Talk:Charles Villiers Stanford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Opera      (Rated Start-Class) This article falls within the scope of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome! Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. WikiProject Biography     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia. WikiProject Composers Charles Villiers Stanford is related to the Composers WikiProject which has been provided as a place for editors of biographical articles of music Composers and Songwriters to discuss common issues, discover neglected composer articles and exchange ideas. All who are interested are invited to comment and contribute. WikiProject PipeOrgan Pipe organ Portal Charles Villiers Stanford is part of WikiProject PipeOrgan, which aims to develop and expand Wikipedia's content relating to the pipe organ and its associated repertoire, organists, and other articles. If you would like to participate, you can edit Charles Villiers Stanford, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion. Looking to help? Check out the to-do list: Get Pipe organ nearer to WP:FA status by adding references, and discuss moving some content to subpages (see also talk). Contribute to the clean up of organ pipe, flue pipe etc., see Mini-projects Find places to link to organ console Copy edit organ stop Create article about the various types of windchest Add the new {{organist-stub}} to biographical articles either instead of, or additional to the {{Keyboardist-stub}} that currently exists. Add Category:Electronic organ manufacturing companies to List of organ builders. WikiProject Ireland     (Rated Start-Class) Ireland Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ireland on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the priority scale.

Also: there is an article by Robert Anderson on Stanford, Bax and (George or Jonathan - presumably George?) Lloyd which at least mentions the 6th symphony in volume 130, February 1989, p 94 the Musical Times. Will log into my university staff account and read it (Jstor scanned it in, accessible using library acct) later, see if it contains any information on the symphony, the composer, helpful to any of the three composers' articles. Schissel | Sound the Note! 19:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Too much Beati! 2 Works list 3 Pronunciation 4 Recording

[edit] Too much Beati!

I added a sentence to the article (hopefully not disrupting the flow of the Britannica text) about the popularity of Beati Quorum Via in school choirs. My Glee Club is singing it right now, but we seem to be the only choir in the country that remembers the other two motets that go with it. Maybe they're not as good as Beati, but I like them performed as a set. -- The Realms of Gold (talk) 19:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Beati is the most popular of the three motets, though my personal opinion is that it is most popular because it is the easiest! but that is not the point. I disagree strongly, however, in that it is "representative" of the "genre of Stanford, Elgar, Perry, &c." Maybe it represents part of Stanford's style, but I really don't think it represents the music of Elgar and Parry, as their styles are even more wide-ranging and diverse. Stefan (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

That's definitely fair. The sentence could be rewritten to say it's exemplary of the late English Romantic choral style. I gather that, while Elgar et. al. are much more wide-ranging across all genres, as far as sacred motets go, Stanford is pretty standard for the nation and for the time. But the English Romantics aren't my strong point, so anyone is free to revise as they see fit. -- The Realms of Gold (talk) 08:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Works list

There are at least three books of short organ preludes missing from the works list, including Op. 101 and 105. -- JTL 23:14, 24 January 2008 (EST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.20.97 (talk)

There's loads missing from the works list - Stanford was unbelievably prolific! Is it really necessary? Wilus (talk) 13:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

No reason we can't have a 'major' works list on the main page, with an attempt at a complete one on a seperate page, like many other composers have. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 15:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

BBC Radio 3 seems to pronounce his second name as "Villers" quite consistently, as though they know something everyone else does not. Is that right? has anyone seen his birth certificate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.56.43 (talk) 21:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I was told years ago the correct pronunciation is indeed "Villers", but I can't cite a written authority for this. There's no doubt as to the spelling of his name however. Wilus (talk) 12:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recording

I don't mean to offend anyone, but the recording of 'The Blue Bird' is a particularly ugly recording. Is it possible to get a better one ? All very subjective, I know ! -Tpacw (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You have to find a free one. Unfortunately, that's probably impossible. Goto any WP page with a recording, even very popular ones, and they will be just as bad, or worse. The basic reasoning is that it's better to have something free and bad than nothing at all. Agree or disagree, it's the general direction of WP. Check out the sound list for a large DIR of more free stuff just to see the general quality stuff takes. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, right. Apologies - I didn't know how the system worked for sound recordings on wikipedia. Thanks for enlightening me. -Tpacw (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

This isn't just a poor recording - it's one countertenor singing all the parts and, while that's impressive, the result is a really bad representative of Stanford's music. If Wikipedia encourages editing for clarity, I think the novelty factor of this recording should be noted up front. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.34.142 (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)