HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: records-database
In-reply-to: Bill_P_Pearce@cup.portal.com's message of Wed,  2 Sep 92 22:02:08 PDT
Organization: pubs
	<CB.92Aug31153656@tamarack13.timbuk>
	<1992Aug31.222510.18481@fid.morgan.com> <34831@cbmvax.commodore.com>
	<65171@cup.portal.com>
Date: 3 Sep 92 11:03:26 CDT

Bill Pearce writes:

   ... The way Alpha Four does this is that when you get to the point
   of entering   data into a particular field in the primary database,
   for example Composer, a pop-up list of composers appears from the
   subsidiary database that is linked to the Composer field and you
   simply highlight the correct one and enter it.  The composer then
   appears automatically in the Composer field in the primary
   database. ... The field that is least amenable to this treatment is
   Work, since there are so many possibilities. ...

I don't know if this makes sense (since I haven't actually tried this)
but... I was thinking entries in the Work table should include composer
IDs, analogous to the way we say "Beethoven's Fifth".  This would mean
each entry in this table would have (at least) two fields, which a
relational database can do.  The info could be typed Lampson-style, as
"bee/sym 5" or whatever, but my point is that, since each work must have
a single unique composer, the composer (unlike, say, the performer)
should be implied by identifying any given work.  So, when I'm entering
the contents of a particular release, I would go to the (presumably
huge) Work table but wouldn't have to go to the Composer table, which
would exist only for expanding "bee" when needed.  It seems this
approach would simplify the structure and the entry process.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
From: elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: clarinet arcana and transposition
Date: 30 Aug 92 17:51:45 GMT
Organization: Harvard Math Department

In article <1992Aug26.022235.10818@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz>
comjohn@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Mr. John T Jensen) writes:
>[...]
>Yes, well, perhaps it is a LITTLE more awkward to play accidentals on the
>clarinet than natural notes.  I play the recorder a bit and the fingering
>principles are similar, so I know what you mean.  But he cites piano which
>he thinks is less of a problem.  I don't see why it should be.  One is still
>doing transposition.  And arguably black notes are a teeny bit harder, at
>least for a relatively beginning player, than white notes.  But they don't
>make B pianos :-) !  You just practise more.

a few comments from a pianist's perspective...

: yes, once a basic level of competence is reached one can't really
say that one key is "easier" than another across the board.  But specific
pieces still do present different technical problems in different keys.
For one kind of an extreme example, look up Godowsky's transcriptions of
the Chopin Etude Op.10 #5 as a study on the white keys, or just compare
playing the etude as written vs. playing it up or down a semitone.

: there *are* transposing pianos (cf. the Irving Berlin thread from a while
back), but they are about as common these days as B[-natural] clarinets...

: harpsichords etc. tend to be tuned as B keyboards (compared to the 
standard A=c.440 prevailing for non-"original instruments" pitch).  Have
any of the historically informed keyboard players gone to the length of
using the old fingering style?  [e.g. shunning 1st and 5th fingers when
not forced by a wide interval --- a scale might be fingered 232323 etc.
as opposed to the 1231234... style that took hold around 1750-1800.]

: Steinway does make B pianos, but the letter indicates the size of the
instrument (they also make D's, L's and M's if memory serves), not a
transposition interval :-)

--Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu)
  Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Subject: Re: clarinet arcana and transposition
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:27:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <useless number> comjohn@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz
(Mr. John T Jensen) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>Actually, to go from C# to D# on the horn I only have to move two fingers
>(pointer up, ring finger down).  But ...
>
>Yes, well, perhaps it is a LITTLE more awkward to play accidentals on the
>clarinet than natural notes.  I play the recorder a bit and the fingering
>principles are similar, so I know what you mean.  But he cites piano which
>he thinks is less of a problem.  I don't see why it should be.  One is still
>doing transposition.  And arguably black notes are a teeny bit harder, at
>least for a relatively beginning player, than white notes.  But they don't
>make B pianos :-) !  You just practise more.
>
>Common sense says that there MUST be a reason for A clarinets other than
>just the avoidance of transposition, but I can't see what it is.  I mean,
>doesn't it seem like overkill to buy another maybe $500-$1000 instrument
>just to avoid a little mental gymnastics?

