IMSLP Forums

I've noticed that a piano work for four hands occasionally gets categorized as one for two pianos. To wit, Carl Reinecke's "2 Sonatas for 2 Pianos, Op. 275", which the PDF files reveal to be a work for piano duet (4 hands). How does one go about correcting this (my attempts, at first apparently successful, did not hold), and in how many different places?

Also, should there be a space between Op. and the number?

It seems as though an administrator reverted the edit, which is why it did not hold. The piece seems to have been, in fact, written for two pianos. Thanks for the concern! It's always helpful to have people checking over page titles to make sure they are correct

jossuk wrote: Also, should there be a space between Op. and the number?

No space between Op. and the number, so you will get for example:

Op.412
Op.7

and so on.

On the composer page for example:

Sonata in G, Op.412
Violin Piece, Op.5

So only a space between the comma and 'Op.'

If you want some more information, just read:
http://imslp.org/wiki/IMSLP:Score_submi ... l_of_Style

As far as I can tell, the PDF explicitly says that it's for two pianos (not piano four hands). Also, if you look at the ranges of the two parts, you'll see that they cross quite a bit - not at all suitable for performance on one piano.

I'm most grateful for the responses, and more than a little embarrassed at my inattentiveness.
I ignored the cover page, saw "primo" and "secondo" and, based on earlier disappointments, jumped to an unwarranted conclusion without further examination. Many thanks, as 2 piano is the preferred medium for me.

The Wikipedia article on "opus" consistently shows a space between each iteration of "Op." and the succeeding numeral. The same seems to apply in various publishers' catalogues, as well as for CDs (not counting the occasional inconsistency). It would seem most logical for the space to be there, since Op. is an abbreviation. I realize that a space-less convention may have been adopted here, but I submit that it may not be the majority convention.

Thoughts?

I seem to remember the space issue was that in proper typesetting the space is actually a half space, so the only choices are wider or narrower. IMSLP has chosen the narrower option. Now that I've gotten used to it, I much prefer it, and I've found that in text it solves the problem of the "op." and the number getting split if it ends up at the end of a line.

A half-space typesetting convention would not have occurred to me, but your explanation makes immediate sense. Thank you...