The End of "Genres"

[imslp]

1. That is, in fact, exactly how the system will work. Multiple categories will be allowed for a single tag, so you can translate the tag "Lieder" into "[[Category:Lieder]][[Category:Songs]]".
2. Technically this is possible (and in fact most likely will be implemented in the near future), though it will not be the case at first. My objective for January is to implement the minimum necessary for some significant usage of the tagging system. There will be much room for improvement, but we will have laid the groundwork, which is the most important. Insofar as usage in January is concerned, the "category walker" will be a very basic thing: it will list all categories included by the pages under the "root" category, even when these categories are not tag categories (though this may actually be a feature, e.g. composer categories under Work type/Instrumentation combo). Future improvements will be (a) separating the categories into "Instrumentation", "Work Type", "Composer", etc., (b) having a hierarchy view (like your example), (c) the combination system you want. These are not small features, so I do not want to take up too much at once in January. I want to make sure that the basics are down before doing fancy stuff However, rest assured that it is very technically possible, and will almost certainly be implemented in the not-so-distant future.

Re: abbreviation. I have no problem with not having abbreviations if you don't think they are helpful. I was just thinking that, since there is a standardized instrumentation abbreviation system that you could use it (e.g. Songs / 4 v + 2 vln + vla + vc, Sonatas / cor + pno). But this is your decision.

One thing I will warn, however, is that you should really avoid plus signs or ampersands in the actual category name (it is ok to use it in the tag because that is not the category name). Technically they work, but realistically they break more than they work, and there is no real need for them anyway. In fact, I may consider banning plus signs and ampersands from tag category names anyway. Basically just do something like "*4 voices + 2 violins + 2 violas + cello|4 voices, 2 violins, 2 violas and cello" on the TTP (tag translation page), and you are fine. The pipe sign (|) separates the tag from the translated category name.

[Davydov]

Thanks, that all sounds good. I'm really looking forward to this!

[Operalala]

1. Thank you for not lumping operas and ballets in one category. However, the category "stage works" doesn't apply to the "concert operas", i.e. Damnation de Faust, which would be expected to be found under "operas". Also "Incidental music" sounds like a catch-all, when these works could be given individual musical definitions (i.e piano piece, choral, orchestral)

2. Names like "Agnus Dei" and "Ave Maria" could be either Vocal or Choral, and should be categorized "Sacred Vocal" or "Sacred Choral" instead. Same with other mass parts, Hymns and probably some more groups.
3. More broadly, "use only when it is the composer's original title" can be unproductive. What would you do which Strauss' Opera "Cappriccio". Or all the Lieder groups titled Gesaenge, or Gedichte for that matter. Plus the title is already searchable.

4. Please use "Art Songs", and distinguish them from "Popular and traditional songs". The proposed system would only distinguish Art and Popular songs in German and French (Lied/Gesang, melodie/chanson) and obscure the difference in any other language whose special terminology is overlooked or not in use. Intersecting "Art Songs" or "Popular Songs" with the Language will yield the desired Lieder, Melodies, Chansons as well as those of all other languages as well.
Under Popular Songs, in addition to "Folksongs", are also Jazz and Cabaret. Under "Sacred Vocal" are also Spirituals.

5. "Opera-Ballets" can be found by intersecting Opera + French + Baroque.
6. The definition of "Singspiele" crosses Opera and Operetta categories. The works should be categorized Opera or Operetta.

7. Will there be categories for written works?

[steltz]

If we are going to use the MLA's Types of Compositions, we need to use it consistently instead of making exceptions for certain categories. It really will help for searching capabilities.

For example, we can't be certain that people will know to intersect Opera + French + Baroque in order to get Opera-Ballets, in fact we can be certain that some people won't know to do this. Similarly with Art Song + Language.

If it's on the MLA list, it needs to stay as a composition type.