	I only played clarinet for three years, so I was never very fast - 
but isn't speed an issue?  Suppose you have a very fast diatonic run.  Are
you going to be able to raise and lower 2-3 fingers, consistently, at the
same speeds that you can move one finger?  Same issue with moving over the
break.

	I thought that all key signatures on the horn required the simul-
taneous movement of two fingers at at least one point on the scale.  So,
perhaps the speed advantage that one would obtain with horns in various keys
would not be as significant as it would be with the clarinet.  I'm not a
horn player at all, so let me ask - is there something equivalent to the
break on the clarinet?  In other words, is there some point on the
instrument at which the fingering and/or embouchure changes so radically
that playing across it causes problems?

	What about the oboe/English horn family?  Are there more than two
sizes of these?

-- 
=============================================================================
 John J. Ladasky II ("ii")				(ladasky@netcom.COM)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Great composers do not borrow - they steal."  - John Ladasky		~ -	
(At the urging of fellow netter Lon Amerman, I stole the above		o o
 quote from Igor Stravinsky, who stole it from a statement made		 >
 by Pablo Picasso about painting, who stole it from...)			\_/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Talking about music is like dancing about architecture." - Elvis Costello?
							    Frank Zappa?
"Property is theft." - Groucho				    Laurie Anderson?
=============================================================================
From: Glenn_Woodsworth@mindlink.bc.ca (Glenn Woodsworth)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Funeral music?
Date: 1 Sep 92 06:13:04 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

You can hardly go wrong with Purcell's Music for the Funeral of Queen
Mary (played also at Purcell's own funeral).

The music is incredibly haunting and beautiful, to me

glenn woodsworth
Vancouver, Canada
From: maverick@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Manners, children please...
Date: 25 Aug 1992 22:55:44 GMT
Organization: CS Division, UC Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: mahogany.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug25.042342.25193@uniwa.uwa.edu.au>, diarmuid@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Diarmuid Pigott) writes:
|> [I echoed, in puzzlement, of Cage:]
|> : Did his aesthetic have bounds?
|> 
|> Yes - he could not have sat down and written a serious, tonally
|> unambiguous, conventionally orchestrated, popular symphony.

My instinct is divided between about 17 possible responses, of which a
few, in no particular order:

* How do you know?

* Why does it matter?

* Yeah, and he probably couldn't have painted like G.F. Watts, either,
or built a hot-dog stand in the shape of a hot dog, or written _The
Fountainhead_.  Why should he have wanted to?

* Have you ever heard _In a Landscape_?

* There's a difference between one's taste in listening and one's
habit of composition: much music of Mozart works great for my
aesthetic, but I don't try to write like that.

|> He probably
|> wouldn't have wanted to, but his aesthetic was bounded by the neophiliac.

Broader bounds than the necrophiliac!
 
|> : Did he ever tell people how to "evaluate" his pieces? 
|> 
|> He threw a pebble into the well of the audience, but he knew it would
|> make a splash. 

I have trouble parsing this ("but"?), let alone applying it to my
question or your original statement.

	Vance
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Bach undervalued? (was: Beethoven - overvalued?)
Date: 3 Sep 92 03:20:08 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <980@pico.OZ> dean@pico.OZ (Dean Economou) writes:
>I agree it's silly to talk about "greatest composers".  It's also silly
>to worry about whether they were influenced by the work of their
>predecessors.  Bach wrote variations on works by almost anyone he could
>find (including his own works).  He re-wrote many concertos by Vivaldi
>and was greatly influenced by Schutz too.  All this does nothing to
>diminish his greatness, and no doubt explains part of it.

I agree with your sentiments, but -- how was Bach influenced by
Schuetz?

