Difference between revisions of "User talk:Johnhenryfowler"

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(added more pages)
Line 419: Line 419:
*[[Come raggio di sol (Antonio Caldara)]]
*[[Come raggio di sol (Antonio Caldara)]]
I don't think it's a good idea to add links to sites for a resource that isn't there yet, even if it will be added soon. A user who comes to the CPDL works page from the "Most recent scores" list expecting to find a score or link to one would be disappointed. I suggest that you don't add score entries for works that aren't available. --[[User:Bobnotts|Bobnotts]] <small>[[User talk:Bobnotts|'''talk''']]</small> 08:49, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
I don't think it's a good idea to add links to sites for a resource that isn't there yet, even if it will be added soon. A user who comes to the CPDL works page from the "Most recent scores" list expecting to find a score or link to one would be disappointed. I suggest that you don't add score entries for works that aren't available. --[[User:Bobnotts|Bobnotts]] <small>[[User talk:Bobnotts|'''talk''']]</small> 08:49, 13 July 2008 (PDT)
:For what it's worth, the lack of links on ASC's Come raggio di sol was due to a faulty edit I made last night to remove a dead link. I have now replaced the information. The others in your list link to external sites. Two to Project Gutenberg, and two, if I recall correctly offhand to WIMA. Rather than remove those valuable resources from CPDL's links, it would be reasonable to link directly to those sites. I don't ever make song posts for material that is not immediately accessible. In any case, I thank both of you for your good work here. (And Bob, I hope I haven't caused hard feelings by my reaction to your post on IMSLP.) --[[User:David_Newman|David Newman]] <small>[[User talk:David_Newman|'''talk''']]</small> 12:52am, 14 July 2008 (EST)

Revision as of 21:42, 13 July 2008

Tallis' O Nata Lux

Many thanks for your edition of Tallis' little gem O Nata Lux which I hope to peruade my local choir-master to use (I belong to a chamber choir and a traditional satb church choir. I only hope that the tenors are up to being divided!). I remember this beautiful piece from my treble days many years ago. The version we used was distinctive for the wonderful dissonances in bar17 and in the penultimate bar. These add so much to the poignancy of the music which matches the text so well. Some editions have taken these out, which seems a great pity - I'm no musicologist, but I'm sure they should be there and I'm delighted that your edition retains them. However, we always used to repeat bars 14-23 (as in the OUP Greening edtion), second time P or PP with a fair-sized, well big! Rall at the end - cheesy and possibly anachronistic, but it worked very well. On another matter, I see your version of Let thy merciful ears you attribute to Weelkes. I believe that this attribution has been challenged for a long time - it was based on a false assumption by Fellowes - and that it is now thought to be by Thomas Mudd. I expect that you know this and maybe your Weelkes attribution is for copyright purposes. Anyway, thanks again for the Tallis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roger Parker (talkcontribs) on 12:46, 6 April 2006.

Weelkes' Mag and Nunc (6th service)

Hi John. Just a quick note to suggest that the additional CPDL #s for Weelkes' Mag and Nunc as seperate scores be removed. I think this should be done to avoid confusion (I originally thought that you had provided 3 PDFs: 1) Complete 2) Mag 3)Nunc). I just came across it whilst tidying the Weelkes page. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Rob Bobnotts 12:55, 21 September 2006 (PDT)


I'm looking at your score for Correa's O Vos Omnes. You show a one-sharp key signature. But the other edition I have, edited by Francis Jackson and supposedly based on a manuscript from Lisbon, has no key signature, so all the Fs are natural, giving it a more Phrygian feel. What's your source for the key signature? Choralnet 15:35, 29 January 2007 (PST)

Byrd Mass for Four Voices

Hi John. The link to your complete edition of the above points to your Benedictus of the setting rather than a full score. Dave had a look for the complete score on the server but to no avail. Just thought I'd let you know in case you didn't see the page. Bobnotts 08:12, 18 February 2007 (PST)

New Liebeslieder-Walzer by Johannes Brahms

Hi John, apparently you're responsible for the addition of a broken link to an hypothetical complete edition of the New Liebeslieder-Walzer, op. 65 (compare Brahms' page as of October 1, 2006 with the previous revision. Do you have such a file, or was is simply an oversight? -- Arthur 2007-02-21 07:13 CET (06:13 UTC)

Copyright text: O God, beyond all praising

Hi John,

See Talk:O God, Beyond all Praising (Gustav Holst) where Douglas Walczak points out that the text is copyright 1982. Do you have permission to use the text?

-- Chucktalk Giffen 04:50, 27 September 2007 (PDT)

Thanks for checking. No, I do not have permission. Remove the score. - JHF —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnhenryfowler (talkcontribs) on 16:08, 27 September 2007.

Elgar Score - The Spirit of the Lord

Hi John. I've left a reply to your message on my talk page. --Bobnotts talk 07:13, 8 August 2007 (PDT)

BTW I've submitted the final edits of the Elgar. Found 2 wrong notes in Accomp. I'm sure you can find at least one more if you have the time... Best to you ! - JHF —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnhenryfowler (talkcontribs) on 15:13, 27 September 2007.
Hi John. Thanks for that - I'll have a good look when I've got a minute (this seems to be increasingly in the distant future as more jobs on here pop up but there you go...) --Bobnotts talk 21:32, 3 October 2007 (PDT)

Pablo Casalsi

Hi John. I notice that you have created this page then marked it for deletion. May I ask why? --Bobnotts talk 07:13, 12 August 2007 (PDT)

In making the page for Pablo Casals I mistyped the page name, and didn't notice the error till I had saved it. The page had the eroneous name of ...Casalsi instead of ...Casals. Any news on when the CPDL management strike will end, and we can get score announcements posted on a daily basis again ? Johnhenryfowler 10:21, 12 August 2007 (PDT)
Thanks for clearing that up. I haven't heard anything, I'm afraid. Chuck does the recent score list and as you've seen, he's not got much free time at the mo. --Bobnotts talk 04:33, 13 August 2007 (PDT)

Last name redirects - check for more than one last name!!!

