lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Caprice No. 5 (Paganini)

message: God, this is one of the worst articles I've seen on Wikipedia.  It's definitely written by a guitarist who doesn't know the history of this piece.  
First, it's foremost a violin piece--duh.  It hasn't been attempted in its entirety on the guitar until Elliot Fisk did the entire 24 Caprice transcription for the classical guitar.  The earlier electric guitar transcriptions never stayed true to the original piece and deviated quite substantially (maybe out of technical limitations of the guitar and the guitarist) from the original piece.  Second, all of the bastardizations of the piece done by neo-classical rock guitarists explored the piece as a theme.  I don't ever remember seeing it played in its original score.  Third, although the piece has been played on the guitar in its entirety, no guitarist has been able to play it sufficiently as fast as a virtuoso violinist.  This is a testament to the guitar's limitations at playing fast scales.  Most guitarists finish this piece around 3 minutes.  Elliot Fisk did it in under 2:50.  For the Malmsteem nut-huggers, even Malmsteen was listening to Fisk's recording for months and stated in interviews that he was very interested in Fisk's recording and playing.  So, on average, a very fast guitarist has played this piece around 2:50.  For a violinist, Leonidas Kavakos played this piece in under 1:47.  That's nearly a 40% increase in speed.  So, although this piece has been played on the guitar, it just doesn't do it any justice.  Finally, I've seen many mentions of this piece making an encore in Crossroads.  That is not the case.  The piece that was played in Crossroads has been inspired by the 5th, but it is in no way the 5th and doesn't even resemble the 5th musically.  I will remove that section of the article.
Please, let's keep Wikipedia accurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.200.125.28 (talk) 21:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Talk:The Birds (Respighi)

message: Is this the piece with the pre-recorded birds that gets played at the end?  If so, some details on that would be interesting.  Thanks.DavidRF (talk) 03:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather late reply, but no, I that's Pines of Rome (Pines of the Janiculum) Rob (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  pre-recorded birds at the end?
Talk:Grande valse brillante in E-flat major (Chopin)

message: What is this piece of music about?
 Evope (talk) 00:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary Of Music
Talk:Harawi (Messiaen)

message: What language was really used in this subject? "Doundou Tchil" doesn't sound as Quechua words, Quechua language has no voiced stops at all.  Raoul NK (talk) 11:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a footnote about Raoul NK (talk) 11:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Currently reading Siglind Bruhn's "Messiaen's Explorations of Love and Death", which discusses in detail the present song cycle. A resource for Messiaen that influenced the work was the compendium of collected Andean folk songs by the French ethnomusicologist and composer Marguerite Bélcard d'Harcourt compiled with her husband Raoul d'Harcourt, "La Musique des Incas et ses survivances". From Bruhn, regarding the fifth song in the cycle (which does include in its text, among other onomatopoeic words, "doundou tchil"): "According to the d'Harcourts explanation, "dundu čil" (which Messiaen transcribes for his French readers as doundou tchil) is an onomatopoeic expression in the Quechua language recalling the clanging of the rings and bells Andean dances wear attached to their ankles" (Bruhn 167). The author cites 458-60 of the d'Harcout catalogue. It is possible that the "variance with Quecha phonetics" is caused by Messiaen's adjustment of the original transcription either in an exercise of artistic liberty or for reasons regarding French phonetics. In any case, this may require either a review of the d'Harcourt source or an expert in the matter of the Quecha language (or both) for a conclusion to be reached. --130.157.94.166 (talk) 08:13, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quechua words
Talk:Horn Trio (Brahms)

message: Hrm... indeed, which page? There is an entire chapter Google-preview-readable, devoted to this trio (chapter 8, starts here, pp.77-86) in Mason's book, but the quote about recovery from mourning appears nowhere within it.  Somewhere else in the book? Some other book? Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I know it's two years after, but I've located two works with the title "The Chamber Music of Brahms" on the Internet archive, first is Mason's book from 1933:
https://archive.org/details/chambermusicofbr00maso
There is also a book from 1932 by Henry S. Drinker:
https://archive.org/details/chambermusicofjo00drin
I plan to check these after Christmas.
Graham1973 (talk) 00:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mason quote 