Just wondering,

Roger
From: conrad@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Top Ten Operas (was Re: La Traviata)
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:25:32 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <1992Aug27.110907.1@gsbacd.uchicago.edu> ca_ac@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:

>	You realize that you are starting a thread here that I am finding
>hard to resist, even though I cringe philosophically from top-ten lists.
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Me too.  And I can't resist them, just the same.  So here are mine.

Cosi fan tutte
Die Meistersinger
Der Rosenkavalier
The Turn of the Screw
La Boheme

Those are easy, no question about any of 'em for me.  Then I have to
think a little more.

The Magic Flute
Falstaff
A Midsummer Night's Dream
Die Frau ohne Schatten [this year anyway]
Turandot

A very weird, lopsided list, but that's the way it is.

Jon Alan Conrad
From: mgresham@dscatl.UUCP (Mark Gresham)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: John Cage is Dead
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:17:03 GMT
Reply-To: mgresham@dscatl.UUCP (Mark Gresham)
Organization: Digital Systems Co,  Atlanta, Ga


In article <1992Sep1.021206.23787@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> diarmuid@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Diarmuid Pigott) writes:
>smoliar@argon.iss.nus.sg (stephen smoliar) writes: 
>: I am not sure how you intended to use the word "normally."  I doubt that mental
>: states can be represented in some metric space within which it would make sense
>: to attempt to characterize a Gaussian distribution.  
>
>Actually I did mean that - only as a metaphor, but as a Cageian you will
>recognise the validity of using such a metaphor. 

As a Cageian?  (Now we can have only two types of
musicians/listeners: Cageian and non-Cageian.  It's like there are
only two kinds of automobiles: Chevrolets and non-Chevrolets.)
:-)

Cheers,

--Mark Gresham

dscatl!mgresham@gatech.edu

==========================
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Music (and flamage) of the Junk Age, cont'd..
Date: 3 Sep 92 01:39:55 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Distribution: rec.music.classical
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Sep2.153709.15319@husc3.harvard.edu> elkies@ramanujan.harvard.edu (Noam Elkies) writes:
>In article <46919@dscatl.UUCP> mgresham@dscatl.UUCP (Mark Gresham) writes:
>>4'33" could be pronounced "four minutes, thirty-three seconds" or
>>could be "four feet, thirty-three inches."  (I doubt he ever
>>suggested 4'33" of arc, though he might have liked that.)

>Hm.  A piece of music lasting six feet and nine inches?
>[Heard at a choral rehearsal: "you're an hour flat!" --or was it
>"you're an octave late!"?  I don't remember.]  Well, there *is*
>a canonical way to convert distance to time: divide by the speed
>of light.  I suppose I'd like 4'33" a bit more (or rather dislike
>it a bit less) under this interpretation. ;-)  I don't think there's
>a natural way to convert a dimensionless quantity like 4.55 minutes
>of arc to a length of time, though.

Go visit Parsifal, then.  

"Hier wird der Raum zur Zeit."

>...then again, maybe it means that it's to be performed on a
>6'9" grand piano (or a suitably-sized string bass).

Sounds like a valid inference to me...

Roger
>--Noam D. Elkies (elkies@zariski.harvard.edu)
>  Dept. of Mathematics, Harvard University
From: ralph@falcon.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Ralph Becker-Szendy)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: forthcoming Michelangeli recitals?
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:53:13 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

In article <1992Sep1.123805.427@cine88.cineca.it> simion@iveuncc.unive.it
(Marco Simionato) writes:

>As some of you might know, pianist Benedetti Michelangeli
>never annonunces his recitals quite in advance.
Well, I vividly remember a recital of his in Dusseldorf which was in the
concert program for the season (printed about 1/2 year in advance), and for 
which posters were printed. That must have been 77 or 78 (quite a while ago).
So he did announce recitals; but maybe he stopped doing that later.

On the other hand, I have heard many times that he had the habit of
cancelling recitals at the last minute; usually, because he felt he
would not be able to give a "good enough" concert (which may be
nothing negative, just perfectionism going a little further than
usual).
 