Hi John,

I just changed your redirect page Harris (pointing to the (unhosted) composer William H. Harris) to point to Harris (disambiguation) which I created, because the hosted composer Cuthbert Harris is already represented at CPDL. I've been trying to chase down other possible composers and/or contributors at CPDL which might have last names coinciding with your last name redirects ... it is a frustrating process, because the last name redirect makes a search for the others very difficult.

Perhaps before creating last name redirects in the future, maybe you could do a search on the last name in question and see whether any other persons (composers, arrangers, editors, lyricists,...) share that last name; if so, then a disambiguation page should be created instead.

Originally, last name redirects were created for the most popular composers, and now it seems to be devolving into a last name redirect for everyone, including unhosted composers. I am not at all sure that last name redirects for unhosted composers are needed, especially if a simple search on the last name will produce the composer page in question. I didn't delete the Harris (redirect) page to try, but I'm guessing that with Harris deleted, a search on Harris would produce both William and Cuthbert.

Maybe I'm way off base here, and if you think this should be discussed in the forums, that's okay with me. Anyway, thanks for putting up new composer pages, even if they are unhosted!! -- Chucktalk Giffen 02:28, 2 October 2007 (PDT)

Hi again, John... I got your reply on my talk page. You didn't step on a Harris disambiguation page; instead, you made it necessary either (1) to delete the Harris redirect to Wm. H. Harris or (2) to create a Harris disambig page and change the Harris redirect to point to (newly created) Harris (disambiguation). I chose to do the latter out of deference to your changes on the N.C.A.Book. I have no qualms about making pages for unhosted composers (or to providing external links to where their works are published) ... my only concern is about the advisability of making last name redirects for such composers when a simple search on their last names will suffice (unless there just happen to be several composers with the same last name). Good grief, I'm a composer, and (*grin*) I don't have a last name redirect!! -- Chucktalk Giffen 02:58, 2 October 2007 (PDT)

Ruggero Leoncavallo

Hi John I've just restored the unhosted part of the composer cat for this page that you removed in a recent edit. I can't see any scores of this composer on CPDL which is why I restored the cat. Incidentally, I've just replied to your message on my talk page. --Bobnotts talk 03:08, 8 October 2007 (PDT)

Use of Templates delnow and delreq

Hi John. I just changed your insertion of Template:delreq on Angel Gabriel (The) (Andy Miller) to get the template to work properly. The delnow and delreq templates must be substituted ... that is to say, you must type:

either {{subst:delnow|reason|user}}
or {{subst:delreq|reason|user}}

Simply typing {{delnow|reason|user}} or {{delreq|reason|user}} doesn't work properly for putting the sort key (date stamp) in the appropriate category Category:Delete immediately or Category:Delete requests.

I see you are doing a great job of getting the works in the various choral collections put up and linked (when present) to scores available here at CPDL. You're doing a great job and it's a valuable service! Many thanks. -- Chucktalk Giffen 07:24, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

Please check the sheet music before putting up Template:a cappella

Hi John,

Before putting Template:a cappella on a score page, would you please check that all the scores on that page are indeed a cappella scores? I've already removed the template from:

I'm sure there are others, but I only just got going on correcting these. (It was Gesu Bambino that caught my attention, since I used that piece last Christmas with my choir and knew it was accompanied.)

Also, I wonder, should standard 4-part hymns be categorized as a cappella? I'm not sure, since for the most part I'm used to hearing the accompanied in church. Of course, I suppose most of them could be (and some are) sung a cappella on occasion. It's a muddy area! -- Chucktalk Giffen 12:01, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

Sorry Chuck. I did the first 200 works from the Carols subcat. If no instruments were listed, then I put in the A-cappella template. I guess you found 5 that weren't.
I'm working on the next 200 now. I'll open up the score file before assuming a-cappella. As far as the "Grey area" if it has a piano reduction on separate staff I add "or keyboard" after the a-cappella template, and note it in the edition notes as "with piano reduction". Works with just vocal lines I count as a-cappella. I haven't done a round (cannon) yet, but suppose I make it a-cappella as well. Johnhenryfowler 05:32, 26 October 2007 (PDT)

Carols for Choirs 2

Hi John. I was just about to go and apply the collection template to this page but I've noticed that you've split the collection into different headings depending on the festival that they are suitable for (rather than alphabetical order by title). Did you have a particular rationale for doing this? I'm fairly ambivalent towards the organisation but it makes it slightly easier to apply the new style of page organisation if the contents are listed according to the number in the publication... Also, I'd have the title as "Carols for Choirs 2" or "Carols for Choirs Volume 2" rather than "Carols For Choirs-Vol2". What are your thoughts on that? Incidentally, you appear to have two user talk pages, this one and User talk:John Henry Fowler. Would you object to my merging them? I just think it's easier to have everything together on one page. All the best --Bobnotts talk 05:10, 26 October 2007 (PDT)