message: The line: * The Adagio from the Horn Trio is said to be one of Brahms’ most impassioned and heartfelt slow movements.* may have been a paraphrase of this line from Mason 1933: *The Adagio mesto is one of the most profoundly felt and one of the most subtly composed of all the slow movements of Brahms.*
The line reading: *The joy felt in the Finale symbolizes the recovery at the end of mourning.* does not appear to be related to anything in Mason 1933, I have flagged it as WP:OR. Graham1973 (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible sources

message: One of the references missing a page is from the 1982 edition of "Brahms: His Life and Work" by Karl Geiringer an enlarged version of the third edition is viewable on Google Books.
Google Books: "Brahms: His Life and Work" by Karl Geiringer
Graham1973 (talk) 04:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Source
Talk:Il Trionfo del Tempo e Disinganno

message: The main article on The Triumph of Time and Truth already has a section on the earliest version of the oratorio with this title.  Thus this entry with the Italian title is redundant, in my opinion.  I suggest deletion of this article.  Any other opinions?  Thanks, DJRafe (talk) 07:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion for article deletion
Talk:GLUMP

message: GLUMP is an eircom wholesale product. It is a result of how Comreg has regulated LLU in Ireland. The only offical defintion of it is the cited eircom Document.
It was supposed to solve number portability issues off LLU. Only Magnet networks used it. Because it is a peculiar Irish solution to an Irish problem it was added to explain the GLUMP mentioned in eircom article.
There can be no complete understanding of Irish LLU market without reference to GLUMP.
* I have added much more context, content, and cites. Bearian 22:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I took the nomination back. I think we should keep the article. It has been improved since I nominated it.UserDoe 23:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afd
Talk:Zvezdoliki

message: I don't know if the CBS recording conducted (supposedly) by Stravinsky includes the chords or not, but I know the Tilson Thomas and Craft recordings do, and I have the sense that most performances do. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 17:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sung superscription 
Talk:Van Norman Machine Tool Company

message: (moved from the main page) - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 22:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:COPYRIGHT and WP:COPYREQ for information about copyrights and how to grant permission for it to be used on Wikipedia. Without this, anything copied from the other website will be immediately removed, whether you own it or not. Thank you - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 00:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Nocturnes, Op. 27 (Chopin)

message: Oh look! Didnt you two make a good article ;) Lucifer (Talk) 22:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  DYK 

message: The metronome mark (Chopin's, as far as I can tell) seems impossibly fast --- much faster than the fastest performance I've ever heard, faster than I can imagine it being played expressively.  Does anyone know anything about this? Musanim (talk) 23:39, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tempo?
Talk:Nocturnes, Op. 32 (Chopin)

message: I refer to this passage from the article:
:The piece is 65 measures long and, unusually, ends in the tonic minor key, B minor. There has been confusion over a key in the first bar of the last line: Theodor Kullak and Karl Klindworth use a G, while Julian Fontana used an F-sharp.
There's a lot more that's confused than just the G vs. F-sharp thing.  (I've always understood G to be the accepted version, although I don't know for sure.)
There is doubt about whether the last chord is B major or B minor - I've seen both in different editions.  Does anyone know which is correct, and whether the incorrect version resulted from an editor "correcting" something he thought wrong, or whether the uncertainty is in Chopin's manuscript?  (The manuscript might be unclear, or there might be two or more manuscripts which disagree on this.)  Whatever the case, perhaps it could be mentioned in the article.  It makes a huge difference to the overall effect of this strange ending whether the last chord is major or minor.  (I've always understood the minor chord to be correct, but again I don't know for sure.)
Also, in the edition on I.M.S.L.P. (http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/5/56/IMSLP00464-Chopin_-_2_Nocturnes__Op_32.pdf) the final D-natural octave in the right and left hands is shown to be simultaneous with the chord F-sharp, E, G-natural, A-sharp - yet I always understood that the D sounded a crotchet before the chord came in, thus adding the value of a crotchet to the passage.  The version shown in that edition (which I've never seen before) looks to me like an editor tinkered with it to shoehorn the notes into a 4/4 straitjacket.
Finally, there seem to be at least two different versions of the rhythm of the entire last two lines of music (beginning with the repeated E-sharps in the bass - which I think I've seen notated as F-naturals).  The edition on I.M.S.L.P. puts bars throughout in dotted lines to make the passage conform to 4/4 metre, and also imposes a particular rhythm on the octave recitative in the second half of the penultimate line; yet other editions have no bar-lines at all (except for the last two), and the recitative is notated all in quavers, joined together.
Does anyone know about these points, and which versions are authentically from Chopin?  I think the last two lines of this Nocturne are one of the most disputed passages in Chopin's entire output. M.J.E. (talk) 20:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous points - created by editors, or in original M.S.?
Talk:List of songs written by Dottie Rambo

