IMSLP Forums

Hello You all...


Since I will soon feel "finished" with WAM: Any suggestions what to do next? I thnk I prefer orchestral music (or at least music for single line instrumentations) since my eyesight is not all that good. But if there is a part for harp or piano or... that will not be any problem since will try to over the score for corrections twice. I´m not "afraid" of large scores.

DALTORPS (Brian Cohn).

I know that Shostakovich Symphony No. 5 has piano AND harp...

I fail to see how this is a score request...

Hello again.

To "Violinist18":

1. I can not do Shostakovich since I live in a EU country (Sweden). Shostakovich died in 1975.
2. I just meant that a piano or a harp harp will not be a problem because of my eyesight.
It did not mean that it was a requirement that there would be a part for harp or a piano.

To "Daphnis":

You are right: This is not a score request but quite the opposite... But since I did not know under which category this type off questions should be I put it under "Score request". I just want to get some suggestions about with what I can contribute to this exellent site after my Mozart "project" i ended.

Best regards

DALTORPS (Brian Cohn)

Dear Brian, I see. Perhaps a more appropriate forum could be used, but that aside, I'm sure other suitable projects can be found Would you mind posting links to some of your existing contributions on the wiki?

Best "Daphnis".

I have so far only done Mozart for IMSLP:

Violin Sonatas K.6-15 (K.26-31 will come soon)
God Is Our Refuge (Psalm 46) K.20 for mixed chorus a capella
Miserere in a minor K.85 for ATB and bass
Kyrie für Fünf Sopranen K.89
Concertone in C K.190 for 2 Violins and Orchestra
Sonata in B flat K. 292 for Bassoon and Violoncello
Kanon K.508
Ave Maria K.554

Please feel free to my my topic to a more suiteble category if you wish.

Best regards

DALTORPS (Brian Cohn).

Brian, I had a look at the violin sonatas and saw these are typesets. Are you asking for a re-typesetting project, or a scanning project?

Hi.

For the time being I am only doing re-typsets. Since I am amateur I thnk the most interessting way is to re-typeset because you come "under" the score´s "skin". AND: I do not own a scaner...

I just now noticed that you are a copyright reviewer...

Best regards

DALTORPS (Brian Cohn).

Dear Brian,

There is still so much music out there not covered on IMSLP, that you should just contribute what is dear to you yourself and that you want to share with other users.


I have, however, a suggestion for you that would make your contributions much more useful to many more users. Music typesets involve so much work that it is a real shame, if your efforts are far less than useful for some users of IMSLP.
My Issue:

Had just a look at your typesets for K.10, because those early violin sonatas are also really nice to play on my own instrument, the oboe, even for an amateur like me

Now I know I myself am rather fond of the best scans and computer typesets possible, and I don't want to force my preferences onto all users of IMSLP, or want to imply that other users may not find these typesets useful (even if the Bärenreiter set of K.10-15 sells for just 18.50 euro). But I would have a very, very hard time using such a typeset to actually perform from it.

Why? Accidentals that are hidden by noteheads, noteheads that flow together to a single black blur, not even to mention that I found 2 wrong notes already in the first 3 lines of the violin part and that pageturns have not been optimized.
Even the most rudamentary music typesetting programs nowadays allow a page layout that avoids collisions of noteheads and accidentals: So, please try to use such a layout function before you compile PDF's for download - it works almost instantaneous and automatically, adding only minimally to the time you need to enter the music.
It would also hope you could try to minimize errors in the typesets by more careful proofreading or actually using your typesets to play through them - but this can take a lot of time, and I myself know only too well, how fiendishly difficult it can be to detect every single error in a page of music.

I concur with Kalliwoda's assessment (by the way, Kalliwoda, I've been a long-standing fan of your music; your Oboe Concertino, Op. 110 especially ) and would like to use it as a springboard for my comment: Typesets are useful from the standpoint of an exercise to become familiar with the program, techniques involved, etc., but unless you're doing scholarly or otherwise very solid editorial work lacking in the engraved score, one's time could be spent elsewhere. Having said that, I would strongly urge you, if you truly want to make a serious commitment to the site, make the investment in a scanner and find some public domain music out there. These original source editions are important to preserve and there's enough remaining to fill two lifetimes.

Dear "Kolliwoda".

Thank you for your comments.

The K.10(-15) you looked at was my absolutly first contribution(s) to IMSLP soit may be even more errors in the piece (pieces). I will look in to this as soon as possibile.