Only reason for the organization was that was the way Oxford had it for that volume. Feel free to change.
I log in as johnhenryfowler, and I think Chuck set up redirects already.
The other username is an artifact from early days where my pswd was changed, and I just set up the johnhenryfowler account instead. I've pretty much adapted this account name everywhere now, so to change it would be a pain.
I'm not committed to the names with the hyphens. Changet all four as you see fit. Johnhenryfowler 05:26, 26 October 2007 (PDT)
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I've just merged the talk pages so that all of the disucssion on User talk:John Henry Fowler is now here and User talk:John Henry Fowler is a redirect to this page. I'll go ahead with the Carols for Choirs pages when I get a minute. Regards --Bobnotts talk 06:19, 26 October 2007 (PDT)
Hi John. I've just been looking at this page and there are many discrepancies from what OUP say the contents are on their website and the contents page of my (old - pub. 1970) copy. For instance, "A babe is born I wys" is listed twice on the OUP list. Do you have a newer edition of the collection? --Bobnotts talk 15:05, 4 November 2007 (PST)
I do have a more recent copy. I'll check into the discrepancies. It may be a messup that happened in

transcription into the newer format. Johnhenryfowler 17:18, 4 November 2007 (PST)

Using a cappella template

Hi John. I've just sorted the formatting of this page. It seems that you typed {{a cappella}} or piano. on the "Instruments" line but unfortunately the "or piano" part was knocked down onto the following line. This is because of a line break in the template. If you want to mark a score page as "a cappella or piano" in the future, may I suggest that you use the new template that I've just created? It is Template:a cappella or piano and outputs:

[EDIT (bobnotts 2007-11-16): template now deleted]

You may find the "show preview" button useful when editing pages to see if the code that you have typed has translated into what you want to see on the page. I've re-edited a few pages that you have added lyrics to, etc., usually because you've forgotton to add the text template. I don't mind at all but it would save time if you could use the preview button and add it when you need to :-) Thanks --Bobnotts talk 10:06, 27 October 2007 (PDT)

Hi Bob, I'll start using the new template so the instuments are presented all on one line. Sorry about some redundant saves, I'm often missing something I add later, and I've had some unfortunate saves where it informs me the session disconnected (and 2 hours of lyric entry is lost...) so I have been trying to save at least each time I am called away from the computer, or ever 1/2 hour or so. The good news is I have looked at all 400 or so "Carols", and added lyrics to about 80% of them. I did no edition combining because I have no idea what Standard to use to combine. Some editions stray far away from the original carol, and even though they have the same name as the carol I'd keep them separate... Johnhenryfowler 10:15, 27 October 2007 (PDT)
John: I didn't mean to detract from what you've achieved over the past week (or two?); sorry if it seemed like that. Having all the texts of the carols is really useful for users (I know - I am a librarian for a choir that uses CPDL rather a lot!) and also, a person searching the internet for part of the text of a carol might stumble across CPDL, having never used it before. This is especially true as Christmas draws near! I understand your concern for losing work after the session is lost... I had this problem some time ago. Now, I get the error message saying that my session has timed out and I can't save the page but I can rescue the code, copy it to a notepad window, go back, click on "article" then "edit" then cut and paste and save successfully. Perhaps it's because of having the latest version of Internet Explorer... I'm not sure. In any case, clicking on "Show preview" seems to refresh the session, so to speak, so you could try that. Ha ha, ironically, my session just timed out... and I did exactly what I just suggested. As for merging pages, often these need to be judged on a case by case basis. I'll crib a merge template from Wikipedia for use here and let you know when I've got it working... --Bobnotts talk 10:52, 27 October 2007 (PDT)

Reverted edit

Hi John. I just reverted your edit to Duets from Orpheus Britannicus (Henry Purcell) in which you added a link to the editor's website. I removed that link in a previous edit because I don't think that it's appropriate to have any links to a site which hosts (potentially) illegal content from a page about that content on CPDL. --Bobnotts talk 13:14, 6 November 2007 (PST)

I got the link to his website from his user page. I got to his user page by clicking on his editor: link on the works page for Duets from Orpheus Britannicus (Henry Purcell) Do we remove all user's WWW links from CPDL because he hosts on his website a work wich might be copyrighted ? A user could go to any works page Mr Hossell put up to "discover" his WWW site. A google search would probably work to dicover it too. The next step would be to tell the contributer to remove the questionable file from his WWW site. I think this is a bit to draconian. Johnhenryfowler 15:48, 6 November 2007 (PST)

Links to score files from new hymn tune score pages

Hi John. I just noticed a broken link on one of the new hymn tunes that you added. Then I went to check the rest of the new score pages and found a plethora of broken links. I have corrected the following:

and I have noted that the following have broken links but I don't have the time to fix them at the moment (and there may be more):

I know this is a simple spelling error in your uploads but would you please double check the links in the future? It would save a lot of time. Good job otherwise for indexing all these hymns on CPDL, will be a really useful resource. --Bobnotts talk 03:44, 15 November 2007 (PST)

Sorry to trouble you with broken links, but I was in the middle of my updates when I needed to call it a night, and, of course you jumped on the task of checking them before I was done. I always check out each link from each page when I'm done. (I'm done up through "Morning" in SSWesley's list.) Johnhenryfowler 06:43, 15 November 2007 (PST)
That's ok - this is a collaborative effort after all :-) I didn't realise that you went through a process of adding a bulk of scores then checking the links - sorry for butting in. I wonder though - being listed as the "editor" of these scores may not be appropriate... would "contributor" be better, do you think? I'll happily change the pages if that's ok with you. Regards --Bobnotts talk 04:53, 16 November 2007 (PST)