message: I am looking for sheet music for the song: The Stable Housed a Mighty King, performed by Dottie Rambo.  Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions on where to find such sheet music?  I've only been able to find a cassette available and already have that.
Thank you,
Pam Pamiej 22:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Piano Sonata in A major, D 664 (Schubert)

message: This is a very good summary.  I would just make sure to cite all of your statements, where possible.  Also, your first two comments under "for further reading" are not as accessible to non-musical people. Good description of the tone of the music, but some of the wording is awkward/difficult to understand. Also, there are a few phrases that are somewhat opinionatedSlee60uic (talk) 00:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Piano Sonata No. 2 (Rachmaninoff)

message: I've made some revisions to this page.  First, I deleted some unencyclopedic, POV drivel added by an anonymous user.  I've removed a dead link and added a citation which links to a detailed analysis of the various performing versions of the work.  I've also tweaked the timings of the different versions of the piece.THD3 (talk) 20:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

message: It seems to me that you can't have an article disscusisng this sonata without making any reference to Rachmaninoff's references of Ravel's "La Valse" in the third movement. However, I could not find any material on the subject through google-searching related keywords, which is perplexing to me.
If someone reading this can have a go at finding a reliable source adressing the matter it would be greatly appreciated.
Uritibon (talk) 11:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do you find these occur?  SPECIFICO talk  16:52, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are the references to Ravel's "La Valse"?
Talk:Piano Sonata in E major, D 459 (Schubert)

message: In the notes to Kempff's Deutsche Grammophon set, I read that "Nos. 1 and 2 are movts. of an incomplete sonata. No. 5 may have been written in 1817 and could be the 1st movt. of another sonata in E major. When published in a transcription for piano duet in 1864, the 5 Piano Pieces were given the title 'Grand Sonata', adopted ever since."
The Wikipedia article makes just the reverse claim: that the work is not a collection of various pieces thrown together and labelled "sonata" but a single work intended as a sonata in unusual form and therefore misidentified by the publisher.
So which is right? S.Camus (talk) 07:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a very late reply, but this article might shed some light on the situation. Personally I'm on the side stating that D.459 is a complete 5-movement sonata. Double sharp (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ...ah. That was before I found this article. Yes, it is actually a collection of various pieces thrown together and labelled "sonata". However, the selection was a good one, because the pieces chosen have stylistic unity and a logical key scheme for a 5-movement sonata. Double sharp (talk) 12:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. I suppose it indeed makes for a better piece of music if you take Eva Badura-Skoda's performance suggestion and cut the first scherzo (making the key scheme I-VI-IV-I), but at this point we are trying to correct Schubert, which is a dangerous game to play. (Similar would be Paul Badura-Skoda's suggestion to reverse the order of the two middle movements of D 625: well-intentioned, effective, and probably historically unjustified.) OTOH, since the Fünf Klavierstücke as a whole are "a second-hand product designed for the early Schubert reception" according to the article I linked above in my September 2014 post, this four-movement solution actually better reflects Klemm's initial conception (removing the unfinished second movement of the Sonata). Double sharp (talk) 07:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Genuine sonata or collage?
Talk:Piano Sonata No. 6 (Prokofiev)

