User talk:Carolus/archive35



Is it possible to remove both my account and my composer page? Or at least everything besides the Serse arrangement I've uploaded? I'm in the middle of doing some major recataloguing as well as having made a new account using my real name and want to basically completely start over with my composition uploads. I could remove em 1 by 1 but seems like there must be a quicker way? Thanks David Hamlin 07:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, in fact it's far better if we remove things. We have to do it one-by-one also, but it really does get rid of them. I'll start tonight. It could take a while. Carolus 02:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks most of the stuff isn't going to be back as I've begun taking lessons in composition from a professional composer and I've realized that more or less everything besides the Xerxes arrangement were mostly my self learning composition and while they worked as trial/error lessons they're not really worthy of being even kept after the lesson's learned. My new compositions once they're done will be posted under my new account DavidHamlin. Thanks for all the help David Hamlin 06:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey I just logged in to check if stuff was gone but it's still there? David Hamlin 06:49, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'll try and remove it soon. Got slammed by the WIMA inundation, so there's been much more copyright review and tagging to do around here lately. I'm moving this thread to my regular talk page. Thanks for the reminder. Carolus 07:09, 18 February 2012 (UTC) UPDATE: All gone expect for the Handel arrangement! Carolus 08:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Scans from the national library of Norway

Thank you for creating the category. I must ask you however if you could change it a little bit. We (the National Library of Norway) are in the process of digitize our complete collection of manuscripts and norwegian printed music. I would therefore very much like if I could have two categories; one for manuscripts and one for printed scores. I'll upload some printed Svendsen scores with autograph corrections on monday. I'll stop making the tabs :) Asj 18:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

That should be easy enough to do. I'll fix and put a message on your talk page when done. Carolus 01:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I forgot to explain why: the scans of printed music is presented different from the manuscripts in the scans. This scanning is done both as part of our library's digitalization-project and as part of a recently started and in-development project called the Norwegian Musical Heritage project (se here for an english summary if interested: Department of Music, University of Oslo. Regarding the PD composers I would deem it as very lightly that all the editions, when ready, will make their way to imslp. The Svendsen edition (on which I'm currently participating) will (hopefully) start publishing in December (with the 1st Symphony). Asj 16:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for the tips!

Thank you for your message re Friml etc and the templates. There's still a bit of catching up for me to do - with the Sibley upload process being so user-friendly, it's easy to get carried away and just try to upload everything with impunity, not realizing how much hard work it is to move things to the US server. I've got a couple of weeks off work coming up, so I will keep looking through Sibley. It's good to have the link list as it makes it possible to systematically go through all of their scores. Aldona 08:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Sonates and Suites (Becker, Dietrich)

Hi Carolus, Forgot to ask that the earlier version of the score be deleted as it's less complete than the newer. Thanks Wrshannon 05:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem! Carolus 05:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Carolus, I received the following mail from M.Bolognani:

Dear Noteschreiber,

I am Mario Bolognani, the editor of While I appreciate some reuse of the music published in my site, I would see an explicit reference to my site when some of my scores are republished on IMSLP.

Thank you for accepting my request. Cheers

Mario Bolognani Via Celimontana 15 00184 Roma Italy

Using your template I would think, that we have already complied with this condition. What can we change? He wants to see "", I think. Where is the right place for that? Or should I stop uploading scores from the site of M. Bolognani? Notenschreiber 22:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

No need to stop uploading. We'll change the template so that he is satisfied with its wording if necessary. Thanks for the note. Carolus 01:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I compared my uploads with that of Alexander Gagarinov (Concerto for 2 flutes in G major (Cimarosa, Domenico)). He regards the score as a scan and not as a typeset and writes "scan:" in the upper corner on the right side. Maybe I should do the same. What do you mean? And another question: The editor template doesn't work in the editor entry (red coloured), but works well on the bottom of the page. Why? Notenschreiber 13:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