Well, before I'm done I want to make the NWC file cleaner, and will be editing them - hence "Editor". I'll also be adding a Sibelius edition for my favorites. I think "Editor" is best, since the value added is the works page, and the Cyber Hymnal credit is built into each page anyway in two places. I don't feel strongly either way. The quandry was that since the Cyber Hymnal didn't actively contribute (but allows their use specifically through their PD copyright terms), them I didn't want to list them as the "Editor" - quite apart from the fact that they ( Cyber-Hymnal) aren't a "person", and the "Editor" should be someone at the end of an email address who is "responsible" for the edition... Johnhenryfowler 05:23, 16 November 2007 (PST)

I understand why you didn't add Cyber-Hymnal as the editor, the reason that you give for that is a good one to my mind. However, I disagree with your assertion that the term "editor" should be denoted because of the "value added" to the score page. As far as I'm concerned, the name in the edition info refers to that individual edition, not to whatever extra information has been added to the score page. If you alter the NWC files to make them cleaner then I think you should be considered the editor because that would be a new edition. But when you copy the files from one site to another, I don't believe that makes you an editor because you have not altered the files. I maintain that I think the term "Contributor" would be best until/unless you alter the files; then you become an "Editor" in my opinion because it would be a new edition. Don't get me wrong - I think all the work that you're doing to add hymns to CPDL is great but I think we should be completely open about this notion of being an "editor" on CPDL. --Bobnotts talk 07:54, 16 November 2007 (PST)

Hi Bob, As I said before, Editor: / Contributer: / Grunt:, whatever. There are 51 hymn pages I have done, and if you would like to change all 51 already submitted pages I'll make the new ones say whatever you want. It is not important to me. I am the editor of 150 or so "real" editions in Encore, Finale, and Sibelius. I have been "open" about the submitted hymns, giving credit on the individual works pages, as well as the "Deep Link" to the Cyber Hymnal page that Noel hates. Since whatever we call this: Editor: / Contributer: / Grunt:, whatever, this should be a new "Standard", so I'd get the other admins to OK whatever the term we use for "A contributer who has added a work which was not (yet) edited by that person, but none the less took the time to make the works page, annotate the links on the composer page, make the PDF file, and add the lyrics to the page, and format the lyrics". When I clean up the NWC files I'll change the notation from "Contributer" to "Editor" (personally I'm favoring Grunt... - just kidding... ) Johnhenryfowler 08:55, 16 November 2007 (PST)

Adding hymns

Hi John. As I went to check the latest discussion about how to organise hymns on CPDL, it occured to me that when the discussion has concluded, it may be necessary to alter your new hymn tune pages in line with the new standard. Do you think it would be better to hold off adding any more hymns until a standard is agreed? That way, there wouldn't have to be a lot of duplication of work... just a thought.

Also, I've just seen Ralph Vaughan Williams and seen how you've organised the hymns into an indented numbered list. Is this the chronological order that Vaughan Williams composed the tunes or have you numbered them for some other reason? --Bobnotts talk 04:01, 21 November 2007 (PST)

It just acted to "count" the number of hymns. It is an alphabetical list. As far as holding off entering any new hymns, I'm inclined just to continue doing what I'm doing. At least it is all done the same way, and there are the other 485 hymns to change anyway. Getting a standard written down would then allow me to go back and reorganize (knowing it's not a waste of time...) Talking about waste of time, do we know if the work of the last 2 months ever got backed up? Johnhenryfowler 04:17, 21 November 2007 (PST)

Duplicate page

Hi John. I've just deleted the page which you recently restored, Sie, wie ist die Welle klar, Op. 52, No. 14 (Johannes Brahms), because it is an almost exact duplicate of the score page for the work which already exists and is correctly named, it is here: Sieh, wie ist die Welle klar, Op. 52, No. 14 (Johannes Brahms). I have corrected the link on Johannes Brahms - list of choral works so that it points to the correct page. I hope this is all in order. Regards --Bobnotts talk 09:21, 21 January 2008 (PST)

I found it missing, and the link RED. Did you retore it from a previous revision? I didn't check prior revs, but just made a new page (with the missing h in the name - opps ! ) Johnhenryfowler 12:38, 21 January 2008 (PST)

I didn't restore the page at all - it already existed and was linked to from the main Johannes Brahms page but not the page ordered by opus no. It's no problem :-) --Bobnotts talk 00:39, 22 January 2008 (PST)

Brahms alphabetical page

Hi John. I've just seen the work you've been doing over at Brahms' corner of CPDL - it looks great! I was just going to suggest splitting the main Brahms page into 2 sections - choral works & solo vocal works - to help users find the sort of music they want. What do you think? --Bobnotts talk 09:18, 10 February 2008 (PST)

Splitting on this basis would split up works like the Liebeslieder and the Neue Liebeslieder, which have both solo and chorus. Perhaps we could group the collections together in a page to reduce the number on a page. (Of course this means searching through more than one page when looking alphabetically for a particular work...) Johnhenryfowler 12:22, 10 February 2008 (PST)

Hmm perhaps keeping things as they are with an alphabetical list is the best way... --Bobnotts talk 03:35, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Brahms's Neues Liebeslieder - Opus 65 - now completed.

