Talk:Symphonie fantastique

message: What is the sourcing for the statement that "Leonard Bernstein called Symphonie Fantastique the first musical expedition into psychedelia"?  And was it a direct quote by Bernstein?  If so, "the first musical expedition into psychedelia" should be in quotation marks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.47.209 (talk) 08:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is your reference -- a script from Bernstein's Young Persons Concerts http://www.leonardbernstein.com/studio/element2.asp?id=383 DavidRF 04:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The second movement is a waltz, which was a bit of a risque dance for this early in the romantic era.  Symphonies of this time period had Scherzos (or earlier they had Minuets) but they didn't have Waltzes.  "Vulgar" is in Berlioz's program notes, but for the shrilly clarinet version of the idee fixe in the final movement.   Perhaps there was some confusion with the quote? DavidRF 04:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: While one critic called it "vulgar", the intent was to portray a single lonely soul amidst gaiety, as Berlioz wrote while composing it.
The issue is that it merely says "one critic" -- my question is, who said that and what is the source? --Todeswalzer|Talk 23:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References?

message: Berlioz's own program notes should really be incorporated into this article.  They are pretty easy to find on the web by googling 'symphonie fantastique program'. DavidRF 04:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  The article looks like it was clipped together from many other program notes and no one read the whole thing to make sure that it makes sense.   The idee fixe ("fixed idea" or obsessive musical thought) is a melody that recurs throughout the work.  It represents the main character's unrequited love.  Its introduced about five minutes into the first movement and developed extensively there.  It recurs in each of the remaining movements.  It greatly increases the enjoyment of the piece if one understands its meaning, (yet I'll admit it took a while for the concept to catch on with me).  Anyhow, if some with better writing skills could pound the idea of the idee fixe home in this article that would be great.  Or perhaps the original Berlioz program notes could be included!  (see above)  They were written in 1830, they can't still be under copyright. DavidRF 16:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlioz's Program Notes 

message: Basil Twist's recent new performance based on the score of Symphonie Fantastique was a widely acclaimed and award winning new production that seems to me a relevant notation about the original composition. It shows its relevance today and seems to me similar to other entries on contemporary theatre and its historical roots. Please do explain why this doesn't seem a relevant addition. Should it be shorter (perhaps removing the theatres performed in)? Or is there something else at issue?  -Flippedout 06:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, maybe it should stay in, but it certainly needs to be rewritten: as it stands, it reads like a marketing piece by the producers. Would be nice to make it a bit more, as they say, encyclopedic. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance of contemporary interpretations 

message: Is it just me, or does the score only specify 2 harps, not 4. I am not a Berlioz expert, but my score clearly has 2 harps listed, and in the second movement, it uses the singular "arpa" (as opposed to "arpe") for the parts. (Dover miniature reproduction of Breitkopf and Hartel Public domain edition). Also, the article refers to "a published score." It would be nice to know the edition. --Snailey! IF you need to tell me something - Like that's gonna happen 16:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the pleasure to listen to this symphony performed and they used only two harps. But, if you read the description of the second movement, you'll see that there isn't a specified number. Clearly, it demands only two to be performed, but it's up to the conductor.
--User:Deafussy19:46, 23 May 2008
Some of those instruments didn't exist back then. Some kind of caveat perhaps needs to be stated. --76.89.188.2 (talk) 23:47, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Orchestration

message: Is there any way we can get a sound file to accompany the score snippet?  It is not the simplest melody to pick out of a score.  Even a simple midi autogenerated from something like lilypond would be a great help. Thanks.  DavidRF (talk) 16:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request Idee Fixe Sound file 

message: Why there isn't information about the first performance? I have heard that the reception was pretty bad, particulary because of a long text included in the program. Deafussy 19:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think the reception is notable enough. -- 213.6.6.112 (talk) 19:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree. SlowJog (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: The article is great, but I just don't like how the ending is presented. Pardon the ignorant observation, did Berlioz actually end it just like an orgy of withces? That's it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surten (talk • contribs) 04:19, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Short answer: yes. 168.150.253.56 (talk) 11:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Observation 

message: Many of the links are bad.
:I fixed one, to the recording --Chewy5000 (talk) 06:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: The "copyright-free" recording linked to in the article appears to be Region-protected, I can't access it here in the USA. Telepheedian (talk) 15:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright-free? 

