Talk:Songs Without Words

message: There's been a mention of new songs recently found and premiered by Robert Prosseda.  Have these been musicologically catalogued?  That is, is there some sort of opus number for them such that we can formally add them to the list?DavidRF (talk) 05:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish. Mendelssohn is probably the worst offender among major composers of having a large bunch of practically miscellaneous being claimed -- check this page out which lists some extra SWW as well as many many others (HOW many fugues for violin and piano?!). Quite frustrating for my personal catalog, especially with the lack of dates to put them in order... ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 07:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How thoughtless of Felix!  :)  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New songs? 

message: A number of Mendelssohn's Lieder Ohne Worte have been recorded as cello pieces with piano accompaniment; some of these have the same opus numbers as the piano pieces listed here, but several carry opus numbers not included in the literature written for piano solo.
For instance, 
*Op. 34, with at least four numbered Lieder;
*Op. 71, with at least four numbered Lieder;
*Op. 86, with at least three numbered Lieder; and
*Op. 109, which appears to contain only a single unnumbered Lied.
On the other hand, at least the following piano Lieder have also been recorded as cello/piano duos:
*Op. 19 #1; and
*Op. 62 #s 1 & 6.
I'm not a musician and don't know anything further about the problem than this, but it badly needs to be addressed here. Did Mendelssohn write the Opp. 34, 71, 86 and 109 specifically for the cello or other stringed instrument?  These are surely different compositions from any of the 48 Lieder included in the 8 piano Opp., while the section on Arrangements seems to discuss only some of these 48 piano pieces as having been arranged for other instruments.
Mischa Maisky has recorded a number of the Lieder from these four unaccounted-for Opp.; I'm also aware of recordings by Feuermann, Bauer, Harrell, and Isserlis. I'm sure more will be listed at Amazon.
Milkunderwood (talk) 08:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: All of these except one are later arrangements of actual songs (with words) by Mendelssohn (see List of compositions by Felix Mendelssohn), and they are therefore not relevant to this article. The exception is op. 109, which was published posthumously as a cello and piano piece - it is not clear whther the composer intended it as a 'Song Without Words' - I will look into this. None of these opp. are in any way 'unaccounted-for'--Smerus (talk) 12:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Whatever Mendelssohn 'intended', Op. 109 is certainly called a Song Without Words now. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for this info. But now it seems to raise further questions. How did these arrangements come to be assigned new and different opus #s--by Mendelssohn, or by arrangers, and if the latter, during Mendelssohn's lifetime? Second, is there any direct correspondence between the sequence and numbering of the piano pieces, and that of the arrangements? Finally, I think I would take issue with the statement that the opus #s 34, 71, 86 and 109 are "not relevant to the article," since surely I cannot be the only WK user to have noticed and wondered about the apparent discrepancies. It seems all it might require might be a brief note mentioning these opp. somewhere in the Arrangements section of the article. Milkunderwood (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, no, the arrangements are of actual songs (written for voice and piano), and someone else made the arrangements, probably by the cellist in the reocrding -- this is pretty common, and there's nothing to note in THIS article about this. It'd be like noting the orchestration of Schubert's Grand Duo in the article for his 9th symphony, or something. If that's not it, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My point is that however and/or when the string arrangements came to be made, somebody--whether Mendelssohn or the various arrangers--thought it would be a good idea to assign new out-of-thin-air Opus numbers for many (but not all) of such arrangements, and with relatively low numbering which gives the distinct impression that they came from Felix's pen itself, and sequentially. The upshot of all this is that anyone familiar with arrangements for cello or other instruments, seeing opus numbers other than for the standard eight opp. for piano, will think they are entirely separate compositions, and be thoroughly confused, as I was. Certainly it's very common for arrangements to be made from original compositions. I'm not familiar with the situation concerning Schubert's Grand Duo, but in general it's extremely unusual for a later arrangement, especially done by someone other than the original composer, to be given not only an entirely new and separate opus number, but a fairly low number that falls squarely within the numbering of the composer's own works. It seems to me that a more usual practice is to retain the original numbering but for instance to add a lower-case letter, or the terms "bis" or "ter" (e.g. in the case of Prokofiev) etc. Note I'm certainly not questioning *why* with the Lieder such low and out-of-thin-air numberings were assigned, but simply pointing out that they make it extremely confusing to anyone with only a passing acquaintance with Mendelssohn's Lieder ohne Worte. And that it would be extremely simple, and certainly worthwhile, to merely mention the fact of separate opus numbering in the Arrangements section of the article. Does this not make sense? Milkunderwood (talk) 19:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Edit: "...the arrangements are of actual songs (written for voice and piano)..." Huh? These are Lieder *OHNE* Worte.