I just finished the 15th lieder in Brahms's Neues Liebeslieder - Opus 65 It is now complete!!! (It was started in Sept of 2006 ... ) and I'd like to announce to the CPDL community that the complete collection is finally finished, and encourage any proofreading people might help with. Johnhenryfowler 03:06, 21 February 2008 (PST)

Google Books link

Hi John. Great to see all of your new Parry editions popping up. I noticed you added a link to Google Books from The Pied Piper of Hamelin (Charles Hubert Hastings Parry) but for the life of me, I can't find where to view the score. Could you enlighten me? Thanks --Bobnotts talk 05:04, 13 March 2008 (PDT)

The built-in link for Parry's "The Pied Piper Of Hamelin" is:


and it worked when I tried it just now. You can download the score or view it there. Use the button "Read This Book" to read it there. Use the button "Download PDF" button to download a copy. Johnhenryfowler 06:41, 13 March 2008 (PDT)

I'm afraid I don't see any buttons like the ones your describing. Either I'm going crazy or Google have got some funky IP filtering system in place because of different copyright laws... --Bobnotts talk 10:48, 13 March 2008 (PDT)

Hi Bob, Sorry you are having the problem. Lets get the other CPDL admins to try, and see it we can sort out what's happening here. Johnhenryfowler 11:41, 13 March 2008 (PDT)

Sabine Cassola's new editions

Hi John. Thanks for posting Sabine Cassola's latest editions - I wonder if you could clarify a point. At the moment, the score pages read "Finale 6". I've never heard of a Finale 6 and from what I've seen, the different versions of the software are always followed by a year, not a single number, eg "Finale 2006". Is that what you meant? --Bobnotts talk 23:53, 28 May 2008 (PDT)

Finale 6 is same as Finale 2006 - just shorthand - and I prefer Fin6 ultimately. Sibelius 4 I abbreviate as Sib4, unless I'm confusing it with Finale and using Sibelius 2004. I'd suggest we abbreviate in future. NOTEWORTHY COMPOSER should be NWC, etc But most impostant is to get Add-Work script working again so we don't have to remember all this detail to post. Johnhenryfowler 00:06, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
Thanks for clarifying that, John. I've moved your reply here because, as I've exaplained at the top of my talk page, I like to group messages together to keep the discussion together and make things clearer - please reply here. I have to say that I disagree with your shorthand suggestion - as was proved by my confusion, most users won't assume that "Finale 6" means "Finale 2006", or, even worse "Fin6" if they haven't heard of Finale. Likewise, NoteWorthy Composer is not a well known piece of software and if a user hasn't heard of it, they won't make the connection between "NWC" and NoteWorthy Composer. I think if this were introduced as a standard, it would be a further stumbling block for new users trying to understand how the site works so I suggest that all names be written out in full to avoid confusion. --Bobnotts talk 00:28, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I agree with Rob. Finale 200X IS Finale 200X (not FinX). Likewise, NoteWorthy Composer (note the proper use of upper and lower case) IS NoteWorthy Composer (not NWC, not NOTEWORTHY COMPOSER). LilyPond IS LilyPond (not LY, not Lilypond, not LILYPOND). And Sibelius X IS Sibelius X (not SIBX, not SibX, not SIBELIUSX not SibeliusX). In other words, we should respect and use the orthography of names as used by the software suppliers. Many users (especially those using software from a foreign source) will not necessarily know the abbreviations, and I submit that, in the matter of software orthography (and in other matters), we should strive for a uniform, across-the-board, appearance. If not then I've spent many hours in vain changing NOTEWORTHY COMPOSER to NoteWorthy Composer, SIBELIUS to Sibelius, ENCORE to Encore, Lilypond to LilyPond, FINALE to Finale, etc. -- Chucktalk Giffen 01:42, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I'll try to be more consistant. But, not to miss my point I repeat it here:"But most impostant is to get Add-Work script working again so we don't have to remember all this detail to post"
By the way do you want the hyphen in "Finale-2006" ? Johnhenryfowler 07:28, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I definitely agree about getting the new add works form up and running which is why I've spent so much time (and will spend some more time) testing and suggesting alterations to Arie :-) As for the name, it seems to be the standard that "Finale 2006", ie. without a hyphen, is correct. Incidentally, I sent you an email via the wiki "email this user" feature as I couldn't find an email address for you. When you get a moment, could you confirm that you've received it? Thanks! --Bobnotts talk 08:35, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I didn't get your email. My email is my CPDL username followed by (at)GMAIL.COM By the way Philip Legge's Monteverdi page uses the hyphen in all Finale links. Johnhenryfowler 08:40, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I have Finale 2004, Finale 2005, Finale 2006, Finale 2007, and Finale 2008 ... all unhyphenated by the manufacturer. I have been removing the hyphens when I find them during editing (the old add music form put the hyphens in). -- Chucktalk Giffen 10:27, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
Chuck's right about Finale - the fact that we've got some mistakes all over the wiki is old news. I've just fixed the Monteverdi page. I just re-sent that email to your gmail address, John, hope it comes through ok. --Bobnotts talk 20:10, 29 May 2008 (PDT)
I did NOT get your email. Johnhenryfowler 00:06, 30 May 2008 (PDT)
Please confirm that your email address is johnhenryfowler AT gmail.com. --Bobnotts talk 00:39, 30 May 2008 (PDT)
Yes it is, and I just received your email in the last 1/2 hour. Johnhenryfowler 01:06, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

Prevent us, O Lord (Charles Hubert Hastings Parry)

Hi John. Why have you added a duplicate score entry to this page for what appears to be the same edition? --Bobnotts talk 18:04, 31 May 2008 (PDT)

