User talk:Robert Urmann

Brahms

Hi Robert. Thanks so much for all the work you're doing here, adding Brahms editions and texts. It's not gone unnoticed! --Bobnotts talk 11:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Bob! (Actually, this is a short form for Robert, isn't it?) I'm doing my best to overhaul the Brahms page step by step thoroughly. I noticed, that Arthur Reutenauer has adopted the composer, and I tried to contact him recently to avoid some hassle. Still, he hasn't replied yet. Hope, my changes are welcome, though. --Robert Urmann 12:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Op. 93a

THANK YOU so much for the full edition of Op. 93a! I had requested that. It WAS one of the very, very few works of Brahms to not be available in complete score format somewhere on the internet (due to Lübeck only having the vocal parts). I GREATLY appreciate it, and have linked it from my Brahms website http://www.kellydeanhansen.com/opus93a.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hansenkd (talk • contribs) on 05:44, 12 August 2009.

Dear Kelly, nice site that you've created out there! I added a link to your listening guide on the work's page, too. If you don't mind I would also add some more links to your guides on the respective work pages–just like you did from your site ;-)

Be assured that my own scores feature proper bar numbering! I'm aware of the "upbeat counting problem" throughout many editions on CPDL, but it's impossible to fix every single score or contact each editor. There are no designated proof-readers on CPDL. If one likes to report score errors: there is a score error template available, which can be used to mark these and other mistakes. Anyway, if there are questions concerning op. 93a (or others), feel free to contact me. I'm still researching in some handwritten revisions in No. 1 (the "Rosenkranz" passage in alto part). As soon as I can confirm changes by the composer I'll post a revised edition. All best wishes. --Robert Urmann 10:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much, Robert! You can obviously link my guides as much as you want! I'm anxious for more and more links wherever I can get them (I might try to lobby IMSLP for the same thing for their individual works pages.) The Breitkopf & Härtel complete edition does indeed have a different alto part for "Rosenkranz." It also omits the "und lustig" part of the tempo marking. I'll have to listen to my recording to see which version it reflects. EDIT--sounds like my recording (NDR-Chor, Günter Jena, DG complete edition) uses the version in the Gesamtausgabe, not the first edition.

Hansenkd 00:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Kelly, I can confirm these changes. I’ll include it in my edition(s) along with some remarks on the first print and Brahms’ later revisions. Keep in touch, Robert Urmann 11:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Marienlieder

Hi again, Robert!

It's a strange coincidence that you posted the Marienlieder score just today, as I'm starting my guide on those pieces--today! And it's also strange that you don't have a translation for verse 7 of No. 4 because I just contacted Emily Ezust today to tell her that her text (and translation) for that song are missing--the seventh verse!! Spooky.

Anyway, I saw that you chose to notate the music of No. 7 twice rather than trying to fit the text of all five verses in one score. It looks like there is an upbeat error (and as a result, a 4/4 bar with three beats) in the second repetition of the music. Probably because all sources have only two beats in the last measure (because the music is in 3/4 at that point, not 4/4, so the upbeat is still part of a 3/4 measure in the subsequent verses).

Was No. 4 the only one for which a score didn't exist (mainly by Rafael Ornes) before?

Let me know when you change that alto part in Op. 93a or if you add any more links to my guides. I just finished the Op. 110 motets, and would love to have a good score (that doesn't use C-clefs) of No. 3. I'm also hoping the Regina coeli, Op. 37, No. 3, might go up sometime.

Thanks for all your great work! Hansenkd 20:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Good God, Kelly!!! This must be from above …

I must confess that the translation for No. 4 is leaned against Emily’s. So, if she doesn’t have one for the 7th verse, maybe you could provide one? It’s only two lines, and I’d be glad to assist. For Germans, too, the vocabulary is kind of outdated. So, if German isn’t one’s mother tongue (and even ‘modern’ Germans don’t have an increased interest in old fashioned language) it’s hard to interprete. It would be great if we could cleanup some peculiar passages, e.g. the singular/plural cases in No. 1: the original text reads „die Engel“ which is plural; this is interpreted in singular case. I feel this isn’t the best solution … And also the passage in No. 7: I suppose it’s the …-thing [I’ll write a PM]. Please, give it a try – I don’t expect singable lyrics ;-) Btw, all songs of op 62 have official translations authorized by Brahms himself! See the Lübeck first prints.