We classify these as typesets because they are editions which are less than 25 years old produced with computer music engraving software. The fact that the files might be scans of printouts makes no difference. It's necessary for this classification in order to make sure a Creative Commons license applies in each case. The reason the link is red is because there is no composer category page for Mario Bolognani. We can create one easily enough. It is fine with me to use "" in the "Scanner" (typesetter) field. Generally speaking, we prefer that the name of the person who used the software appears in that field, but the company or organization name is fine also. Make sure he knows that the template we are using automatically generates a link back to his website - which is why it is better to use the template. Thanks, Carolus 05:08, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky Complete Collected Works

Dear Sir,

I'm a last year cello student and currently writing my thesis (for obtaining my Masters Degree in Music) about Tchaikovsky's Variations on a Rococo Theme op.33. I'm searching for the original version of Tchaikovsky's cello & piano edition, because it seems that the 4th variation is different from the one in the orchestrated version. Raphael Wallfisch claims in his edition to have published the first draft of the "real" original 4th variation, which only exists in a piano/cello version, but I can't seem to find any other proof of its existence... I found out that the autograph of the cello/piano edition is in the Glinka State Central Museum of Musical Culture, but because Russia isn't that close to Belgium, it would be quite difficult for me to go there. I noticed that in 2006 you uploaded the orchestrated version from the Complete Collected Works vol.33B and I was wondering how you found it and if you know where/if I can find the vol.55B (which includes the original cello & piano version)? Thanks in advance. Yours sincerely, Renke

Dear Renke, All files here are the work of volunteers who scan music or find scans elsewhere online. This score (vol.55B) has been reprinted by LudwigMasters music in the USA, and you can order it inexpensively from them. The catalog number is M2919. Best Wishes, Carolus 05:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

BACH....under RONDEAU in C(arrangements)

Hello Carolus......under "arrangements"....C......there are choral arrangements by J.S. Bach that do not belong under Rondeau.....thanks......MR

Hi Michel, I've been working on moving things to the correct pages and will get to the J.S. Bach items as soon as possible. Thanks, Carolus 01:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


Hello Carolus,

when checking the Maintenance page I found more than 700 Pages with tho NoAuto-Tag. Could you please tell me what is to do in this cases? Just remove the NoAuto-Tag or is there something else to do??? --TobisNotenarchiv 20:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The NoAutoTag is used for cases where something is actually public domain (in the US, for example) when the auto-tagger will classify it as 'Non-PD US' or Non-PD US and EU'. Generally speaking, you should leave this alone. There is one category where it does need to be removed: living composers. We used to have a bug whereby composers who uploaded their own works had a big red-box copyright warning appearing on the workpages, so they were instructed to use the NoAutoTag to stop the warning from appearing. This bug was fixed more than a year ago, so it is no longer necessary to have the NoAutoTag for a living composer. Thanks, Carolus 03:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Anton Diabelli's Rondo militaire

Hi Carolus! I've just discovered that this piece is actually the third movement from Diabelli's third sonatina from the Op.152 set. I've moved the content of the "Rondo MIlitaire" page to Op.152 but don't know how to re-direct the existing "Rondo MIlitaire" page to Op.152 once that page gets deleted and because there is content on the Op.152 page (I don't think I can must "move" it) so I have left it as is. Please work your magic and kindly provide me some enlightenment. Thanks! --Cypressdome 04:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Doing a redirect is very simple once you've moved everything (You already did the hard part): Blank the previous content of the page and put in #REDIRECT [[Work Title (Composer Name)]]. That's all there is to it! Carolus 04:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll be sure to note that down. Thanks, --Cypressdome 04:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Sinding op.38 editing

Hey - Sorry, I was reorganizing the sibley links for sinding op.38 onto one page so I was lazily uploading the info and then changing it once I had it all in place. I always remove the composer as editor normally. You just got to reviewing it too quickly! It should all make sense now. Icactus 06:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

