Talk:List of compositions by Frédéric Chopin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of compositions by Frédéric Chopin is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, cleanup, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that aren't covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
This article is supported by the Compositions task force.

Contents

[edit] List format

See this discussion of list formats for discussion of composition lists in general; this list is the one which sparked the debate. It wasn't really in my to do list, but I have access to vi, awk & sed. I removed the date of composition where it is the same as the date of the containing opus, but left them in where each piece's composition date was different (for example, Op. 10). I've removed all the red links on the grounds that links like Mazurka in C are no use. While links like No. 5 in C might be of use in the future I feel life's too short :-). Thanks, Mallocks, for doing the initial detabulation. --RobertG | (talk) 10:58, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] missing waltz?

There seems to be no mention of the waltz in f-sharp minor, also known as the Valse melancolique (KK Anh. Ib/7). Is there some doubt surrounding this work? I know it is peculiar in the baseline given by the left hand which is unusual for a Chopin waltz, but I have not heard much talk about it. Thanks. 70.240.178.41 03:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)Mysticfeline

Was in a part of the site that I hadn't looked at, specifically the supplement. Those published works in there have now been added. Mallocks 17:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] op 10-3

I don't know if it's common for the same piece of music to have more than one title, I'm not exactly an expert at all, but op 10-3's title in some places (but not on Wikipedia) is Chanson de L'Adieu, while on here, and some other places, it is titled Tristesse. I knew it as Chanson de L'Adieu my whole life until trying to find it on here. Hmm.EgyptianSushi 02:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

None of those 'names' are titles, incidentally. Tristesse is a name given to that particular étude by the original French publisher. They are usually used to identify the piece to laymen. ALTON .ıl 22:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Format

Why do some links lead to the general music form ("écossaises") and others to Chopin's specific compositions (Études)? Should the former be removed until all lead to pages of Chopin's own works?     ✗  Zen. ➚ 05:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, no. The links to form are under the heading of By musical form, and can be seen to be thus introducing each form for those unfamiliar. If individual pieces were being linked to these forms then that would be wrong, as it stands I think it's right. Mallocks 22:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
That's what I mean: all link to the general musical form except études. That particular link in this article is wrong, according to you, because it leads to the composer-specific page (Etudes (Chopin)). It should appear as the extant Waltz section, correct? z ε n 08:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh, didn't notice that, my bad, and yes I agree, formatting as the Waltz section is a good solution. Well noticed :) Mallocks 21:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I've made the suggested changes, feel free to tweak it if you don't think it's neat enough. Mallocks 21:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
That's wonderful, thanks. z ε n  04:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Details of Compositions by Genre

Hey all, I'm planning on creating a page for each major genre Chopin wrote (Mazurkas, Waltzes, Nocturnes, Etudes). On each page, there will be a list of songs in chart form, with specific details about them.

Exg:

Title Nocturne in G minor
Tempo lento
Performers Arthur Rubinstein
Difficulty moderate
Miscellaneous A favourite among students


If you think this is a good idea, or think the pages would be a waste, I would love to hear criticism/support. I'll also need some help with creating them if we decide to go through with it. Thanks --Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 01:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at Études (Chopin) to see an extant page on what you are talking about. I have to question the importance of these pages, because they seem simply like a stylized version of the categories that already exist. More importantly, as epic a work as Beethoven's sonatas are, they have no central page; rather, they have only a category here. However, I would implore you to get going on making pages for each of his works. Maybe not each prelude, but some major works need pages: Ballade No. 4 in F minor, all of his impromptus, and possibly some of the polonaises. ALTON .ıl 21:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
On second thought, that table might be very useful placed at the top of the category pages. I am sure it would be very appropriate there. ALTON .ıl 21:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Information from Frédéric Chopin#Works

I just added the information that is listed at Frédéric Chopin#Works to the top of this page. I don't know if this will flow well with everyone, but if it does I have two questions.

  1. Is there a way to just reprint the text from Frédéric Chopin#Works to the top of the page rather than a direct copy and paste as templates are done, and if so, should it be done?
  2. Should the various links in the title such as ballads link to ballads or List_of_compositions_by_Frédéric_Chopin#Solo_piano where the ballads on the page are?

