Talk:Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme, BWV 140

message: :Another setting by J.S. Bach is a chorale prelude for organ (Schübler Chorale No. 1), BWV 645, which has been recorded with cello by Yo-Yo Ma. This work is most often performed in an instrumental arrangement, without the choir, under the name "Sleepers Awake" with one performer as a soloist. Usually the solo instrument is a cello. The instrumental arrangement has made this perhaps the most performed Bach cantata and one of the most performed pieces by Bach. It lasts about 5 minutes.
I removed this text because it's totally irrelevant to the cantata. The portions concerning the cello, while not inaccurate, concern an arrangement of BWV 645, which is an arrangement itself for organ of the cantata movement for tenors and obbligato oboe. Thus, it is unnecessary for it to be a part of the article. This article is currently in a rather woeful state; I will edit it further soon. —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 23:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to go on record to say that I believe this information needs either be included in this article or made into a completely different article.    BWV 645 is a terrific and famous work, which I actually thought this page was referring to, until I read closer.  Kntrabssi 09:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not new, but just updating people who are reading this later (like me) that BWV 645 has an article as one of the Schübler Chorales DavidRF 06:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant information 

message: I have now added more information to this article, including basic musical characteristics and appropriate (read: Lutheran-specific, as Bach was a Lutheran) information on the situation with the lectionaries. More musical information from someone who knows would be welcome! In particular, I have heard that there has been a virtually exhaustive study of BWV 140 done, but I don't know who did it. It should be referenced! I removed the information regarding the Revised Common Lectionary, as Lutherans use either the historic one-year lectionary or their own three-year lectionary, not RCL. Furthermore, it is a shame that chorale fantasia is currently red-linked, as this is a great genre of music. I will plan to start an article on it soon. —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 13:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There might be more information to be found in these discussions.  —Sesquialtera II (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More information 

message: I wonder where whoever wrote it got that there's an Oboe da caccia? The score clearly indicates a 'taille' (which is apparently just Bach word for a cor anglais), and the oboe solo during the duet being a normal oboe. Maybe newer versions show the caccia, but the linked one in the one I've always seen. Anyone? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no Taille page. I'm not expert on baroque precursors to the cor anglais, but I'll try to reword it... Pfly (talk) 09:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to follow-up -- there is a Taille page obviously, but it's not about the instrument. I looked in the Oxford Composer Companions: J.S. Bach book (ed. Malcolm Boyd, 1999) and found two bits of info. First, "taille" is defined as a "French term used generally for any voice or instrument which plays a middle, or tenor, part. In Bach's scores 'taille' usually indicates an oboe da caccia." Second, under the oboe da caccia entry, "... 'taille' is given as designation ... only when the instrument is used alongside two oboes." Anyway, I can't pretend to be knowledgeable about baroque instruments and Bach's terms for them myself, but I thought I'd pass along this bit of info on the topic. Pfly (talk) 04:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrent instrumentation? 

message: There was no reason to remove the referenced in pop culture section, it is accurate and the removal should be documented instead of erroneously reverting the page for no reason.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.40.91 (talk) 09:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: All the pop culture sections in the WP:CM wikiproject have been removed.  Check BWV 147, check the Brandenburg concerti, check the Beethoven symphonies, Moonlight sonata.  That's the reason.  See archives at the talk page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music for more details.  Cheers.DavidRF (talk) 13:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop culture sections

message: Wouldn't it be known as "Sleepers, awake"?  (Wachet auf.)User:Sca
:That's not listed because its the best translation, its listed because that's what everyone calls it.  It came from an older translation which tried to keep the syllable count the same for singing and the name stuck.  Newer translations generally leave out the "sleepers".  Newer translations are available in the external links section.  But the old name has stuck.DavidRF (talk) 21:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: Movements are typically titled with the German, not the Italian; we include the English borrowed terms recitative and aria to show the structure. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Bach himself titled the arias Aria in the score, the recitatives Recitativo, - he did not always do that, sometimes only for some movements, typically not for the first movement (but here: Chorale). I think it's worth mentioning. Perhaps you can do it better? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any sources to suggest that he intended these as titles rather than labels, or any secondary sources discussing the naming? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have the Dürr source (and he was one of the editors of the NBA) showing exactly what was written by Bach and what not. I don't know which would be the best term for this, "label" seems two weak. We don't have to muse about Bach's intentions when he wrote these words, I assume. (A help for the performers might be a reason, who would sing a recitative differently, for example.) He did not write movement numbers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but do any secondary sources discuss the naming, rather than simply report? How would a recitative be sung differently than a recitativo, when the two mean the same? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Misunderstanding? I meant that Bach may have written Recitativo and Aria to instruct the performers. Sometimes he didn't. Whatever his reasons, I believe that it is interesting for some readers what he wrote himself. Why do you ask for discussion? Voice parts and scoring are given as facts, without being "discussed". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not appear to be significant that he indicated the recitative as "recitativo" rather than "recitative"; as such, it makes more sense to provide the more standard and familiar label. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movements