Milkunderwood (talk) 19:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Re-edit: Oh, okay, sorry about that--I missed the explanation given by Smerus, above, that most (but not all) of these cello arrangements are taken from actual opp. written by Mendelssohn *for voice*. That explains it. However, this still leaves the problem that at least in the cello recordings, which are what I'm mostly familiar with, they are specifically called "Lieder *ohne* Worte". So this is correct in a literal sense, but still extremely confusing, since they will naturally be assumed to be from the piano pieces rather than from the true Lieder. Thus I still think it would be useful to append a note here in the Arrangements section to simply clarify the situation. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd wager it's the CD producer simply being cute. After all, they are songs...played without words. With Mendelssohn being the initiator and the main 'name' in the genre, it's unsurprising that it'd happen. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 20:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't disagree with your suggestion, but to the casual cello listener who is curious about such things, it's still very confusing to see a composition being called a "Lied ohne Worte/ Song without Words" and not understand that it derives from a song *with* words rather than one of the piano pieces. I still don't understand the objection to appending a clarifying note to Arrangements. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Milkunderwood, I think you are missing the point. Anybody can call anything they like a 'Song without Words', and Wikipedia can't stop them. This article is about the pieces which Mendelssohn wrote and called 'Songs Without Words'. The only cello piece which should be mentioned here in detail therefore is the op. 109 piece, and I am still waiting for the opportunity to research that - I will add a holding comment to the article in the meantime. If a record company is confusing you, complain to the record company, not to Wikipedia. Many  of the pieces, and of Mendelssohn's lieder, have been arranged for other instruments (including the cello arrangements you mention), but not by Mendelssohn. Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 12:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Smerus, your addition to the Arrangements section does the trick for me; thanks very much. I wasn't trying to cause trouble here, but was honestly confused. As I said, I'm not a musician, and frankly, my interest in Mendelssohn in general as a composer is quite limited. Rather, I was approaching this whole thing from a curiosity about cello music, and the opus numbers on various so-called Lieder ohne Worte didn't seem to make sense or match up with the solo piano versions. (I'm familiar only with the piano and the accompanied cello pieces; I can't stay in the same room with somebody singing a Lied.) Your point about "anybody can call anything they like" is well taken; for that matter, anybody can come here to Wikipedia and start editing whatever they like, but at least here garbage will eventually be found and corrected or deleted. But still, I've occasionally gotten the impression that some articles seem to be written by experts *for* experts, without taking into consideration that others with just enough knowledge to be dangerous will also be wandering by, and getting into a muddle. That's what happened to me here (but at least I was cautious enough to post to the discussion rather than messing with the article itself). I appreciate everyone's patience, and the help given. Milkunderwood (talk) 13:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  thanks for raising the issue, and I am glad you find the article a bit better now. I will try to find out more about op. 109 but the facts are a bit elusive at the moment! Best regards--Smerus (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  additional Lieder Ohne Worte with different opus numbers 

message: Book I's opus number appears here,  here and here as 19b, not just 19.  
On checking Mendelssohn's catalogue, I see he wrote a set of 6 Songs, Op. 19a, so it would make sense for there to be an Op. 19b.  Problem is, I've never seen this designation used anywhere else.  
Anyone know anything about this?  --  ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 08:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: 19b is right, as per your authorities. I have corrected. --Smerus (talk) 10:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, why do almost all scores and references omit the "b"?  --  ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 11:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea, but my own list says 19b as well, so I'm pretty sure it's in the thematic catalog published a few years ago. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Book I: Op. 19 or Op. 19b?

message: In the introduction to this article the Lieder ohne Worter are described as "a series of short lyrical songs (Lieder), with piano accompaniment." This should probably be: these are Lieder written for piano, and thus "ohne worter", or something to that effect. Or does anyone know the reason for this confusing wording? AloysiusBotycos (talk) 13:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Somebody somewhere might know. Looks like a mistake to me. I have reverted back to a previous version. The question still arises (at least in English) - can songs without words really be songs? Aren't they just tunes, or musical pieces? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:00, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  With piano accompaniment?!