message: "Symphonie fantastique" translated to English is "Fantasy symphony". I corrected this error before and someone changed it back. I don't know why anyone would think that it means "fantastic symphony". I don't think Berlioz was so egotistic that he would call his own symphony "fantastic"! Also, the whole symphony is about the composer's fantasy.
I will change this soon if no-one else does.86.46.224.67 (talk) 02:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's more then one english definition of "fantastic".  According to webster's, the first two are still pertaining to the "fantasy" as an adjective.  Its only the third that you object to, the more modern connotation of fantastic meaning "excellent".  The webster's thesaurus focuses on the first two definitions too (bizarre, grotesque, imaginary).  Webster's doesn't list "fantasy" as an adjective.  It looks like when you use it has one, you're trying to get the first two definition of fantastic while avoiding its spelling to eliminate confusion with the third.  DavidRF (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation error 

message: All of the subjects in the "Outline" except the first have english translations in parantheses after the french name. Why not the first? I suppose it *does* seem pretty obvious what it means, but then again, "Un bal" is even more self-evident... So, why isn't there a translation? The2crowrox (talk) 18:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency 

message: An Episode in the Life of an Artist, Op. 14, usually referred to by its subtitle Symphonie fantastique (Fantastic Symphony) 
: I thought it was the other way round.  --  Jack of Oz (Speak!) 08:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now fixed.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 02:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Subtitle vs. main title

message: Great article.  Probably tells you most of what you want to know - except what key the thing is written in. 86.180.87.215 (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The key is not specified and does not need to be.  Most of the classical symphonies in X key are only in X key for maybe parts of the first movement; it's simply a convention that the 1st movement's predominant key dictates what the key of the whole symphony is said to be in, even though everyone knows that's very inaccurate if read literally.  You can't look at the separate keys of the movements and come up with a sort-of "average key" or "general key".  It just doesn't work that way.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 02:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  In this case, I agree with you, but it's ridiculous to state that there isn't an overall key to most symphonies.  Until the late 19th century, there was almost always a clear tonal center to symphonic works, which would be established in the first movement, contrasted with the following movements, and returned to in the final movement.  Berlioz is not one for convention, of course, but the overall formal plan, starting in C and returning to C via the submediant, subdominant, and dominant (albeit minor) is pretty clear.  On the other hand, for someone like Gustav Mahler or Carl Nielsen, a symphony may start in one key center and end in another, and in those cases I would not ascribe a key center to the work.  Xenofan 29A (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Key?

message: Link MP3 Creative Commons Recording does not work.90.190.225.121 (talk) 14:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Link not good

message: It has been reported in the UK that a High Court judge has ruled there must be no ceremony to mark the disposal of notorious child murderer Ian Brady's remains: the fifth movement of Symphonie fantastique is specified mentioned by the BBC after Brady's executor requested leave for it to be used. Is this significant enough to warrant a mention in the article? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ("In popular culture" doesn't strike the right tone for this event.) The symphony's 5th movement seems to be a small part of the ruling. Unless that aspect gains wide coverage, mentioning it here is not warranted. Has this been discussed for mentioning at the article on Brady? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're absolutely right: "in popular culture" is pretty inappropriate - while that idiom is used in the pages for other works of art, something more in keeping with Brady's acts would be necessary if he were to be mentioned in this article. I'll follow your suggestion and start a discussion on the Moors murders page ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 14:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

text: Quite agree. This sort of "culture" is very definitely unpopular. In fact, reviled, I think. If it had been used, that might have been barely notable. But as it is it's just a "non-event", albeit a non-event enforced by a High Court ruling. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:45, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture? 

message: put some time 112.200.97.236 (talk) 06:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What time did this song release/written? 

message: This article is littered with factual errors, poor organization, and embarrassing grammar. I’m appalled that a “vital article” is in this state. I fixed a couple of things in the beginning but don’t have my textbooks on hand, so I wasn’t able to fix as much as I wanted. When I got to the ellipses at the end I fully gave up. I’m already doing this to procrastinate on work, I don’t have time to spend several hours rewriting this article right now. I’ll circle back if I have time but I hope someone can help fix this mess. Leilaaaaaa (talk) 04:03, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual errors, poor organization, bad grammar