Template talk:Instruments
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)
|
- 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 08:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
|
- - 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 07:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
|
- You're welcome, Chuck! I just realized that I had completely forgotten about this 5 years old discussion. I need to check which of your suggestions have already been implemented. Regards, —Carlos 21:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
adding explanatory remarks?
Cavalli's (or maybe Vincenti's) spelling of violincino incorrectly adds Category:Violin accompaniment, while
{{Instruments|basso continuo}}
with violincino
is decidedly inelegant in appearance. Is it easy (and indeed desirable) to remove the line break after the template? Richard Mix (talk) 23:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC) Thanks for that fix: I knew something was afoot when I took a second third look at Lauda Jerusalem (Johann Rosenmüller)! Richard Mix (talk) 03:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Viol consort is now linking correctly, as you already noticed :) violincino was also fixed, thanks for pointing it out!
- This template is conceptually different from the other accompaniment templates: the idea behind it is to encompass all the descriptive text that comes after it; that's why the line break is already included. The syntax in the example you gave would then be {{Instruments|basso continuo with violincino}}
- Regards, —Carlos 03:31, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Chuck found a way to avoid the dotted lines at Ave verum corpus, KV 618 (Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart). The 'concept' of nothing outside the brackets would make it impossible to pipe things if one wished, for example, to link using the words keyboard reduction ;-). My issue with that page is only the confusion of "general information" with edition-specific re-arrangements. Richard Mix (talk) 23:09, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
- In fact, the two-line layout was unintentionally produced by Chuck when he ran a ReplaceText without noticing that there could be text left after it. Please have a look again at the Ave verum corpus page: what do you think of the single line layout?
- I was thinking of a trick that might be helpful in this case: any text inside of parentheses would not be linked at all. In the Ave verum example, individual instruments of the String ensemble would not be linked; would it be of any help?
- Instruments: String ensemble (2 violins, viola, violoncello, contrabass) and organ continuo; may be sung with keyboard accompaniment, or a cappella in some arrangements.
- Regarding your example of "Keyboard version/reduction", they are separate categories, why would you want to pipe them? Maybe you are considering that a Keyboard version of an instrumental accompaniment should also be called a reduction? I've always made confusion with these two categories also; a solution might be to rename them so that "Keyboard version" would become "Keyboard reduction of instrumental accompaniment", and "Keyboard reduction" would become "Keyboard reduction of vocal parts".
- —Carlos 14:20, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- It's really not significantly worse ;-)
- Parentheses to avoid Cat|Violin accompaniment links sound good, but maybe it's time to consider how (or if) this template could be used for combined searches: on Sundays without a violist I would like to call up works with 2 violins and bc, without woodwind instruments but either with or without colla parte trombones. How can that best be worked towards?
- Yes, there's a conversation underway(!) at Category talk:Keyboard reduction. Richard Mix (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
- Parentheses aren't implemented yet, are they? Richard Mix (talk) 07:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
4-hands
Is it feasible to have "piano 4-hands" both in a subcategory Piano 4-hands accompaniment and not duplicated in the parent Piano accompaniment? Richard Mix (talk) 07:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, it is. I made the necessary changes to the template. See also my reply at Category talk:Piano accompaniment. —Carlos (talk) 03:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
- Wonderful; thanks! Richard Mix (talk) 09:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Gamba
If parenthetical information comes to be ignored, this will not have been the optimal solution: Jubilate Domino, omnis terra (Dietrich Buxtehude). Should "gamba" before a comma be made to remove "viola" from Category:Viola accompaniment? Richard Mix (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Richard. Just added viola da gamba as a new option. Still have to fine-tune for viola da braccio, viola d'amore etc. —Carlos (talk) 18:56, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Orchestra accompaniment
I was just looking again at Christ unser Herr zum Jordan kam, BWV 7 (Johann Sebastian Bach). The usual way to tidy up the line break would be to replace
- {{Instruments|Orchestra}}: 2 Oboi d'amore, Violino concertate I/II, Violino ripieno I/II, Viola, Continuo<br><br>
with
- {{Instruments|Orchestra:2 Oboi d'amore, Violino concertate I/II, Violino ripieno I/II, Viola, Continuo}}
But, is it useful for Category:Viola accompaniment include some pieces with string ensemble and not others, rather than pieces with viola alone or a least obligato parts? What I would wish for is categorization under Orchestra accompaniment alone, eventually searchable by the combination of instruments. Richard Mix (talk) 01:35, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes Richard, this can be done. Just use the following syntax:
- {{Instruments|Orchestra: |2 Oboi d'amore, Violino concertate I/II, Violino ripieno I/II, Viola, Continuo}}
- Just the first part of the text will be analyzed and categorized. The second part is left alone. Best, —Carlos (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
- Of course! One can even do:
- {{Instruments|Orchestra: Violino concertate I/II, |2 Oboi d'amore, Strings (Violino ripieno I/II, Viola, Continuo)}}
- Thanks, Richard Mix (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
- Of course! One can even do:
Adding Category:Wind ensemble accompaniment
I just added a line of code hoping to include Category:Wind ensemble accompaniment and see that the 'Instruments line at Kantate auf das Dreifaltigkeitsfest (Christian Ludwig Dieter) unexpectedly became blank and the piece is still uncategorized. Is there a guide somewhere I should have looked at? Richard Mix (talk) 00:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Richard. The text used as parameter for the #multireplace function must abide to the rules of w:Regular expressions. Regex is very powerful, and if not properly defined can lead to unpredictable results. You probably based your entry on the Mixed ensemble line; you just left out a closing parenthesis. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 18:13, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Ensembles
The template seems to be trying something fancy with plurals of some instruments but not others; I wonder how desirable this is, even if the bugginess of example 1 is fixed:
Instruments: 2 flutes
Instruments: 1 or 2 flute(s)
Instruments: 2 violins
Instruments: strings
Instruments: 5 string instruments
I just dealt with Solomon, HWV 67 (George Frideric Handel) by changing the argument to Orchestra:|
Richard Mix (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)