Commons:Featured sound candidates/File:Menuet bwv anh 114 115 Anna Magdalena.wav

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Menuet bwv anh 114 115 Anna Magdalena.wav[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 19:05:08
To visit the nomination page click here.
File Location  File Location  Description Two ex-J. S. Bach minuets arranged in electronic berceuse musical box format, merged without ritornello. Unique work.

So I'll wait for the others' advices to consider making an alternate proposal. Millennium bug (talk) 01:53, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, side point, but is there ever a ritornello? Do you mean no da capo to the first minuet? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the original form each minuet have two parts, both with ritornello. Da capo either. Millennium bug (talk) 20:32, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I used to play this piece, and of course I've also heard it performed many times. My memory is Minuet I (Maggiore) - Minuet II (Minore) - Minuet I da capo. Ritornelli are normally in fast movements of concerti (think of the famous opening of the "Spring" concerto in Vivaldi's "The Four Seasons", which is repeated in part in different keys throughout the first movement, interspersed with solo passages) or some portions of cantatas sometimes (Bach's "Wachet Auf" has a famous example in a movement that features chorus and orchestra), never in minuets (unless maybe if Monterverdi or someone else in the relatively early 17th century wrote minuets, as the style was quite different then than in the 18th century). Are you really dead sure you're using the term ritornello correctly? For anyone who wants to understand what a ritornello is and how it relates to the rest of a concerto movement, here's a good explanation you can listen to and look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alt version[edit]

New file without trills, improved sound quality and a second fraction before starting. Let's try if it works now. :-) Millennium bug (talk) 06:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC) [reply]
File Location  

  •  Oppose - The style is better, even if still a bit robotic in giving the 1st beat of each measure the same weight many measures in a row. However, it has two wrong notes in the left hand in measure 15 - you have A-B-D instead of C-D-D, a mistake that makes the left and right hands play in parallel octaves for 2 beats, totally unacceptable in this style. I think that what you mean instead of "ritornello" is repeats. Minuets normally have the form AABB or AAA<superscript>1</superscript>A<superscript>1</superscript>, and you've reduced that to AB or AA<superscript>1</superscript> in both minuets. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - In fairness, since this is such a famous and often-played piece, I doubt I'd support featuring any electronic version, but if I do, it'll have to be really fantastic. So if you want to try to impress me, aside from fixing the two crucial note errors, think about which measures are stronger and weaker and calibrate the accentuation accordingly. One really common pattern in measure accentuation is STRONG weak STRONG weak, but that's not the only pattern. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks for now. Fixing the mistakes of classical music harmony canons would not be a problem. But the other disagreementes (weighing tempos and restoring repeats) are out of the inicial purpose, of emulating a simple berceuse music box (and you probable reject this principle). Thus, in order to avoid changing the proposal kernel, I'll wait the others' advice previosously to a possible third attempt. Thanks again. Millennium bug (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say you should change the tempo or restore repeats, but you need to correct the glaring wrong notes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've just checked the original Petzold's manuscript and he himself has written the "mistaken" parallel octave. So I'm in a dilemma, don't you agree? Millennium bug (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, no real dilemma. It's an obvious scribe's mistake. Fix it to the notes everyone uses. The idea that whatever is in the text is always right is an erroneous 20th-century idea. 18th-century and even 19th-century manuscripts often exist in several versions, all somewhat different from one another, and even printed versions can have errors. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So it seems that people that identified the scribe's mistake haven't show this thesis because all available scores (see, e.g. in Google or Imlsp) simply repeat it. Nonetheless, I'd agree in changing if there were more editors in the discussions to endorse it. For now let's wait. Thank you again. Millennium bug (talk) 17:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In these kinds of instances, basic knowledge of 18th-century style in written European music is sufficient to understand that a careless scribe wrote 2 notes a third too low. I feel sure the modern edition I played from when I was 6 had the correct notes, because I played them, but I have no idea what happened to that sheet music over the years. What I do know is that those parallel octaves are ugly in this context and unacceptable, and could not possibly have been the intent of any composer of the period with any degree of musical knowledge or understanding at all, including a 6-year-old. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:35, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've understood and I trust you so I will take care of your advice in the next proposal. Millennium bug (talk) 18:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit conflict] By the way, I'm sorry if I sound abrasive. I'm a professional musician, have a Doctorate in music and taught all kinds of music courses for years, and I also compose, so it's my expertise speaking. I don't have universal expertise on all aspects of music (I imagine some of you know more about hip hop and electronic music than I do, for example), but I know some things very well and don't shrink from speaking confidently and emphatically about them. However, I don't mean to be disrespectful or assholish. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course you're not at all disruptive. You've opened my mind about scribe errors and misconceptions of the "composer-loyalty-school" (of which I've already aware of). I'm an amateur musician and even though I know the interdiction of parallel octaves (and other rules) mainly in cases like that, because we have two voices. I feel thankful for your contribution. I will play the minuets on piano (much later than 6yo) and if you want to visit Brazil you are invited. :-). Thank you for all. Millennium bug (talk) 20:38, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I very much hope to visit Brazil some day! One of my most important teachers was Keith Underwood, who's based here in New York but spent a year in Brazil on a Fulbright grant studying a virtuosic form of traditional wooden flute music while giving concerts and master classes on modern flute. He's been back to Brazil many times and speaks fluent Portuguese. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /—Eatcha (talk) 09:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_sound_candidates/File:Menuet_bwv_anh_114_115_Anna_Magdalena.wav&oldid=355364173"