message: Please revise the existing text under the first movement. It is written like and advertisement, and Wikipedia is not one. Also, the subsequent movements are empty, and info should be added on there. ->Challisrussia (talk) 03:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revise existing text and add info about subsequent movements 

message: This article should not have a "Criticism" section, particularly being that the entire section consists of the opinions of one individual, which are not representative of any sort of prevailing opinion regarding the piece. For any great work, you can find someone who's had negative things to say about aspects of it. Similarly, you can find unequivocal praise from equally qualified sources. For instance Richter remarked of the Sonata, "With wild audacity the composer broke with the ideals of Romanticism and introduced into his music the terrifying pulse of twentieth-century music. Classically well-balanced in spite of all its asperities, the Sixth Sonata is an utterly magnificent work." Why not have a "Praise" section? Or why not have a "Criticism" section on every piece which has been criticized?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.51.3 (talk) 03:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: This article really doesn't need the "Criticism" section
Talk:Savannakhet province

message: Isn't there a district called Muang Phin or is it in another district? Badagnani 22:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes: Phine District ;) --katpatuka (talk) 18:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Muang Phin

message: I'm a bit confused:
* 13-10 Xonnabouly redirects to Khanthaboury District - but sounds like Xonbouli/Xonbuly ເມືອງຊົນບຸລີ 
* 13-14 Xayphouthong ເມືອງໄຊພູທອງ redirects to Xonboury District - there is also a wikidata item for Xayphouthong (Q10834764)
please cross-check. --katpatuka (talk) 18:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong redirected districts ?
Talk:Blond Ambition World Tour Live

message: "...Falcon Neue Medien which had obtained a licence to release it only in that country. Neither Madonna nor Warner Bros. Records authorized the release."
If this DVD was released without approval of Warner and Madonna (as the article says), where they get the license?? I think this DVD is illegal.--88marcus (talk) 00:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't understand this 
Talk:Preludes, Op. 23 (Rachmaninoff)

message: Hello,
Over the next few weeks, I'll be adding to this page and cleaning up the article with some scholarly sources. Also, I'm going to create pages for the other 9 preludes and analyze them in the style of the wikipedia page on Beethoven's Diabelli Variations. I'm very interested to hear suggestions anyone might have about Op. 23!
Cheers,
Dsauve (talk) 06:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions / cleanup
Talk:Rondos, Op. 51 (Beethoven)

message: I've seen in two separate publications these two pieces published as WoO 51, rather than Op. 51.  The IMSLP has the #1 listed correctly, but the #2 is listed as WoO instead of Op.  Also, the CD Sheet Music collection I have has them both labelled as WoO.  They're not the same publication, as you can clearly see differences in the way they're laid out.  (For example, the #1 is 6 pages on CD Sheet Music, and 9 pages on IMSLP.  There are other subtle differences as well, dynamic markings, note grouping, placement of fingering indicators, etc.)  I wonder how widespread this error is.  Clearly, the correct numbering is Op. 51, not WoO 51.  WoO 51 is supposedly a fragment of an unpublished piano sonata, though I've yet to find a score or recording of it, so it's possible that one of these Rondos is indeed that fragment, but I doubt it.  Anyhow, I'm not sure how widespread this error is, but the fact that it's appeared in two unrelated sources might be worth mentioning. Lurlock (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a recording of WoO 51 on Naxos with Jeno Jando.  Its the last volume of their piano sonata cycle which includes the Pastorale and then the WoO 47, Anh5 and WoO 51 sonatina/sonatas as filler.  There, WoO 51 doesn't sound anything like either of the Op. 51 rondos.DavidRF (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't think so, it was just a theory.  I still wonder how far back the numbering discrepency goes.  It may be that both the publications I looked at copied the same error from some earlier source.  It's worth noting that the error appears on the score itself.  Both of them have the pieces correctly labeled as Op. 51, but when you look at the actual music, that's when you see that they've been mislabeled.  Now, I'm pretty sure that both IMSLP and CD Sheet Music get their much of their content by scanning paper books (rather than storing the music data digitally).  Thus I'd guess that the error extends at least as far back as whatever paper publications these two were using, which were, again, different publications for reasons I mentioned before.  IMSLP states in their legal pages that their publications must be old enough to be public domain (though I'm sure this rule is often broken).  CD Sheet Music is a commercial company that I'm sure has similar internal rules, and probably are more strict about it.  Thus the error likely dates back at least 75 years, and probably more if both of their sources were copying from some yet-earlier common source.  Lurlock (talk) 12:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Op. 51 or WoO 51?
Talk:Six moments musicaux (Schubert)