>I would be grateful if anybody who knows about rumored recitals/
>concerts could let me know.
I may be confused, but I remember that he died a few years ago (a great
loss). If someone knows for sure, please clarify.

-- 
Ralph Becker-Szendy                          RALPH@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center                      RALPH@SLACVM.BITNET
M.S. 95, P.O. Box 4349, Stanford, CA 94309                    (415)926-2701
My opinion. This is not SLAC, Stanford U, or the US DoE speaking. Just me.
From: givler@bermuda.cbm.commodore.com (Greg Givler)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: VOCAL Wedding music suggestions?
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:15:46 GMT
Organization: Another Amiga UNIX System

In article <1992Aug28.171027.8556@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.165830.29702@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, altizer@figaro (Robert Altizer) writes:
>> After all the instrumental music recommendations, how about some for vocal music
>> for a wedding?  (I appear as the singer.)  What I'd like to see are your picks for:
>> 
>>   1) Male solo (baritone or bass-baritone)
>>   2) Female solo (lyric soprano)
>>   3) Duet (above voices)
>> 
>
>The classic soprano aria for a wedding is the Alleluia from Mozart's
>"Exsultate, Jubilate" (I'm open to correction)---not that it's entirely lyric
>soprano stuff. For a baritone-soprano duet, how about La ci darem la mano from
>Don Giovanni? You may want to check on the circumstances of singing to avoid
>complaints from over-knowledgeable guests, but it's a glorious tune. Since
>we're talking Mozart, I'm sure you can find something in the operas for solo
>baritone that is suitable.

Sorry but I can't resist:

How about Non Piu Andrai from Le Nozze de Figaro. A rough translation of 
the first line: "Now you days of phalandering are over" :-)

>-- 
>
>Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
>wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.

Greg
-- 
Greg Givler                 | "If you're not going to kill me,
Commodore Product Assurance | I have things to do." - From Darkman
givler@cbmvax.commodore.com |
===============================================================================
From: ca_ac@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Top Ten Operas (was Re: La Traviata)
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:09:07 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.230758.15109@husc3.harvard.edu)
Vinh Nguyen writes 
> Ah well, Carmen, Traviata, Boheme, Aida, Figaro would probably make my
> top 5 list of operas, with Trovatore, Tosca, Fledermaus (!), Lucia, and
> Butterfly following suit to round off the top ten.  I might have missed
> something in this off-the-top-of-my-head list, but I'll let it rest as
> is for now.   
> I would be hard-pressed to pick out a clear winner for Don Carlo(s)
> though.  It's still a close call between Caballe and Tebaldi in
> the leading role here.
	You realize that you are starting a thread here that I am finding
hard to resist, even though I cringe philosophically from top-ten lists.
So here are my ten most favourite operas. (No particular order!)

Le Nozze di Figaro
Don Giovanni
Il Barbiere di Siviglia
Carmen
La Boheme
La Traviata
Aida
Falstaff
Fidelio
Der Rosenkavalier

Alternates: (i.e these might have been on the list if I had made it up a week 
ago or if I were asked the same question next week (!)
Otello (Verdi's), Tannhauser, Die Meistersinger, Rigoletto, Il Trovatore,
Pelleas et Melisande (Debussy).
					Alak Chakravorty
From: Bill_P_Pearce@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: records-database
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 21:45:52 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

