Piano-vocal score vs. "Vocal / Piano Score"

General help on the Wiki

Moderators: kcleung, Wiki Admins

Post Reply
Lyle Neff
active poster
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:21 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human
Location: Delaware, USA
Contact:

Piano-vocal score vs. "Vocal / Piano Score"

Post by Lyle Neff »

Hello,

Could this label be standardized among the IMSLP pages?

I'm sure that I have entered "piano-vocal score" on some of my contributions, only to have it changed to "Vocal / Piano Score."

While the latter makes more sense (in terms of hierarchy), "piano-vocal score" or "vocal score" seems to be standard usage. (However, IMHO, "vocal score" would make sense only for a cappella works. :wink: )
Vivaldi
active poster
Posts: 407
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:54 pm
notabot: YES
notabot2: Bot
Location: Malaysia

Post by Vivaldi »

It is to my understanding that a vocal score means that the orchestral parts are reduced to a piano reduction while retaining all the vocal parts.
Lyle Neff
active poster
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 3:21 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human
Location: Delaware, USA
Contact:

Post by Lyle Neff »

Vivaldi wrote:It is to my understanding that a vocal score means that the orchestral parts are reduced to a piano reduction while retaining all the vocal parts.
Yes, although the full term is "piano-vocal score." What I'm wondering is why there is "Vocal / Piano score" in some places on IMSLP.
Carolus
Site Admin
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:18 pm
notabot: 42
notabot2: Human
Contact:

Post by Carolus »

The term "vocal score" is easily the most common one used in the English-speaking world. Library of Congress uses "vocal score" for category M1501, most US and UK publishers employ "vocal score" as well.

While we probably ought to use "Vocal score" like LC does, "Vocal / Piano score" is the most common form found at IMSLP, which is why I've been changing it when I do copyright tagging - even though I'm not personally all that fond of the term since it is (strictly speaking) no more accurate than "vocal score" and certainly more cumbersome. "Piano-vocal score" suffers from the identical problem and even lists the principal components in reverse order of their order in the score itself. The only thing to be said in defense of either term is that they are (possibly) less confusing to the many visitors here whose first language isn't English.

Operas are an area where we start to see the limitations of a single wiki-page for a given work. A very popular opera, like Bizet's Carmen, could end up with the following formats all on a single workpage:

1. Full score (multiple editions)
2. Vocal score (multiple editions)
3. Piano score (the whole opera arranged for piano, often with text added above the top staff)
4. Chorus score
5. Individual parts for vocal soli, chorus sections, orchestra
6. Libretti

7. Suites (orchestral scores and various arrangements)

8. Excerpts (original extracts and innumerable arrangements)

9. Fantasias, potpourris and the like (usually for piano, sometimes for solo instrument and piano)

For any of these categories, there could also be manuscripts (both the composer's holograph and copies) and new typesets along with the normal scans. Taken together, one could easily stretch a workpage past its limit in terms of navigability and sheer length.
Post Reply