[Davydov]

Hi Operalala. Thanks for your comments, and actually I think most of the points you raised are already addressed by the new system:

1(a). All operas, ballets and incidental music will be tagged and categorised as such, but people will also be able to find them by searching under "Stage works" if they want to.
(b) Bear in mind also that every work will be tagged for both its type and its instrumentation, so people searching under "Incidental music" will find sub-categories "Incidental music for orchestra", "Incidental music for solo voices and orchestra", "Incidental music for chorus and orchestra", etc.
(c) As far as "Le Damnation de Faust" is concerned, then Grove lists it just as a choral work, mentioning that it was adapted as an opera in 1893 (long after Berlioz's death), while the Oxford Dictionary of Music and Oxford Companion to Music both describe it as a "cantata". I'd be happy to be guided by our in-house Berlioz expert Pml on this one, but fortunately the majority of works should be much more straightforward to classify.

2. All settings of the "Agnes Dei" and "Ave Maria" that are independent of larger choral works will be found under those titles, and also under "Religious music" (and arguably under "Masses", "Hymns" and "Chants" as well) . Again the tagging system allows them to be sub-categorised according to the vocal and instrumental forces used.

3. "Use only when it is the composer's original title" is intended to prevent all German songs from automatically being classified as "Lieder". For example. Brahms published several sets of "Lieder und Gesänge" and "Lieder und Romanzen", from which it's clear that he considered "Gesänge" (songs) and "Romanzen" (romances) to be different things to "Lieder", and we should respect those distinctions. The MLA considers "Gedichte" (poem) to be a descriptive title rather than a generic type of musical composition.

4. The category "Art Song" will be created by grouping together "Lieder", "Melodies", "Romances" and comparable terms in other languages. "Folksongs" will also be separately identifed, but all of these will also be found by searching under the broader grouping of "Songs", together with other solo vocal works that are neither "Art Songs" nor "Folksongs".

5. All "Opera-ballets" will be tagged as such, and also cross-referenced independently under "Operas" and "Ballets". As we've touched on before, there are 19th-century opera-ballets as well (like 'Mlada').

6. "Singspiele" and "Operetta" will be classified according to the composer's description, but both will also be cross-referenced from the broader category of "Opera".

7. Yes, there will still be categories for written works.

[Operalala]

1a. "Vocal music" and "Dance music" should be the higher categories respectively for Opera and Ballet. How much of a need is there to look up specifically operas and ballets together?
1b. But what is the "Higher work type category" that everything from "Peter and the Wolf" to film accompaniment will be assigned to? It can't be "orchestral" or "keyboard pieces" because this will transclude keyboard pieces into the "orchestral" category, and/or vice versa. And if it just goes to "Stage Works" (which is doubtful for movies), there will be keyboard and orchestral scores that will not be included those respective categories.
1c. Yes there is a conflict with Damnation, which is performed with operatic forces, whatever its category.

2. Yes, but what is the "Higher work type category" that works like "Agnes Dei" and "Ave Maria" will be assigned to. Again, since these include both vocal and choral works, this will transclude vocal works into any higher choral categories and/or choral works into any higher vocal categories.

3. The sets of "Lieder und Gesaenge" and "Lieder und Romanzen" are collections, all on single work pages (and titled on the IMSLP "Lieder and Songs" and "Lieder and Romances"!). Was Brahms (and others) really making distinctions? And how will these single work pages having "two" titles be categorized?
3a. The MLA calls Gedichte a "type", not "destinctive" (and doesn't mention "descriptive" designations)

4. So the committee is expected to know every possible language's word for "Art Song". What about English?
More importantly, will there not be a problem when it comes to translating these categories into other languages. Words that would be used for "Art song" or "Popular Song" or "Song" will be taken up by these specific categories.

5. You actually have/had a more accurate description of Opera-ballet on your list of work types : "a popular genre of French Baroque opera" (except that it very much a courtly genre, and not "popular" in the usual sense). Of course, there is no problem with noting in some way that an opera contains ballet/dance interludes (everything from Mlada to Aida to the Paris version of Tanhaeuser), but forcing an Opera-Ballet category outside of the definition you give above is artificial. I should also point out that "Opera-ballet" is not included on the MLA list.

