Template talk:Instruments: Difference between revisions

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 7: Line 7:
While I like the template, I don't feel that it is set up to categorize correctly, say, a work whose accompaniment is, eg. flute and piano, or viola (alone - not part of a string ensemble).  Indeed, solo instruments seem to get ignored in the way the template is written now; for exmaple, in the current version of the template, flute links (possibly wrongly) to {{CiteCat|Wind ensemble accompaniment}} (there is indeed a {{CiteCat|Flute accompaniment}} category).  I think that we have to try (insofar as is possible) to follow the subcategory structure of {{CiteCat|Accompaniment}} if we are to implement a comprehensive template.   
While I like the template, I don't feel that it is set up to categorize correctly, say, a work whose accompaniment is, eg. flute and piano, or viola (alone - not part of a string ensemble).  Indeed, solo instruments seem to get ignored in the way the template is written now; for exmaple, in the current version of the template, flute links (possibly wrongly) to {{CiteCat|Wind ensemble accompaniment}} (there is indeed a {{CiteCat|Flute accompaniment}} category).  I think that we have to try (insofar as is possible) to follow the subcategory structure of {{CiteCat|Accompaniment}} if we are to implement a comprehensive template.   
}}
}}
:The template in its current state will certainly need some adjustments to encompass all instrumentations currently found at CPDL. But you're mistaken about the flute solo, it's already being categorized correctly as can be seen in the template documentation's example. Other categories for solo instruments can be created if necessary (as the viola example you gave), but currently they only exist for flute/guitar/harp/lute, and these are already included in the template. Some were not included yet because of their rarity, as "Brass" and "Jazz band". One complication that I foresee is how to decide when a combination of instruments is a [[:Category:Mixed ensemble accompaniment|Mixed ensemble]] and when not. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [{{carlos}} {{mail}}] 08:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
:The template in its current state will certainly need some adjustments to encompass all instrumentations currently found at CPDL. But you're mistaken about the flute solo, it's already being categorized correctly as can be seen in the template documentation's example. Other categories for solo instruments can be created if necessary (as the viola example you gave), but currently they only exist for flute/guitar/harp/lute, and these are already included in the template. Some were not included yet because of their rarity, as "Brass" and "Jazz band". One complication that I foresee is how to decide when a combination of instruments is a [[:Category:Mixed ensemble accompaniment|Mixed ensemble]] and when not. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [{{fullurl:User talk:Carlos}} {{mail}}] 08:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


{{reply|level=1|by=[[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 14:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
{{reply|level=1|by=[[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 14:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Line 37: Line 37:
:- As to adding other instruments to "complement" what the user has written, I don't think it's a good idea. In the case of the Viol consort, for instance, if the user wants to include lute/theorbo/etc., he should have to indicate it clearly. The template shouldn't add instruments that weren't explicitly indicated, in my view.
:- As to adding other instruments to "complement" what the user has written, I don't think it's a good idea. In the case of the Viol consort, for instance, if the user wants to include lute/theorbo/etc., he should have to indicate it clearly. The template shouldn't add instruments that weren't explicitly indicated, in my view.
:- Oh, yes I forgot the Harpsichord, will add it soon. :)  
:- Oh, yes I forgot the Harpsichord, will add it soon. :)  
:- If you and Rob aren't used to Regular Expressions, I suggest you google for this term together with "php" (this is the particular "brand" of RegExp used by the wiki). You'll find plenty of documentation related to this topic and many syntax examples (this is helping me a lot with the RegExp). —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]]&nbsp;[{{carlos}} {{mail}}] 07:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
:- If you and Rob aren't used to Regular Expressions, I suggest you google for this term together with "php" (this is the particular "brand" of RegExp used by the wiki). You'll find plenty of documentation related to this topic and many syntax examples (this is helping me a lot with the RegExp). —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]]&nbsp;[{{fullurl:User talk:Carlos}} {{mail}}] 07:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 
{{reply|level=2
|by=[[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 14:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
|text=
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Carlos.  I'm in general agreement with what you wrote and will try to digest it more later today or tomorrow (it may turn out to be a busy day for me here).
}}

Revision as of 14:04, 20 May 2009

New template discussion

I like it already :-) Should we have this run alongside the regular accompaniment templates? --Bobnotts talk 22:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 04:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

 Help 

While I like the template, I don't feel that it is set up to categorize correctly, say, a work whose accompaniment is, eg. flute and piano, or viola (alone - not part of a string ensemble). Indeed, solo instruments seem to get ignored in the way the template is written now; for exmaple, in the current version of the template, flute links (possibly wrongly) to Wind ensemble accompaniment (there is indeed a Flute accompaniment category). I think that we have to try (insofar as is possible) to follow the subcategory structure of Accompaniment if we are to implement a comprehensive template.