OK. I'm glad you know to watch out for that. I have no idea why Sibley was doing that - it seems worst on the earlier items in their scanning program. I think they were using some sort of card catalog system to enter things in at first, which is also why the estimated dates on those items can be literally decades off the mark. They've been using a better system in the past couple of years though (like Hofmesiter). It's been a very heavy day of uploading - more than 500. Carolus 06:30, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Troisième fantaisie, Op.18 (Benoît, Peter)

As an example, is there really any need to keep around this latest addition, weighing in at ~37MB for four pages of gray scale, especially when we already have a monochrome scan of the exact same edition? I know it's easier to just tag these, but do they add anything to our collection, or do they serve to clutter up pages with inferior-quality scans? Daphnis 15:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

We probably should get rid of something like that - unless there are markings, composer signatures or similar things. Carolus 23:43, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Right, and I thought that was the consensus we all reached quite some time ago, yet I still see reviewers and others making these available when clearly they offer no benefit. Daphnis 00:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Not surprising. I'm likely guilty of it myself. For example, yesterday there were over 500 uploads. Not a lot of time to do anything apart from the basics. On such a day I would be unlikely to spend the time to actually open and view a large file like that in detail, other than maybe to look at the first page. Let's just say that I will be very happy when WIMA is finished and the chaos goes back to the usual dull roar. We do have a new collections feature, thanks to Feldmahler. Take a look at Domenico Scarlatti's page to see how it works. Carolus 00:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Daphnis, Carolus,
I'm not aware of a consensus to remove large files...well, at least I don't remember. But I agree that keeping large greyscale with no additional information / benefit together with a compressed version doesn't make sense. The point is I don't want to simply delete scores by users just because they are large (and leave my upload with my username), they may take offence. May I suggest the following: if someone is willing to make a compressed version, the large file should be replaced with that new version. In this way the original user still appears as uploader on the work page. Maybe we could make a template to tag such large files of which compressed versions can be made. What should we do with colour scans? Although useless for printout, optically some are quite nice. Regards, Hobbypianist 19:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


Sorry about the overload......I keep thinking I'm near the end.....1o more ....10 more.......etc........I will try to be more careful in your instructions......when the composition content is greater than the arranging should it not be considered as a composition? the other WIMA pages I consider all other works arrangements......because there is always something that I,ve changed....ex....change the original instrumentation......add a cadenza...... add a second voice to another voice....fermatas added ....time signature changed ....etc......but the 90% or more of the composition still belongs to the original all of the music I entered there is at least 60% or more that could be considered my composition .....but like you say it is very complicated and I will leave it to you to decide.....thanks for all the help...I will do my best....I think that after this long page ....the rest will most likely be easier ....I hope....MR

Hi Michel, Yes, when you have added a lot of original material to the original, it should be considered an original piece more than an arrangement. Things like "Variations on ####" or "Fantasia on ####" are clearly originals but a christmas carol where you added an introduction and some material in the brass to accompany the familiar tune sung by the choir, plus a coda is more of an arrangement. It is very difficult to say where the magic dividing line is between an arrangement and an original work, but if more than half the duration of a work consists of original material by you, it should probably be counted as an original. So, if you happen to know of a piece you did where more than half of the duration consists of material added by you, do let me know as there is a very good chance that it should be listed as an original work. Carolus 23:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Other pages.....?

Hello Carolus.....the big page is finished ....could you fix the defaults so I can go to the Torelli page ?....all the rest will be arrangements of other composers......thanks....MR

Your uploads went excellently today. I think you would need to have Christian fix any defaults over at the WIMA site. For arrangements of other composers, be sure to check carefully before creating any new pages. Keep in mind that we usually place all of a single opus on one page, so an item such as Mendelssohn's Hark the Herald Angels Sing is located on the page for the original work, which is Festgesang, WoO 9. Thanks, Carolus 03:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


Hello Carolus.....I entered a Torelli G1.....under Torelli G4.......sorry about that....MR


Hello Carolus.....I tried to enter Gi for trp and Org.....but it didn't go in....I will awaait your instructions....MR


Dear Carolus! Unfortunately I've uploaded a file double times. Could you delete the Air: Elle m'a prodigué sa tendresse from Oedipe by Sacchini? I would like to renew the file. Best wishes Bassani

Done! Carolus 07:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Qualifications for LinkLib and LinkTr?

Hi Carolus! In preparing to post some incidental music for a play that includes singing I've become a bit puzzled as to who deserves LinkLib and if LinkTr is justified in this case. The play is Alcestis by Euripides in the English translation by Robert Potter (1721-1804) "adapted by" Frank Murray ca.1876. Since the words set to music are Euripides albeit translated and adapted is he worthy of LinkLib? If so, would that make Robert Potter worthy of LinkTr? I'm guessing that Frank Murray's adaptation of the existing words makes him worthy of LinkLib, correct? Thanks! --Cypressdome 02:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

That seems about right to me - a complicated case to be sure! Carolus 02:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Rondeau's arrangements

Hello Carolus. I've just returned after a short break and I'm catching up with the tagging. I notice there are a large number of works by Michel Rondeau that are being treated as arrangements (e.g. The Angel Gabriel (Folk Songs, Basque), Angelus ad Virginem (Anonymous), etc.). I understood that in the past we've treated such arrangements of single folksongs as the work of the arranger, which for copyright purposes they invariably are, except for wider collections of folksongs by multiple arrangers.

In terms of cataloging and tagging it would certainly be more practical to list these particular ones under Rondeau's own name, but I wanted to check with you first in case I missed a discussion while I was away. Needless to say I'd take care of moving the works to Rondeau's name if it comes to it, rather than inflict anyone else with that task  :-) — P.davydov 18:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I was probably too over-zealous in classifying items such as those you mention as arrangements - and your point about treating them as compositions does indeed make much sense from the cataloging point of view. In Rondeau's case, there are quite a few things which are transcriptions of arrangements made by other composers (such settings by Bach and Mendelssohn of German chorales) along with orchestrations of composed carols like Wade's Adeste fidelis. I suppose it also depends to an extent on whether or not Rondeau took a simple folk melody and made his own harmonization, added material like an introduction, transition and coda - which certainly qualifies as his own composition - or if he took a setting of a song made by someone else and scored it for some instrumental combination (an arrangement of an arrangement, as it were). Rondeau is generally pretty good about mentioning his sources - but not always. At any rate, he's quite willing to answer questions and has been very cooperative overall, so feel free to ask him.
BTW, in case you've not seen my post on the forums, we now have template and tool to deal with the nasty problem of collections. Using the template {{ColCat|Firstname|Lastname}} puts pages in the "Collections with" section of a composer's category page. For single-composer collections, use the following added field in the "General Information" section: |Page Type=Collection . This allows us to separate compilations which have been created by people other than the composer from regular single works and those collections which were issued by the composers themselves (though we might even want to have composer-authorized collections in the "Collections" section as well). The advantage of these tools is that they will enable the addition of numerous collections such as are found at Sibley's site which have been skipped because people didn't to spend the time to split them up into individual works. Now they can be added and volunteers can download and add them whenever they have the time and inclination. The added individual item can then be linked back to the page for the collection it was taken from. Carolus 03:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes the new template is very useful, and it can replace the old Compilations category which was created as a stop-gap. Another step forward!  :-) — P.davydov 06:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Offertory (Abt, Franz)

Hi Carolus, this is the original title page of Vol.8, No.1. But it's ugly - so I took another one for the thumbnail. Regards, --Ralph Theo Misch 23:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Yours is a huge improvement - thanks! Carolus 00:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


Hello carolus......I will enter a dozen or so of jazz arrangements.....some are my own.....some are based on old themes.....I thought that it would be better to keep them together because ther are so few of them but if you wish to enter them by name that's fine with me......and yes I will eventually enter all the Boyvin suites....they are already arranged.....I'm sorry for being slow to adapt to the seems like there is always one more thing to think of ....thanks for all the work....MR

L'Organiste pratique (Guilmant, Alexandre)

Hi Carolus, I think Warren's version for organ with pedal obligato is merely an adaptation (with 3 instead of 2 staves) than an arrangement. Regards --Ralph Theo Misch 23:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

BTW: Apparently there is some confusion between the terms 'book' and 'volume' on that work page.

