Talk:Violin Sonata No. 9 (Beethoven)

message: Link to 3rd movement doesn't work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FWadel (talk • contribs) 09:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old discussion

message: I fail to see why the fact that Bridgetower was "negroid" is relevant. Skiasaurus (talk) 06:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Skiasaurus (talk) 17:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision by 75.157.201.62 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support. See this ngram. The article title should be a name, not a catalog number. Gulangyu (talk) 19:35, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Kreutzer Sonata currently redirects here. This seems wrong. Under WP:DABNAME, it should be the redirect destination of Kreutzer Sonata (disambiguation). Narky Blert (talk) 11:34, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In other words, "Do it my way or there will be a lot of argument." The redirect issue is covered at WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. This title is out of step with the common name concept outlined at WP:TITLE and followed in the rest of Wikipedia. The first and foremost purpose of a title is to tell the reader what the subject is called in the real world. This type of consistency is like designating a city by its postal code. Beethoven-Haus Bonn gives the full name of this piece as "Sonate für Klavier und Violine (A-Dur) op. 47," or in English as “The ‘Kreutzer’ Sonata for Piano and Violin op. 47.” My point is, they don't give the sonata number anywhere. It’s no where near as important as this title makes it seem. Gulangyu (talk) 12:43, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but most of the examples you are citing, are giving the key and the opus number, both of these are less well understood by non-musicians.Pincrete (talk) 20:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

text: What is the advantage of de-'shoehorning'? Formal classifications were invented to fulfil a need on the part of musicians and scholars so of course we won't find Beethoven, Haydn etc using these formal names or numbers, but neither do they necessarily use the informal. Redirects and opening sentences cover the aka names. Pincrete (talk) 14:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an interesting use of the word “formal.” The opus number is the title proper, the name the piece was originally published under. I’ve already shown that the current title isn’t the name used by the most authoritative sources. The sonata number is a catalog number, analogous to a postal code for a city. The purpose of a title is to tell the reader the name of the subject, what it is called in the real world. He should be able to look up at the top of the article and say either, “Yup, I’m at the right page!” or “No, this is not what I want.” A reader who is familiar with this piece from the Tolstoy story, or from the movie based on it, is likely to be quite WP:ASTONISHED to see the title the form it is given here. Gulangyu (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but opus numbers are completely uninformative, except to the seriously initiated, opus numbers are the 'postal codes'. 'Formal' here means 'more formal'. I find a bit implausible the picture of a reader who is sufficiently literate to be enquiring about a Tolstoy novella, but who is nonetheless astonished to find that the title is also a piece of music. However this notional reader is still going to end up looking at the same page, forced to negotiate the same dab/hat, except the title will be different, instead of the opening line of text, which s/he will still need to read, to understand the error. Pincrete (talk) 20:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: In Tolstoy's "Kreutzer sonata", it opens by the piano (played by the woman) quietly answered by the violin (played by the lover); in the original score a solo violin preludes to it all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.226.217.129 (talk) 11:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Tolstoy

message: I have discovered that in the 1840s Composer/Teacher Eduard Marxsen orchestrated the sonata and it was performed in a concert in Berlin conducted by Felix Mendelssohn. I believe that this would be a good area to study/research. Was this only  time the work was orchestrated, did Marxsen treat the work as a concertante piece with a violin soloist or was it a purely orchestral work. Was it performed more than one time and if so where? Graham1973 (talk) 10:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:FORUMSHOP, please keep this discussion in one place, i.e. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#Area for research - Orchestrations of Beethoven Sonatas, where the discussion was opened before here. (BTW, "in the 1840s" is definitely wrong, but that follows from my reply at the other place). --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orchestrations 

message: I would argue that designating the overall key as A minor makes more sense. It's classified as A major because it begins and ends in that key, but the first movement is only in major for the intro, after which it switches to minor. Beethoven's Symphony No. 4 is considered to be in B-flat major despite beginning in minor because the minor is only for the intro, and his Symphony No. 5 is considered to be in C minor because it's the key of the first movement (but not the finale). Putting these two precedents together, it would suggest that this sonata should be considered to be in A minor. --ForeverStamp (talk) 04:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: A minor, not major