As to No. 7: You’re absolutely right concerning the measure counting! This happens when people like me split it into two parts :-( The reason simply is readability. You might have noticed how the first print handles each of the five stanzas: the first one below the soprano, the second below the alto, … that’s an outdated habit, not very useful in [choir/rehearsal/performance] practice. However, I’ll stick to the source, which means parenthesized bar numbers in conformance with the other stanzas, and, of course, correct my silly upbeat mistake! (I’d swear it wasn’t there yesterday …)

Yes, No. 4 had been the only unset score till now.

Oh, op 93a has already been corrected, but not uploaded, yet … wait a minute. While you’re working on the Marienlieder I would dive into setting Wenn wir in höchsten Nöten sein. C clef reading always is a good exercise. I can’t promise how long it will take (editing, not exercising C clef reading); give it some time, please. Next will be – I’ll take it as a score request – Regina coeli! Will also add links to your valuable guides step by step, but allow time for editing, too ;-)

Yours truly, --Robert Urmann 21:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The editions in question are now revised and online. Thank you for your attention – I don’t want to have a yellow score error warning beneath my submissions! --Robert Urmann 08:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

There is one more bugaboo with No. 7, and it's impossible to know what is correct because of the idiotic text underlay in the first edition (which was taken up wholesale in the B&H Gesamtausgabe). Listening to my recording of the piece, the trailing altos and tenors repeat not "fallen in Finsternis," but instead "vor dir in Finsternis" in stanza 4. In stanza 5, the repetition is "so scheid ich fröhlich, so scheid ich fröhlich hin" instead of "so scheid ich fröhlich hin, scheid ich fröhlich hin." That was obviously just Jena's interpretation. Based on the sources, it's simply impossible to know which underlay is correct, and I wonder if even the Henle Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke will be able to sort it out whenever they publish these pieces. The situation is even worse with the bass parts in the last two verses of No. 5 from the Op. 41 male choruses. I'll have to email you privately about that one... Hansenkd 12:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I compared the full score and the voice parts: the text underlay now should be clear! (To my favour it sounds a bit odd to have ‘vor’ and ‘so’ on the downbeat, but that’s just my personal opinion.) --Robert Urmann 17:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't think about the voice parts! I guess there are THREE possible ways to interpret the alto/tenor underlay in stanza 5. 1. "hin" on the last beat of m. 14 and "scheid" on the downbeat of m. 15 (this is what the Ornes score has--it also has "fallen" instead of "vor dir" on the downbeat of m. 15 in stanza 4). 2. "hin" on the last beat of m. 14 and "so" on the downbeat of m. 15 (this is what you have now). 3. "so" on the last beat of m. 14 and "scheid" on the downbeat of m. 15--so cutting off "hin" in the first statement: "so scheid ich fröhlich, so scheid..." (it looks like THIS is what the parts have and it's what I hear on the recording). See, I really AM a pest. :-) Hansenkd 18:03, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Argh–I changed it wrong! You are right with the last stanza. I think, now I got it --Robert Urmann 18:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: copyright mp3 links usw

Hallo, Robert, vielen Dank für die an mich gerichteten Zeilen auf Julianes Diskussionsseite! - Sehr aufschlussreich! Grüße von Christoph --Christophero Manco 12:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sandmännchen (Brahms)

Hallo, Robert, danke, dass du dich darum gekümmert hast! Eigentlich ist "Die Blümelein, sie schlafen" ja kein "echtes" Volkslied, sondern eine Komposition von Anton Wilhelm von Zuccalmaglio (1803-1869). Und der wiederum hat dabei lediglich auf die Melodie des Weihnachtsliedes "Zu Bethlehem geboren" zurückgegriffen. Aber das hat Herrn Brahms - wie so oft - nicht sonderlich bekümmert; ihm ging es mehr um die Qualität, weniger um die Echtheit. Bei IMSLP.org habe ich übrigens eine Bearbeitung derselben Melodie aus der Feder von Franz Abt hochgeladen (mit französischem Text). Bis ich dies alles auf Englisch herausgebracht hätte, wären Stunden vergangen; deshalb habe ich's gelassen. Grüße von --Christophero Manco 23:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)