Talk:Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin (Bach)

message: I've been doing some heavy editing to this article, and I've added a lot of links to it from other articles.  This is one of my favorite pieces of music, so I'd really like to see this page develop some more.  There is lots of interesting information about the sonatas and partitas, but I'm not schooled enough in music to contribute as much as I'd like.  I do think that the page on the 2nd partita should be merged with this one, though.  Alcuin 05:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial comments

message: Is it really necessary to include the opus numbers in the titles of classical music pages?  We now have a title 52 characters long, when 'Sonatas and partitas' (20 chars) would still uniquely identify this work. Alcuin 14:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Sonatas and partitas for solo violin" at least, I think.--Quadalpha 05:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BWV numbers in page titles 

message: "The third partita is probably the best known of the six suites."
Is there a source for this quote?
Is the rest of the quote really necessary (unless the following suggestion is made).
Should this be merged with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solo_Violin_Partita_No._2_%28Bach%29
I don't understand why that set deserves its own article while the others do not (aside from the awesome ciaconna, which can have descriptions on this article).
--CheeZe 01:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge/Question 

message: I removed this from the opening paragraph, because (a) it's not referenced (b) it's sort of a piece of trivia at best.  If you have a reference for it, please put it back in the article, but not in the lead.--24.86.252.26 07:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They were nearly destroyed when they were discovered to be used as butcher paper.
Although I've heard the story before, I couldn't find a single mention of it in any reliable source. New Grove doesn't mention it, Lester's 1999 book on Bach's solo violin works doesn't mention it, searching Google Books/Scholar for "bach paper", "bach violin paper", "bach butcher paper", etc. does not produce anything other than really general books on music. My guess is that its an anecdote from some outdated biography, i.e. Forkel's or Spitta's, which has since been proven wrong. Unless someone finds a source, I suggest we remove the claim from the article altogether. --Jashiin (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

text: You should add a cite from the Menuhin/Primorse book, then? --Jashiin (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  butcher paper? 

message: Can someone please justify why we need a list of recordings?  If there is a particularly noteworthy one, please mention that, but please put a reference that justifies it as important.  Indiscriminate lists are rubbish.--24.86.252.26 07:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I think a list of notable recordings can be useful, I agree that an indiscriminate list is not helpful. After glancing at this list, I think a good half or more of it could be eliminated. --Kyoko 01:22, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like its time to clean up the list again.  Its getting really long and includes red-link-ed performers as well. DavidRF (talk) 23:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

text: I think a separate section like the one you describe would indeed solve the problem. The only problem I see is that it looks like it would be difficult to cite - are there any good and recent books/articles that discuss the matter? Otherwise we'd be reduced to having to use reviews I guess.. --Jashiin (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I guess you're right. But actually, I just remembered there was a decent book on these works which had some details about the earliest recordings and probably a few things on more recent ones: Lester's "Bach's works for solo violin". --Jashiin (talk) 08:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Also, would you mind weighing in on the issue of merging (i.e. Merge/Question above, last paragraphs)? It really kind of bothers me to see these separate articles which don't have too much content... --Jashiin (talk) 08:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: What is your objection?  Removing the list?  The other edits?  Provide your input.  The page history preserves everything.DavidRF (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of recordings? 

message: In my opinion, so long as the list exists, people will gladly add their favorite renditions into the fold, no matter how obscure.  We will have to clean this up over and over again.
One way to "prevent" a list from happening, is possibly to replace the "list" with a section on "musical and stylistic interpretation", and cite prominent works that represent a certain style.   For instance, Syreng's to-the-tee-faithfulness to the MS; Milstein and Heifetz, and their "chop chop" school of playing; Helene Schmidt(??? maybe not her) with the first true Baroque interpretation; and Viktoria Mulova's union between the two supposedly opposing styles.
I would also do the same thing for the "transcription" section.  Anyone who play an instrument other than the violin would have come across some sort of transcription of the Bach solo sonatas.
--Bart weisser (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a separate section like the one you describe would indeed solve the problem. The only problem I see is that it looks like it would be difficult to cite - are there any good and recent books/articles that discuss the matter? Otherwise we'd be reduced to having to use reviews I guess.. --Jashiin (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I guess you're right. But actually, I just remembered there was a decent book on these works which had some details about the earliest recordings and probably a few things on more recent ones: Lester's "Bach's works for solo violin". --Jashiin (talk) 08:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Also, would you mind weighing in on the issue of merging (i.e. Merge/Question above, last paragraphs)? It really kind of bothers me to see these separate articles which don't have too much content... --Jashiin (talk) 08:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