The template in its current state will certainly need some adjustments to encompass all instrumentations currently found at CPDL. But you're mistaken about the flute solo, it's already being categorized correctly as can be seen in the template documentation's example. Other categories for solo instruments can be created if necessary (as the viola example you gave), but currently they only exist for flute/guitar/harp/lute, and these are already included in the template. Some were not included yet because of their rarity, as "Brass" and "Jazz band". One complication that I foresee is how to decide when a combination of instruments is a Mixed ensemble and when not. —Carlos Email.gif 08:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 14:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

 Help 

Sorry I missed the single flute example, Carlos - my bad! On to some issues/problems to be tackled:

  • Mixed ensemble is one problem, as you mentioned. As I see it there are the following kinds of "ensembles" (which are to be viewed as somehow less than an full (or chamber) orchestra, (concert) band. I'm not sure just how "complete" this list is (perhaps overly complete, perhaps less than complete, depending upon ones viewpoint, but it reflects most of what I had in mind when I began trying to flesh out the accompaniments):
    • String ensemble: consists only of string instruments, which could be, eg., a string quartet or string orchestra, possibly with a keyboard instrument (such as a harpsichord, especially in the case of baroque accompaniment).
    • Brass ensemble: consists only of brass instruments, eg. a brass quartet or a brass band.
    • Woodwind ensemble: consists only of woodwind instruments (and possibly a horn, in the case of a woodwind quintet).
    • Wind ensemble: consists of woodwinds and brass, without percussion, and hence less than a (concert) band.
    • Mixed ensemble: consists of strings and winds, possibly with percussion and/or keyboard, but less than an orchestra (eg. typically at most two players on each string part, one player on each wind part). How much would this overlap the concept of a "chamber orchestra", which might have more than just two players per sring part (at least in violins, violas, and probaly cellos)?
    • Jazz band (or ensemble): clearly an eclectic assignment, but valid. I myself have composed a Kyrie for cantor (celebrant), SATB choir, and jazz ensemble (scored for 3 flutes, 5 saxes, 4 trumpets, 4 trombones, piano/keyboards, and string bass, percussion, with optional harp) - the first part of a w.i.p. Missa polychromia.
    • Consort of viols: pretty clear what this consists of, since it derives from an established early music idiom, but it might also include lute/theorbo/harpsichord/clavichord and/or a violone (but with these additions, does that make it a "string ensemble"? - I tend to feel not, at least in the usual sense of string ensemble).
  • Solo instruments is another problem. There are works composed for voice(s) and one or two (or perhaps even three) solo instruments as accompaniment (sometimes there is also a piano/organ/keyboard part). How to handle these seems somewhat problematic. We already have cases at ChoralWiki with flute and piano. In addtion, sometimes the solo instrument is simply specified as "optional C instrument", which might mean flute, oboe, (sooprano) sax, violin - or any other (typically soprano) range instrument, but the part is only written out in C (appropriate transposition left up to the performer).
  • Harpsichord accompaniment: this seems to have been left out of the template, at least I'm thinking that the "(harps?)" line only picks up harp accompaniments.
  • How do we fit in rarer instruments such as guitar (electric versus acoustic or 12-string), lute, krummhorn(s), cornetto (Zink), harmonica, banjo, saxophone (whether soprano, alto, tenor, baritone, or bass), etc.?

I know the tempation is "to cross that bridge (or those bridges) when we get there" - but I really think that some planning ahead is necessary. Probably not all of these possiblities need to be written into the template yet, but I think we need to know where we are going and just what categorizations should be made. For example, entering something like "string ensemble: violins I & II, viola, cello, basso continuo" should not make a link to string ensemble on the words "violins", "viola", "cello", and I wonder if the "basso continuo" (here and elsewhere) should include a harpsichord accompaniment link (since this is the usual case?).

Anyway, this is all just some food for thought.

- Chuck, I realize there's a lot of work to do ahead, and the list above is a pretty good start! The definition of Mixed ensemble was especially useful, since I wasn't totally sure of what to include in it. Good also that you cited the Chamber orchestra, I was missing it at CPDL, and I agree that there's a good level of overlapping between the two of them, but I have the impression that the latter expression is more commonly used than Mixed ensemble.
- About the solo instruments, it would perhaps be useful to have a clear idea of how much they are present at CPDL. It can be done via the ReplaceText extension (say we try to replace "oboe" with "oboe", it will inform how many pages already have this text), and then create new categories for the most relevant ones. This approach is also valid for the other rarer instruments you cited.
- I would leave off from the template those very generic cases like "optional C instrument"; if the editors won't themselves define what is the best accompaniment, it shouldn't be us to do it; besides, adding all those categories for each fitting instrument would create visual pollution. I particularly have never seen such an instrumentation at CPDL.
- As to adding other instruments to "complement" what the user has written, I don't think it's a good idea. In the case of the Viol consort, for instance, if the user wants to include lute/theorbo/etc., he should have to indicate it clearly. The template shouldn't add instruments that weren't explicitly indicated, in my view.
- Oh, yes I forgot the Harpsichord, will add it soon. :)
- If you and Rob aren't used to Regular Expressions, I suggest you google for this term together with "php" (this is the particular "brand" of RegExp used by the wiki). You'll find plenty of documentation related to this topic and many syntax examples (this is helping me a lot with the RegExp). —Carlos Email.gif 07:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 14:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

 Help 

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Carlos. I'm in general agreement with what you wrote and will try to digest it more later today or tomorrow (it may turn out to be a busy day for me here).