I don't know if this will be like much. Pages like List of compositions by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart have a blurb like this, but most others that I have seen do not. Asmeurer (talk ♬ contribs) 02:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Just go through with what you originally intended. The Chopin page has enough information about his style and whatever, and this page should have only a cursory description of the list. As for the second question, I say remove "the" and link to the general form. ALTON .ıl 02:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catalogue

After a two-minute search I gave up. Sparing my deep research facilities, could someone clarify what the "B" and ""KK" catalogue numbers are? ALTON .ıl 04:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Found. ALTON .ıl 04:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] wow

This page has really been cleaned up. Good job Alton! Asmeurer (talk ♬ contribs) 02:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Glad you approve! There is still much work to be done for Chopin, as in naming conventions and factual statements in composition articles. Let's aim for Featured List or better yet: Featured Topic! ALTON .ıl 03:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Also, is that what you mean by "section link"? Just place the Pound sign before a section name and pipe the link. ALTON .ıl 04:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to second those thanks Alton, great work. Also thanks for all the individual composition pages you've been working on; an amazing amount of work by the look of it! Mallocks 18:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Structure

The structure of this page worries me a little. It’s in 3 sections:

A. compositions by musical form
B. unpublished and early compositions, and
C. compositions by opus number.

It seems to me that A and B should be merged into one section. If the sorting key here is “musical form”, it’s a secondary consideration whether the work was published, unpublished; early, late, or middle; or complete or partial. Also, it’s confusing when you read through A but find no mention of the “La ci darem la mano” variations, the Krakowiak, the Grand Fantasy on Polish Airs, the Fantaisie-Impromptu or the Songs, and others. It’s only when you get to the heading “Unpublished and Early Compositions” that you realise the following works all also belong to the foregoing section, because there’s no mention at the start of A of the fact that A does not contain all of Chopin’s works, only those that don’t fall into “unpublished and early compositions”.

I’ve had a go at merging A and B. -- JackofOz 02:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The whole thing was recently done in a single edit, by 89.138.22.47. I put a note on the IP's talk, but given that was his only edit, it might be an unlogged user. ALTON .ıl 09:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Posth." conflict

There is dissent on the correct naming of several works. As shown by this diff, an edit was reverted without discussion. ALTON .ıl —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 01:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Before commenting, I would like to here what Lividore has to say. I am currently unsure whether to include posth. for Opp. 66 - 72, but I shall see what others think. Centy – reply• contribs – 09:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Quite splendidly in the media section at Op. (posth.) 66 both versions are present so it would seem we haven't quite got a standard system worked out. I think the question can be reduced to this: "Does the addition of 'posth.' add any useful information?" If it does, put them in, if not, take them out. Mallocks 10:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if the revert seemed blatant. I just think the addition of "posth." is necessary because otherwise the opus numbers might create a false impression that these are among the last compositions by Chopin, when, in fact, most of those published under opus numbers after his death are works from his very early days as a composer. --Lividore 12:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll go with that, as long as we're consistent throughout. Centy – reply• contribs – 13:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Opus 7 Rondo

At 4:36 GMT (5:36 BST) on 25 October 2007 BBC Radio 3 played a Chopin Rondo in C, Opus 7. The schedule at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/throughthenight/pip/vl9w3/ shows it coming from a CD which further Googling suggests is http://music.balkanatolia.com/c/sl-e/mid-3/p-p/id-29/liudmil-angelov-frederic-chopin.html. There the same mention of Op 7 is repeated. But the list in this article reckons Opus 7 is a group of Mazurkas. Which source has the inconsistent information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by David Colver (talk • contribs) 14:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Theirs. Op. 7 is a set of Mazurkas. The rondo they are referring to is Op. 73 Rondo. The 3 obviously was forgotten. Centy – reply• contribs – 12:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Cleanup tag

Well, this may be obvious, but the fact that one piece is designated as "One more song" here is a bit questionable. Does anyone know the name for this mysterious, anonymous piece? P.S.: I hope I'm not being too petty by listing this as my only reason for the clean-up tag. --~~MusicalConnoisseur~~ Got Classical? 02:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bolero

This edit summary confused me. It sort of suggests the whole piece has been transposed into a different key and that transposed version sometimes gets an airing. I've never heard of it. The Bolero as I know it starts with a C major introduction but the main part of it is in A minor. Along the way it gets into A major, A flat major, and B flat minor, before returning to the A minor reprise; but it ends in A major. In order of accuracy, I'd prefer "C major-A minor", then just "C major", but I don't like "C major-A major" at all because A major plays a relatively minor (joke) in the proceedings. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)