It is the same edition, but now it is stored on the Wiki server, and has the missing Sibelius 4 source file.
I left the original for the CPDL number, in case you wanted to keep the original CPDL number.
Did you get my email with the Crookall's Stanford files ? Johnhenryfowler 23:14, 31 May 2008 (PDT)
That's great that you've recovered the Sibelius 4 file, but as it is the same edition, there should only ever be one entry (and one catalogue number). I've merged the entries, commenting out the Williams server links. Should they ever be required, the links can be restored. I did get your email, thanks for that - I'll make sure I deal with those files. By the way, I removed the external links that you added to Armida's Garden (Charles Hubert Hastings Parry) because these are already on the new Mary E. Coleridge page where they belong. If someone wants to find out more about her, they can simply go to the CPDL page on her by clicking the link next to "Lyricist". Also, I removed the note under "description" about Coleridge as that information also exists on her page and doesn't relate directly to the art song in question. Sorry for messing up the indentation of the lyrics. --Bobnotts talk 07:47, 1 June 2008 (PDT)

David Newman's contributions

Hi John. According to the Note posted by David Newman on his User page, CPDL is welcome to link to songs from his site but asks CPDL not to rehost the PDF files. According to my reading of this, it is therefore not sufficient to add a cross-posting note to the Edition notes sections. Instead, it will be necessary to delete copies of the PDF files on the CPDL server and put in net ( Network.png) links to the corresponding file pages at Art Song Central. I hope this can be done as quickly as possible so that we comply fully with the contributor's wishes. -- Chucktalk Giffen 22:35, 9 June 2008 (PDT)

I noticed David Newman's comments but with his site down couldn't do anything about it yeaterday. All the links have been changed, but you must already know this as you have now deleted all the PDF files. Johnhenryfowler 02:56, 10 June 2008 (PDT)
Yes, I deleted the files as soon as I saw you had changed the links. I figured it was best to get it done quickly. Thanks John!! -- Chucktalk Giffen 03:16, 10 June 2008 (PDT)

Quem vidistis, pastores?

Hi John! Sorry, I didn't notice you were still editing the cited score page and created a similar one for your score. It seems the correct is indeed the above title, without the exclamation "O". I also made a few corrections to Orazio Vecchi's page with regards to his image size. -- CarlosTalk 13:57, 23 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi Carlos! Thanks for your help. I'm adding scores done by Sabine Cassola (Rome, Italy) who has difficulty posting, so I do it for her. She Postal-Mailed a CD ROM with over 200 scores which I have been busy posting. I can only manage 2-3 scores a day. It also puts me at a disadvantage, since I know nothing about the origins of the score.
I made a composer page for "Horatio Vecchi" (the way it is in the score is Horatius Veccius) only to find the existing composer page titled "Oratio Vecchi". The score was titled: "I Quem vidistis Pastores" but the Finale file named "1 Vecchi, O. Quem vidistis.mus", so I mistakenly named it "O Quem Vidistis (Horatio Vecchi)" when it should have been "Quem Vidistis (Oratio Vecchi)"
I am about to start posting 30 or so scores from "Florilegium sacrarum cantionum - Petri Phalesij 1609", which I guess is a collection of music published by Netherlands music publisher "Petri Phalesij" in 1609 (Italian:Petri Phalesij, French:Pierre Phalèse or Latin:Petrus Phalesius)
The Dutch Wikipedia (translated via babelfish) has the following info: Pierre Phalèse, including Petrus, Peeter or Pieter Phalesius or Ned. Pieter van der Phaliezen (born circa 1510 - deceased in 1573), was a music publisher and printer from the Netherlands. Componist is hij waarschijnlijk nooit geweest, al associeert men de anonieme dansen die hij in de jaren 1570 uitgeeft meestal wel met hem als componist. Composer he probably never has been, whether we associate the anonymous dancing in the years that he spends most of 1570 with him as a composer.
The set probably should have a "Collection Page" made for the "Florilegium sacrarum cantionum" similar to the page I made for Palestrina - Canticum Canticorum
My next posting piece is: Franciscus Bianciardus 1570 - 1607 - Composer of Number 2 of the set from "Florilegium sacrarum cantionum" - which is titled "Surgite pastores". What is the proper composer name: Fransisco Bianciadi ? So the works page should be "Surgite pastores (Fransisco Bianciadi)"?
Would you like to assist in the posting of Sabine's files ?
Johnhenryfowler 01:47, 24 June 2008 (PDT)
Hi again John! You seem to have a lot of work ahead, I will surely try to help you in everything I can. I've already created the composer pages for Francesco Bianciardi (that's the most common form of his name nowadays) and Girolamo Vespa. The composer of #3 is Ruggiero Giovannelli. I intend to create pages for the other composers you listed below, as well. -- CarlosTalk 16:42, 24 June 2008 (PDT)
Hi John, I've created two more composer pages: Benedetto Pesenti and Damiano Scarabelli. As I had said you above, you shouldn't have created a page for Ruggiero Ioanelli, since there is already one for him: Ruggiero Giovannelli. I'll move his pages to the correct titles, ok? -- CarlosTalk 03:42, 25 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi Carlos. Thanks for the correctly spelled composer pages! I've moved the pages for "Giovannelli" from my page "Ioanelli". I wouldn't have known they were the same composer. Feel free the follow behind me as I do the 30 postings, and clean up my mistakes. The Italian Renaissance was not a specialty of mine while I was studying electrical engineering - However English Baroque... Johnhenryfowler 04:01, 25 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi John, so you are an electrical engineer too! So do I, LOL. During my course, I was impressed at the amount of engineer colleagues who also liked the Baroque style!
Would you like me to create the next score pages for you and fill them with a template, so you have less work editing them? -- CarlosTalk 04:29, 25 June 2008 (PDT)
Hi John, I have to leave now but will be back at night and them I can help you more. Please take a look at Florilegium Sacrarum Cantionum, I've added links to score pages that already exist, you will just have to add the new score info to them. By the way, are the number of pages and CPDL# really necessary on that page? I understand this info may help you now, but the page would be much more "clean" without them. Besides that, some score pages have more than one edition, so the best is to keep page number and CPDL number info only in the score page, with each edition. -- CarlosTalk 05:19, 25 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi Carlos - The Page Numbers and CPDL Number were just for my reference while adding scores to the list. If you are in the mood to post I've uploaded files for 14, 20, 21,23, and 24. If not I'll attack them tomorrow. Thanks for your help today. Johnhenryfowler 08:03, 25 June 2008 (PDT)


