My postulate about few work pages, typesets (boring, I know)

General help on the Wiki

Moderators: kcleung, Wiki Admins

Post Reply
Arturo
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:16 pm
notabot: YES
notabot2: Bot
Location: Poland

My postulate about few work pages, typesets (boring, I know)

Post by Arturo »

Hi!
Recently I've looked at many pages of IMSLP.
Correct my if I'm wrong, but:
I
I think that song "All through the night" (Anonymous) is not ANCIENT! In work page is information, that it was first notated at 1784 :!:
II
There is lot of works perfectly scanned, why then, these works are doubled by owfull typesets? Especialy, if there is no difference in music text between them? :idea:
III
In Sweelinck page, there is complete edition. Why there are also separate pieces "excluded" from it? The edition of complete file, and selected scores, i. e. Toccata XIII are EXACTLY the same :idea:
If any mod read this, please correct it at IMSLP.
IV
In Cesar Franck page, few scores from L'Organiste are doubled (typeset)
V
And small question at the end. We have to take all scores, also rubbish? I'm not typeset hater at all, I just prefer clean and readable typesets, whenever it is needed (i.e. no public domain edition of work). But when we have possibility to get clean, high quality and usefull scan?
This is my personal feeling, you can think it's right or not, but since first day, when I started uploading scores, I want to make this Library better.
Best regards,
Arturo
Post Reply