6a. If Singspiel feeds into Opera, all its many lighter works will bypass Operetta (or Light Opera).
6b. Also if you feed Operetta/Light Opera directly into the Opera category, you will make it impossible to sort out just the full operas, as you can Operettas.
6c. Mozart and Schikaneder both termed their archetypal Singspiel "Die Zauberfloete" an Opera.

7. What are the categories for written works? Not that there was much controversy there, but they do need to be listed out.

[Davydov]

Hi Operalala. The new categorization system takes a radically different approach than previous ones, and for that reason your questions concerning the relationships between categories aren't actually applicable. I can only invite you to re-read the project notes, or to wait until the project gets off the ground in January, when things should become much clearer.

[Operalala]

I have read the project notes; this is where my above concerns come from. And you have taken down the Project Notes page.

[Davydov]

I have read the project notes; this is where my above concerns come from. And you have taken down the Project Notes page.

Actually the project notes only went up yesterday:

http://imslp.org/wiki/IMSLP:Categorization

The discussion phase of the project has now concluded, and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your many contributons. Work is now starting on the implementation phase, and seeing the project in action is probably the best way to address any outstanding questions that you might still have....

[Operalala]

Davydov,
Ah, I see it was moved from the location given earlier in this thread.
Please respond to the concerns posted above, before unilaterally announcing a discussion's closure.
Thank you.

[steltz]

With all due respect, I feel that we are starting to go around in circles, and because of that, I would agree that it is time to close the discussion. Everyone has had ample opportunity to voice their opinions.

Most people who have commented think this is a very good system.

It stands to reason that everyone who has participated will have to compromise a little bit, and no one person will get their way entirely.

[Operalala]

Steltz, that's not it - there are some serious issues that need to be addressed.

[homerdundas]

I should have contributed to these discussions earlier... very busy this fall...
I have looked at the project page and like what I see very much - this is a great improvement from the current methods of categorization. This should eventually eliminate most of the manually updated pages - I hope? I strongly support any scheme which keeps all of the information for works ALL TOGETHER.

Questions and comments...
1. arrangements transcriptions
Surely we should be including arrangements and transcriptions of works in this system. Often, people will browse for, say, works for flute and piano - orchestral reductions being quite acceptable, performable works. I feel we *must* categorize all of the works in IMSLP. If we wish to separate the work from it's arrangements - we could simply have categories such as 'Concertos - arranged' . This would match similar Library of Congress subject headings. This would increase the number of categories - but not more than say... 25% ?

2. unspecified instruments
Many works - (especially baroque - trio sonatas etc) do not have any particular instruments specified - and indeed sound fine with any instruments in the given range. We could effect this under the proposed system by listing multiple instrumentations. (However, a trio sonata for flute / oboe / violin would make lots of combinations ... 2fl cont, fl ob cont, fl vn cont, 2ob cont, ob vn cont, 2vn cont - have I got 'em all? ) Should we have unspecified instruments added to the list? (tc - any treble clef!)

3. manually updated pages...
My favourite ... Orchestra works with parts available. There is no tag for such 'meta-categories'. I assume we would continue to update such pages manually?

Thanks - we just keep getting better and better

[steltz]

'Concertos - arranged'

This brought up a thought -- I realize this is the official designation, but most of the time this is more specifically a piano reduction. However, there are arrangements that aren't piano reductions -- they are for the purposes of turning a larger work into a chamber work. For example, the piano concertos of Chopin and Beethoven have been turned into piano quintets.

Is it worth considering specifying 'Concertos - piano reduction' as opposed to 'Concertos - arranged'? In this context, an arrangement would have to be something other than a piano reduction.

[imslp]

I would suggest that the page tagging is limited to only the original instrumentation. Arrangement and reduction categories should be attached to the file, not the page. The solution I can think of is to duplicate the page tagging functionality specifically for arrangement/reduction files. The uploader will be able to specify that the file is an arrangement/reduction, but wouldn't be able to chose the detailed category, which is handled the same way as page tagging.

Regarding parts, that should be a choice the uploader has, since there isn't much argument over that. Whether it would be considered a "tag" is mostly irrelevant since it is different from the normal tagging process.

I would like to hear Davydov's ideas on arrangements/reductions though.