Hi John First of all, congrats on your prolific output over the past few days and weeks. Wonderful to see all that valuable music become available on CPDL. One small question, though: you mention your last contribution as having been published by Petri Phalesij. I'm pretty convinced that should be Petrus Phalesius, since that is the nominative case in Latin. The possessive which you use probably stems from some sort of title or dedication mentioning that the book was published by Phalesius or in Phalesius' establishment, hence the case marking. Cordially, joachim 07:00, 24 June 2008 (PDT)

It's a good point. If I were using his LATIN name your choice is correct, but what name to use. In this translated-from-the-Dutch WikiPedia page on this flemish publisher it says "Pierre Phalèse, including Petrus, Peeter or Pieter Phalesius or Ned. Pieter van der Phaliezen (born circa 1510 - deceased in 1573), was a music publisher and printer from the Netherlands." In Sabines score she says "Florilegium sacrarum cantionum - Petri Phalesij 1609", so I used her name for the guy. Is it Italian ? Flemmish ? I've no idea, but it is what is in her scores....

Want to help post her scores ?

I'm uploading PDF, MIDI, and Finale 2006 source files tomorrow for the following (and I need new composer pages mad for the *'ed entries below):

Florilegium sacrarum cantionum - Latin:Petrus Phalesius - 1609

  • No 1 - Quem pastores, dicite! - Orazio Vecchi - (1550 - 1604) - 2 pps. - CPDL 17314
  • No 2 - Surgite pastores - Francisco Bianciardi - (1570 - 1607) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17315*
  • No 2a - Patefactae sunt iannuae coeli - Girolamo Vespa (c.1540 - c.1596) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17316*
  • No 3 - Hic est discipulus - Ruggiero Ioanellus - (1560 - 1625) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17317*
  • No 8 - Senex puerum portabat - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina - (1525 - 1594) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17318
  • No 9 - Ave Regina coelorum - Thomas Luigi de Victoria - (1548 - 1611) - 5 pps. - CPDL 17319
  • No 10 - Emendemus in melius - Baldassare Donato - (1530 - 1603) - 4 pps. - CPDL 17320
  • No 11 - Suscipe Verbum Virgo Maria - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina - (1525 - 1594) - 9 pps. - CPDL 17321
  • No 12 - O vos omnes - Hieronymus Praetorius - (1560 - 1629) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17322
  • No 13 - Jerusalem, surge - Benedict Pesenti - (1545 - 1591) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17323*
  • No 14 - Regina caeli laetare copia - Thomas Luigi de Victoria - (1548 - 1611) - 5 pps. - CPDL 17324
  • No 20 - Ascendens Christus In Altum - Thomas Luigi de Victoria - (1548 - 1611) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17325
  • No 21 - Ascendo ad Patrem meum - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina (1525 - 1594) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17326
  • No 23 - Spiritus Sanctus replevit - Damiano Scarabelli (Scarabeus) - ( ? - 1598) - 6 pps. - CPDL 17327*
  • No 24 - Dum complerentur dies Pentecostes - Thomas Luigi de Victoria (1548 - 1611) - 8 pps. - CPDL 17328
  • No 31 - Puer qui natus est - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina - (1525 - 1594) - 4 pps. - CPDL 17329
  • No 35 - O lux et decus Hispaniae - Thomas Luigi de Victoria (1548 - 1611) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17330
  • No 36 - Beatus Laurentius Dixit - Sebastiàn Raval - (1550 - 1604) - 4 pps. - CPDL 17331
  • No 37 - Surge, propera amica mea - Tiburtio Massaino - (1530 - 1609) - 4 pps. - CPDL 17332
  • No 44 - Ecce Dominus Veniet - Thomas Luigi de Victoria - (1548 - 1611) - 6 pps. - CPDL 17333
  • No 45 - Canite tuba - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina - (1525 - 1594) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17334
  • No 46 - Alma Redemptoris Mater - Thomas Luigi de Victoria - (1548 - 1611) - 5 pps. - CPDL 17335
  • No 51 - Corona Aurea - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina - (1525 - 1594) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17336
  • No 56 - Dilectus Meus - Pierre Bonhomme (1555 - 1617) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17337
  • No 57 - Tota Pulchra Es - Giulio Belli - (1560 - 1621) - 3 pps - CPDL 17338*
  • No 58 - Jubilate Deo - Damiano Scarabelli (Scarabeus) - ( ? - 1598) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17339*
  • No 59 - Eructavit cor meum - Benedictus Pesentius - (1545-1591) - 7 pps. - CPDL 17340
  • No 61 - Non est bonum - Hieronymus Praetorius - (1560 - 1629) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17341
  • No 62 - Exultate Deo - Pierre Bonhomme - (1555 - 1617) - 3 pps. - CPDL 17342
  • No 63 - Laudate DOminum - Francisco Bianciardi - (1570 - 1607) - 4 pps. - CPDL 17343*
  • = Need a new Composer Page made for these composers.