The problems with accidentals that are hidden by noteheads I hope that this problem has been solved in my newest contributions that will come soon since I, "to late", discovered my programs "automatic spacing" function.

I find it quite amazing that even if you THINK your are so careful to the notes right it is allways SOMETHING that is wrong and that is why I allways, especially in large scores. try at my best to go through it twice. I always listned as I go throught it but sometimes it obviously does not help...

Of course commercial editions has to be "perfect" otherwise the publisher would not sell any.
This is NOT AT ALL ment to be a excuse for lausy re-typesettings but that it the way it is...

About "Daphnis "comment "... would strongly urge you, if you truly want to make a serious commitment..."

As I wrote in my topic "What to do next". that I explained that I re-typeset, even I have to admit is it quite "crazy" since it is time consuming but I gues I am bit "crazy" , because I see this also as a way to "study" music insted of "just" copying it in a scaner since I will not attend a music college. But "scaners" are off course just as good and, sometimes, even better.

I do feel that I am a truly serious about what I am doing for/at this site. This is because I want to belive that that this site valuble for many congregations and amateur/community orchestras and other (amateur) music gropus with tight budgets.

I will try to remember to give you a notice when I have uploaded the fixed versions of the
K. 10-15 uploaded.


Sncerely

Daltorps (Brian Cohn).

To my mind, anybody looking to do home typesetting could most usefully tackle the scores here that are either in manuscript form (e.g. the Tartini Violin Sonatas) or that are in an otherwise difficult-to-read format. To me the most important of the latter category are the recent uploads of the 17th century first printings of Monteverdi (madrigals and other choral works). Even a straight transcription from old note values into modern score format of the madrigals, which are presently only in individual voice parts, would be extremely helpful. Extreme care would have to be taken as to where the words are set, however. Other "amateur" typesetters have already graced this site with loads of scores of harpsichord music, set, presumably, from facsimiles of original sources. Collecting these in modern printed editions would cost many thousands of dollars.

--Sixtus

Dear Brian,

you are perfectly right - proofreading typeset music is a pain. When I do typesetting (mostly for transposition of A clarinet parts to Bb), my method so far was to keep proofreading a movement repeatedly once a day, until I do not find any errors on two consecutive days. Sometimes this takes as long as a week, but regardless of how carefully you proofread, there are always a few errors left that we only notice later during rehearsals.

So, when you say "even twice", I believe that might not be enough. I also prefer to have actually played from a typeset work before I publish it here on IMSLP.

But on the other hand, occasional errors also happen with original parts, so music publishers seem to have the same problem. Funniest occasion lately was Tschaikowsky Violin Concerto op35 by Breitkopf & Härtel, where the 3rd movement is printed as 3/4 for 2nd clarinet (when it should be 2/4). So it happens to all of us ...

Greetings - noqu

noqu wrote:When I do typesetting... keep proofreading a movement repeatedly once a day, until I do not find any errors on two consecutive days.

I do roughly the same, then send them to a friend who plays them through. It's amazing how errors slip by. It's one reason why production editors on newspapers are still such powerful (and in many cases, well paid) people. You can't beat a highly trained human eye.

I feel for Daltorps. I've done a lot of typesetting over the years and it's soul-destroying to use shonky software. I use Sibelius now. It's pricey but very, very solid.

Reply to "sbeckmesser", "noqu" and Philidor

To "nocu"

What a great idea. I will try to use your method of proofreading.

Another "problem", wich has happend even with commercial editors, is that you/they "think" "
it "should" sound in a certain way but that in turns out , at the end off he day, that the "correction" is wrong.

So since I am not a academic, although I have some knowledge in piano playing and music theory,
I would not want to "tamper" with a score to much.

To "sbeckmesser":

Another time when the re-typewriting is a good method of score is when the score is so worn out or so damaged so when you try to turn the pages it falls apart.

I have seen wich type of music you are interessed in so I will look into that.

To Philidor:

Offcourse that is a exellent way to find errors. I know some people that could help me find errors but they have jobs thay have to manage so I do not want to burden to them. It is easier if you attend a school with fellow students, or teachers, that play diffrent instruments.

I basically only know organists and only a few other "kind of" musicians.

I use Finale wich I like, even if the progam has its faults.
I know three composers that use Finale. And it is not quite so exspensive as "Sibelius".
Some like Sibelius and some like Finale...

Thank you all you kind peole.

DALTORPS (Brian Cohn).