Discussion in 'General' started by Anonymous, Sep 14, 2007.
please fix your liszt section. follow searles catalog instead of making groupings yourself.
Liszt as well as other composer does not fit very well to the hierarchy Composer -> Genre -> Work because he did not compose very much in genres. But I do not understand how to group his work in any other way using a generic structure. Do you suggest we list all his work on a single page in the SXXX structure? That would not look very nice and what should we name the "genre" under Liszt? Liszt's work?
I believe that placing everything on one page following the S.XXX format would be ideal. However, like Mr. Robert said, it would be a mess. Much like classicalarchive.net's organization....it's an eye sore. Therefore I reason that PS should leave it as it is, but merely add in the S numbers to each recording. (As it does with BWV in the Bach page).
Searle ordered Liszt's works thematicly. You should take a look at the cataloge, it is available on IMSLP.
Well I didn't exactly meant ordering all works on the same page. Rather, following Searles structure, and creating pages, like "Piano and Ochestra" (e.g. Concertos), "Original piano works" (Sonata, 5 Klavierstücke), "Works in Dance form" (e.g. Mephisto waltz), "Fantasies", "Paraphrases", "Transcriptions". What do you recon?
I see you are a bit of an authority on Liszt and a great contributor to IMSLP, so now I understand your request better.
Having looked at these Searle categories there are not many of them - a great chunk of his work is lumped up in one category. Our categorization may be a bit ad-hoc but is more intuitive and useful, and probably what people are most used to. It always makes sense to conform to standards but I agree with Robert that we should probably leave it as it is - obviousy adding S. numbers wherever possible. Reorganizing it all would be a huge task, and we'd have to do it also for Bach, Mozart, and all other composers with an offical cataloguer.
Separate names with a comma.