Hi John, thanks for that clarification. Your answer confirmed my assumption that the name you used is in possessive case because of the particular wording in the title of the work. Whether you use his French, Dutch or Latin name, Phalesij could never be the guy's name. As for the daunting editing job ahead of you: much as I regret it, I've sort of taken the approach of not editing anything on cpdl as long as the contribution and editing processes haven't been finalised (or at least finetuned). Still, keep up the good work. joachim 01:05, 25 June 2008 (PDT)

More composers

Hi John, here are the composer pages you will need:

Regards, CarlosTalk 16:26, 27 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi again John, I've created the composer pages for you:

Regards, CarlosTalk 16:23, 28 June 2008 (PDT)


And congratulations for the award, it's well deserved! :) -- CarlosTalk 04:52, 30 June 2008 (PDT)

Binchois PDF & MIDI uploaded

Hi John. I've uploaded File:Binchois-Virgo Rosa.pdf and File:Binchois-Virgo Rosa.MID. -- Chucktalk Giffen 06:13, 28 June 2008 (PDT)

Thanks, Chuck. I've already posted them in a works page. Johnhenryfowler 08:54, 28 June 2008 (PDT)

New editions - revisions

Hi John. Great to see all the new editions by Sabine popping up. Just a note to say that where you are adding an updated edition (such as for Salve Regina a 11 (Marc Antoine Charpentier)), where the original edition exists, there shouldn't be 2 sets of CPDL numbers, and 2 entries. Simply use the original entry and update the links to point to the new files and put a note under "edition notes" to say that it's been revised and give the date. This is all explained on this help page. Thanks! --Bobnotts talk 08:38, 28 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi Bob, I wasn't sure but what the new posting was a different scoring, and I was going to check them side-by-side to makes sure they weren't different (say with a different Key, different voicing, different accompanyment, etc... Johnhenryfowler 08:58, 28 June 2008 (PDT)

The two Charpentier editions above are different, in that old one is a condensed score, and the new one is a full score. -- Chucktalk Giffen 22:24, 28 June 2008 (PDT)

Voicing info on title

Hi John! I noticed you've been creating a few pages with "a 8", "a 10" etc. on the title. Do you think it's necessary? I usually only put voicing info on titles when it is necessary to distinguish two works by the same composer that have different number of voices; in all other situations I prefer the shorter, simpler title without it. But I guess there's no rule here at CPDL about it, it's a matter of taste. -- CarlosTalk 11:46, 29 June 2008 (PDT)

Hi Carlos, I'm actually not a proponent of the "a n", disignations, but merely following what Sabane had used as a title. I've omitted "a 4" because it's really not needed on a SATB work. If you do want to rename, just rename the display name, not the source name, so reloads will work. ie: Ave Maria Johnhenryfowler 12:48, 29 June 2008 (PDT)

Now I saw that Sabine used the "a n" designations inside the PDFs too, so perhaps we should leave the titles the way she conceived them. By the way, do you want me to create a composer page for "Faux des Spickable"? (just kidding! where did you take this crazy name from? :) -- CarlosTalk 13:16, 29 June 2008 (PDT)

Big task? - No problem!

Treble clef.gif The Treble clef award
  for tenacity in large-scale tasks

is hereby awarded to John Henry Fowler for tackling big projects that greatly expand the usefulness of CPDL. — Chucktalk Giffen

Montecassino Ms-Adoramus te Domine PDF & MIDI files

Hi John. You never got back to me about what files I was supposed to make PDFs and MIDs for, but after much searching, I finally found Montecassino Ms-Adoramus te Domine.mus which says it is a Finale 2007 file, so I've made the following files:

File:Montecassino Ms-Adoramus te Domine.MID

File:Montecassino Ms-Adoramus te Domine.pdf

I hope these were the ones you wanted. -- Chucktalk Giffen 10:20, 3 July 2008 (PDT)

Adding editions which aren't available (yet)

Hi John. Great to see all these links to Art Song Central popping up. Unfortunately, on looking at one of the works page on ASC, I found that the work you indexed into CPDL isn't actually available there, though apparently it will be coming in the future. I have commented out all the edition info for ASC on the following pages:

I don't think it's a good idea to add links to sites for a resource that isn't there yet, even if it will be added soon. A user who comes to the CPDL works page from the "Most recent scores" list expecting to find a score or link to one would be disappointed. I suggest that you don't add score entries for works that aren't available. --Bobnotts talk 08:49, 13 July 2008 (PDT)

For what it's worth, the lack of links on ASC's Come raggio di sol was due to a faulty edit I made last night to remove a dead link. I have now replaced the information. The others in your list link to external sites. Two to Project Gutenberg, and two, if I recall correctly offhand to WIMA. Rather than remove those valuable resources from CPDL's links, it would be reasonable to link directly to those sites. I don't ever make song posts for material that is not immediately accessible. In any case, I thank both of you for your good work here. (And Bob, I hope I haven't caused hard feelings by my reaction to your post on IMSLP.) --David Newman talk 12:52am, 14 July 2008 (EST)