message: Is momens really a mistake? According to Reforms of French orthography, "[t]he spelling of some plural words whose singular form ended in D and T was modified to reinsert this mute consonant" only in 1835, after Schubert's death; is moments one of them? Double sharp (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is! (Link is to 1798 edition of the Dictionnaire de l'Académie françoise.) So this is not really a mistake but a spelling reform that occurred after Schubert's time. Double sharp (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

message: I think it is just you. While the Schnabel files may be "old recording[s] from a well-renowned pianist", they're also not terribly good at demonstrating the sound of the pieces. The recordings sound like you're hearing them from underwater, with a fair bit of background noise here and there as well.
While the Krueger files are MIDIs, they're MIDIs that sound no different from a high quality recording. As a matter of fact, , I genuinely thought they were performances that had been recorded, and I only found out they weren't upon looking more closely.
I'd say the pedigree of the performer and the format are less important than the quality of the tracks. Toast for Teddy (talk) 02:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I don't know. I have a fairly strong bias against MIDI, even good ones (in fact, I had an interesting experience of my own when first listening to one of Krueger's files]]. Having said that, on listening to #2 of the Schnabel set, I can hear what you mean by it sounding like it was played underwater! (I'd previously only heard #1, which mostly doesn't seem that bad, at least to my ears). Graham87 06:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krueger v. Schnabel
Talk:Sonatina in F major (attributed to Beethoven)

message: This appears in a number of sources with "Beethoven" attached but I am not convinced it's authentic Beethoven... Anh5b but no WoO number or other cataloguing in sight anywhere (not just sheet music) is one of many issues that comes to mind, people are a little more systematic nowadays... Schissel | Sound the Note! 01:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember this one from the piano books growing up.  The Suzuki piano books have the companion G major piece in their book 2.  Naxos has a recording of it .  None of this implies authenticity, though.  I found a few amateur lists that both say "probably spurious" .  It would be nice if there was an official listing somewhere that we could site. DavidRF (talk) 02:09, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Authenticity question
Talk:Bredenbury, Saskatchewan

message: Created the page, added the basics, will work on additional information.  Leafschik1967 22:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:String Quartet No. 3 (Bacewicz)

message: Hi, I am Colonmon, and I will be revising this article as part of my class on chamber music literature this spring. My focus will be on looking to known influences on Grażyna Bacewicz and how they can be seen in this piece, as well as evaluating this piece within the context of her other compositions. I look forward to your feedback on my revisions.
Colonmon (talk) 03:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction
Talk:Mount Pelion West

message: The articles about mountains are not climbing guides but encyclopedia entries - please help cleanup SatuSuro 00:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Encyclopediac tone and context

message: There would have to be a history section, famous people who have been there, casualties, geology, references on some  statements that may come from nowhere, and where the name came from, also related items. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvements
Talk:Gospel of the Horns

message: *Metal Archives Page
*Official Myspace Page
*Invictus Productions
*Gospel of the Horns interview
removed these from external links as per WP:EXT. moved the interviews into the article as inline refs. kept the band's page as per WP:ELOFFICIAL Kathodonnell (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed some external links 