text: What is your objection?  Removing the list?  The other edits?  Provide your input.  The page history preserves everything.DavidRF (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove the list, and alternatives?

message: Most of the post 1980's recordings strike me as insignificant and possibly self-promotion. I'm not sure whether there should be any list, but at least there's a case to be made by listing perhaps the 20 by the most acclaimed violinists.  SPECIFICO talk 22:09, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Too many recordings

message: Is it possible, or do I have to create the graphic files for the musical passages?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bart weisser (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to create the PNG files using your own copy of Lilypond.  Then I usually include the Lilypond code in the comments for the PNG file.DavidRF (talk) 19:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lilypond on Wikipedia

message: I am going to go through other the Bach Sonatas/Partitas articles and merge them here.  We will just leave the articles the way they are.  I doubt there will be future (major) editions on these stub-ish articles.--Bart weisser (talk) 05:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do. I think we should create sections here (i.e. not simply titles in bold the way it is now) and move the content. In the meantime, I tightened up the lead and the first section. --Jashiin (talk) 09:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging articles

message: I'm not sure how Bartok and Hindemith are from the generation 'following' Bach's...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.166.168.141 (talk) 23:44, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Following generation? 

message: That is how it appears in the books of David Ledbetter and Richard D. Jones and numerous other Bach sources. Partia is not an English word. In this context it is a German/Austrian borrowing from Italian. The plural of Partia in German is Partien. That is the plural form used by Richard D. Jones (Creative Development of J.S. Bach, vol II, Oxford University Press, page 171) and by Ledbetter (Unaccompanied Bach, Yale University Press, Page 111). It is a German/Austrian word in the context used by Jones and by Ledbetter. The word Partias appears in neither book. "Partias" seems to be a creation of wikipedians. Ledbetter's book is given as the source but he uses the plural Partien. I might check with some other sources. Mathsci (talk) 01:33, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plural of Partia is Partien 

message: Looking at this article, I notice various problems. One concerns self-borrowings. Is it really that hard to explain that the material from the first movement of BWV 1006 was reused by Bach in the sinfonia for cantata BWV 29 where it was scored obbligato organ, strings and trumpets? Some movements of the sonatas and partitas also exist in keyboard arrangements by the pupils of Bach: these are in print. I have no idea why there is no section on reception. These works have been arranged and transcribed many times. The Chaconne exists for piano in several piano versions; Busoni, Brahms (for left hand), etc; there are multiple organ arrangements. Amongst the missing references are the recent Bärenreiter editions: the 2001 edition of BWV 1001–1006; and the 2014 NBArev edition of Bach's chamber music for violin. The critical commentaries are fairly definitive. At this stage, having uploaded the BWV 1001/i onto commons, I am simply going to add images of the title page and the first page of BWV 1006/i from the autograph score. The corresponding image of the organ part of BWV 29/i, also uploaded by me, is in the infobox of that article. Mathsci (talk) 06:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And why no discography? I was expecting to see some mention of the recordings of Nathan Milstein or Arthur Grumiaux, etc, etc. Mathsci (talk) 07:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing content 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin (Bach). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080530225837/http://www.stringsmagazine.com:80/article/145/145,3865,Feature-1.asp to http://www.stringsmagazine.com/article/145/145,3865,Feature-1.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051221225656/http://www.tononirecords.com:80/jsbach2.cfm to http://www.tononirecords.com/jsbach2.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070301041908/http://www.gotomidori.com:80/english/musicnote-200302/musicnote-49bach.html to http://www.gotomidori.com/english/musicnote-200302/musicnote-49bach.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified