Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Holst - First Suite

Holst - First Suite

Problems playing these files? See media help.

Gustav Holst's "First Suite in E-flat for Military Band", first composed in 1909, is considered one of the cornerstone masterworks in the concert band repertoire.

Great recording. Now all we need is the Second Suite ~~and a replacement for that horrid musopen recording of Jupiter on The Planets~~ nvm found a USAF recording :).

Nominate and support. --haha169 (talk) 05:18, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm surprised noone else has voted on this - I must admit I usually hold off on voting for a bit in order to facilitate closing - but, eh, let me start the ball rolling. Support. This is a wonderful piece, very well played, and will be a fine addition to FS. Only flaw is that it seems a little on the quiet side - I had to turn my speaker up a bit. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very well played, it is quite quiet, but that's not so much of a problem with headphones (I used both). —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 2:38pm • 03:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The beginning is indeed very quiet, I don't think any recording is louder. First Suite has lots of dynamics variation! :) --haha169 (talk) 04:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'll take a look at the sheet music if I can get my hands on it, for the dynamics. For a suite this grand it is a bit quiet, nonetheless Holst's compositions are musical genius, a 22-second applause with fade out for the third is a bit much in my honest opinion, I'm not very familiar with sound-editting programs like Audacity so I'll leave that for someone else. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 4:46pm • 05:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - IMSLP has the full 1921 Boosey & Co. scores for First Suite. --haha169 (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - I will see what I can do on audacity. How many seconds would be a better length? --Guerillero | My Talk 20:08, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        12 seconds with a fade out after 10 seconds would be ideal. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 10:08am • 23:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Checked score, the start is meant to be quiet, it's piano for several bars then pianissimo before a crescendo where the dynamics increase to mezzoforte so the piece is supposed to be relatively quiet. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 9:32pm • 10:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support; the tuning problem at the start of the first file can be lived with. It's very good, overall. I don't have a problem with the dynamics at the start. I'd say six seconds of applause with a fade-out. The listener will get the point. Mega-point: Can the filename of an arrangement have "(arr.)" or "Arrangement of ...", please? It's very misleading when you expect to hear the original. Tony (talk) 02:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I have cut the applause to ~7-8 seconds and faded out. I'm not sure what I can do about the file name, I do not have move privileges on Commons. --haha169 (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Applause: nice, thank you. Nothing much can be done about the Commons file name, I guess. Do they have a protocol, I wonder? Probably not. And so many drive-by visitors upload, I guess it would be hard to enforce. Tony (talk) 10:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - You could request a rename: Commons:COM:FR. Jujutacular ^talk 11:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Before you do: Is this an arrangement? It was composed for military band, and is being performed by a military band - no arrangement would be necessary (or desireable). Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        I am a file mover here and on comons if you have a name in mind please drop it on my talk page --Guerillero | My Talk 00:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I simply thought Tony would know. This is either the original or the 1921 arrangement, but the differences between them are too subtle and I'm not familiar enough with the differences to tell which one it is. --haha169 (talk) 01:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Further research: I think this is the 1921 arrangement, if it can be called an arrangement. Boosey published it in 1921 with some score changes (since Holst's original 1908 manuscript was messy and full of notes). So I don't believe it can be considered an arrangement, per se. The 1921 version deals more with fixing the score itself than the music. --haha169 (talk) 05:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)\[reply]

Promoted all --Guerillero | My Talk 17:24, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]