Thanks for letting me know. Carolus 00:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Dear Carolus, You gave me useful suggestions before, so I contact you again with a problem. I tried to upload an improved version of Couperin's 10 th concerto part 2, but it did not succeed: I was banned to a user talk page. The improvement is an essential correction of a wrongly placed repeat sign, and some minor improvements. How do I upload improved scores? Second problem: I am not content with my realisation of the basso continuo in Couperin's 12 th concerto part 1, and would like to withdraw these files, , both the edition and the arrangements. In due time I will upload them again, together with the other two parts of the 12th concerto (which are without bc). How do I withdraw or remove a file? Greetings, Arnold den Teuling

Hello Arnold, Replacing a file with a new, corrected version is very simple once you know the trick. Click on the file number (usually six digits for your items) of the item that needs replacement and then click on the link to "upload a new version of this file". Once you see the copyright tags change from the green N!/N!/N! to U/U/U you will know that you have actually replaced the file. Note: the old file still will appear if you are not logged in and try viewing the piece in your web-browser. As you file count has grown so much, it can take 2 or 3 days for the system's cache to update so that the new version is displayed in the web browser when not logged in. That's all there is to it. Just imagine how happy Anton Bruckner would have been if he had IMSLP and its simple system of replacing old versions. Carolus 03:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Hello Corolus......why am I stuck in the AUDIO page of BOYVIN?.....can't get out to scores

Lieder ohne Worte, Op.53 (Mendelssohn, Felix)

First edition!! I saw it several times, bound in an album together with this and this (e.g.). But I didn't know (so far) that it's the FE. Cheers --Ralph Theo Misch 00:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Fantastic. I had no idea! Carolus 00:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Carolus, Sorry about adding all those parts. Unfortunately I added some more before reading your advice. I am not sure how to create the separate page for parts as yet. Stephen.

Hi Stephen, You actually should not create separate pages for parts. What you need to do (ideally) is to merge parts for separate movements into a single file, per instrument. For example, instead of three separate parts for Violins I (one for each of three movements), it would be better is there was only a single part for Violins I (all movements in one part). It's fine to have separate files for each instrument, and it's OK to have separate files for the different movements for full scores, vocal scores or sound files. Carolus 05:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello Carolus

Carolus....thanks for all the work.....the Guitar chart is the same as the Keyboard is not a the future I will put Guitar/Keyboard together to avoid confusion....thanks...MR

thanks for letting me know this. I have adjusted all the previous jazz collection items accordingly. Carolus 03:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Johann Herbaut

Hi Carolus, I accidentally left off the final 't' when I created a composer page for Johann Herbaut, so the page for Herbau should be deleted. And it isn't even that late... sorry. Wrshannon 08:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Carolus, thanks for all your advice. Have reworked Concerto 1 parts as you suggested. Would like to resend these. Unfortunately I will also need to resend the full scores as page and bar numbers no longer corresponded to the score parts. Regarding Concerto 2 and the Mass. Might it not be better to delete these files and pages to give me time to adjust them? Sorry to ask this after your work on these pages. Also, would it be possible to keep the full scores and parts all on one page now? Less complicated for me and less work for you, hopefully. Please advise. Believe it or not, I used to be organized!!! Stephen.

Hi Stephen, I can go ahead and delete what you uploaded and leave the pages in place with no files present - though it might be simpler if I deleted both. Full Scores and parts actually all go on the same page as it is. They go onto different tabs for larger works such as a piece for chorus and orchestra. For chamber works, scores and parts usually go on the same tab-division. Once you have more than 8-10 separate parts, it generally is better to have parts under their own tab division. Note that a tab-division is still part of the same page, however. A work-page is for a given work, regardless of how many formats or arrangements the work have been made. The original or earliest version of any given work determines the listing which goes into the instrumentation field in the "General Information" section of each page. Carolus 03:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)