actually, I think its not neccessary to have sound samples for every notated example. In fact, if you could make one for the big chorale image it'd be absolutely fantastic and quite enough, since all other examples illustrate much simpler concepts.

The discussion at Talk:Johann Pachelbel seems to show that the C major fugue isn't really an important example, so if you could record a different piece instead of it (unless you already started preparing that exact fugue, then by all means go ahead), it'd be better. Particularly the G minor fantasia is a beautiful piece (..and it would make the otherwise unremarkable section about fantasias much nicer looking :). Jashiin 18:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Happy Birthday!

Thank you so much! and welcome back!! Regards, Trisdee 01:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

recordings

Hi Sesqui

Those links to the prelude and the fugue lead to huge amounts of code—line after line—but no facility for downloading a sound file. Any other way?

Tony 01:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS I see from the discussion above that you're the performer of the Pachelbel Toccata in C that I ... um ... sounded off about. Sorry, I don't want to tread on toes.

If you're making further recordings, can you do some more trial and error to ahieve a better tone for the instrument, which, to me, lacks fundamental (i.e., it's too fizzy). The mid-range is a little fat, perhaps, and the bass needs to be boosted somehow. The second and subsequent entries are indistinct. In terms of the performance, it's good, but I think there needs to be a totally different approach to 'pulse'. The initial repeated notes can be wonderful if each treated differently. (I'd be going for a 'duuuuh - duh - duh - duh' effect by manipulating both (1) the length of each note, i.e., the gap between it and the next note, and (2) the length of each beat, i.e., the agogic distortion that makes the second note start after it would in a strictly timed treatment.)

I hope I don't sound bossy <grimace>. Tony 01:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I hit the 'Prelude' link, I get a page that starts and continues for about 30 pages like this:

OggS�zn�«õˆ��vorbis�D¬ÿÿÿÿî�ÿÿÿÿ¸�OggSzn�Ñ*>Ž�-ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿq�vorbis�Xiph.Org libVorbis I 20040629��vorbis+BCV��1L(Ä€ÐU� ˜6�k§µÖZk‚¤vZkªµÖZk&µ¶ZkµÖZkµÖZkµÖZc 4d��@(J�´dRLJ)e GŽrä9HÊ'¥(G bâ9è=õdkM¦¤ä[MJ)%�

A few seconds later, my browser crashes. I wonder whether these could be uploaded to WP just for this purpose, since it might be hard to transfer such big files via email (10 MB limit for me). Tony 10:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OK if I send you an email? Tony 01:12, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of compositions by Johann Pachelbel

Hello again,

I organized the page thematically today but a few works do not have instrumentation/genre provided and I don't know where to put them. I made an "Unknown" section for such works, do you think you could help me out with this? (ie. I thought maybe Perreault has some sort of an explanation somewhere).

I was also thinking about making a separate article for a list of doubtful works (the ones marked *), since they clutter everything up and are somewhat misleading/confusing (article: "Pachelbel composed three ricercars", list: 4 ricercars, etc). What do you think about this?

Oh, and I've added a notice about the "first true string quartet" to Johann Pachelbel, I thought it was important to mention this in the article. Could you provide a reference note, with a page number? Please :) Jashiin 09:42, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Handel

Way to move the works! Did you see the silliness on the talk page? Oh well. By the way, and article that I mostly wrote, Trobairitz, is in Peer Review right now. It would be great if you could take a look at it. Mak emi 22:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, do not even get me started on that list at the end. If you check out the edits made by Bethchen you might get the picture. The notes/references thing is problematic, and within Wikipedia there doesn't seem to be any good clear guideline. People seem to want the new inline <ref>Foo </ref> style, but I can't figure out a good way to have both that and page numbers for each. The whole thing is pretty buggy. I agree that "sources" should go under references, I'll change that now, and continue to try to figure out the frigging cite system. I've just been working on messing with the sound uploading stuff at commons as a preliminary to getting a sound file to add to the article, but I have to find a good edition first, since frankly I can't quite tell between the lines/spaces in the facsimile. Thanks, Mak emi 22:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like there's some discussion of the references system going on at WP:CITE, and on the page on Meta at m:Talk:Cite/Cite.php. Check out what I did at Charles Ives and see if it makes sense to you. I'm thinking I should do something like that. Cheers, Mak emi 16:13, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your Georg Boem edits

... as well as your other excellent work. I'll be playing Boem a week from Sunday; I do so like the partitas for communion meditations because you can stop or repeat and make them as long or short as you want and no one will be the wiser.

You may also be interested in [2], where I have been starting to add some stuff on repertoire.

Also you may wish to contribute any performances you've recorded where you're comfortable releasing copyright. We have few and I wish we had more.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 02:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

adding an organ builder to the Category: Pipe Organ Builders

I wanted to add Martin Pasi of Pasi Organ Builders http://www.pasiorgans.com to the Ccategory: Pipe Organ Builders but I cannot figure out how to edit that page.

Can you help me with this? How do you add a page to a category? Jvonholstein 13:26, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French organ

Hello, I wrote most of pages about pipe organ and harpsichord (instrument and composers) on the French Wiki and I can help translating some stuff to english, if you need it. Gérard 20:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Sowerby

May I ask what possible point there was in moving the list of Sowerby's selected works to a separate page? Apart from the inconvenience of separating them, it leaves a reference under "Canticle of the Sun" to "mentioned above" when it is no longer mentioned above because there is nothing above. Would you mind terribly if I undid that edit and reattached the list of works to the main article? Ranthlee 16:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]