  In article <1992Aug24.152317.1@venus.ycc.yale.edu> the author inquires
about database programs for making a record catalog.  I am engaged in this
process now and am using one called Alpha Four.  I think you asked about
a public domain, or shareware, one and I don't know about that.  Alpha
Four is a commercial program that we have at the office so I just brought
it home and put it on my computer here (I don't know how much we paid for
it.).  It works beautifully, as would any number of database managers.
Alpha Four is a fully relational database manager and has more power and
options than you need for a record catalog but it is very nice to use.  One
could use a simpler flat field database manager for this purpose too.  As
with most such programs, Alpha Four allows you to set up whatver kind of
format you want, including whatever information you wish (I am entering
composer, work, performer, medium - i.e. lp, cd or cassette - record number,
and, where the recording contains more than one work, the work under which
it is arranged on my shelves.  You can then set up whatever kind of sorting
and arrangement you wish, based on whichever of your data fields you 
select, in whichever hierarchy you select.  It is taking quite a while
and I have not gotten very far yet - about 804 entries so far I think,
about 500 or more of which are Schubert and Schumann songs (for no
particular reason I started on a  "S" shelf).  One nice feature is that
you get to look at all of your records again.  Since I have been
collecting for more than 30 years, some I haven't seen for quite a while.

     Bill Pearce
From: dgold@basso.actrix.gen.nz (Dale Gold)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Bach undervalued? (was: Beethoven - overvalued?)
    <7166@charon.cwi.nl>
Date: 28 Aug 92 19:52:00 PST
Organization: New Zealand Symphony Orchestra

Quoted from <7166@charon.cwi.nl> by vanloon@cwi.nl (Maarten van Loon):
> In article <JWA.92Aug26190914@vipunen.hut.fi> jwa@vipunen.hut.fi (Jyrki J Wahlstedt) writes:
>> In article <1992Aug25.044827.9106@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> markc@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU () writes:
>>> No, No, I was right the first time. Beethoven comes first, then Mozart, then
>>> Bach in fifth spot. After all, Mozart is in fourth.
>>>>> email: vanloon@cwi.nl  Not knowing Bach = not really living
>>>				       ^^^^
>>>another careless mistake. This should be Beethoven.
> 
> As far as I can see, this is the best proof that Van Beethoven in
> overvalued indeed.
> 
>>  Everybody has his own favourite to be the greatest composer of all. You
>>  are really stupid, if you insist on Beethoven like that! 
>>  Especially as I have Bach in the first place and after him I don't care...
> 
> Yes. Bach comes first. I think it's time to ask: why is Bach so undervalued?

If I felt stupid enough to try to choose a `Greatest Composer of all
Time', I suppose I'd choose Bach, but this is a stupid argument.  Bach, of
course, came at the end of an era, and wrote the music of his era with
un-excelled mastery.  Beethoven was a revolutionary, and helped to lay the
groundwork for many of the wonderful things that followed.

> I see relatively too less article on Bach. 

In this newsgroup, perhaps.  No matter how you organize your personal
pantheon of great composers, the fact is that Bach did what he did at a
level that must deny any serious argument, and that Beethoven explored new
material in a way that has inspired other composers for all these years. -
sort of like John Cage, to whom you will probably return in the next
article.

Cheers,
Dale
--
- dgold@basso.actrix.gen.nz
- Korokoro, New Zealand
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: John Cage is Dead
In-reply-to: steve@fid.morgan.com's message of Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:16:34 GMT
Organization: pubs
	<1992Aug25.215902.8691@fid.morgan.com>
	<1992Aug26.135214.16150@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>
	<1992Aug26.171634.10695@fid.morgan.com>
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:24:08 CDT

Steve Apter writes:

   ... Cardew calls for an end to "formalist
   garbage", and sounds the trumpet for a "people's music", presumably
   of the sort you deride, presumably overseen by committees consisting
   of the politically enlightened.

People like Ligeti, Nono, and Berio were big on this too.  Their music
was supposed to advance Marxist ideas, so naturally workers would want
to hear it, right?  In union halls, yet.  As with many Marxist
suppositions, this failed to take account of what anyone actually wants
(which, as we know, consists 99% of Michael Jackson, Garth Brooks, and
equivalents).

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
From: k@west.darkside.com (K)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: dirt
Date: 27 Aug 92 08:43:40 GMT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM

eh... too much John Cage banter... oi!
    Is anyone here a composer, too?
    I seek other composers, LIVING composers, who have interest in 
electronic music.

- the letter K -