Talk:Ballades (Chopin)

Score images

Since there are only Chopin's original manuscripts for two of the ballades, I will, for the sake of consistency, just use a modern score for all four ballades and request that the manuscript be deleted. This also allows me to format the ballades better. I don't think there will be any objections... but just in case. ;) Insorak ♫ talk 01:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Just for reference, the images are at Image:Ballade No. 2 manuscript.jpg and Image:Chopin Ballade 1.png. Insorak ♫ talk 04:11, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Also removed a File:Frederic Chopin - Ballade Ab major Opus 47.ogg. Just the following points for further improvement:

• Add some publication information (the master and his publishers got along notoriously (un)well)
• Cite things so I don’t violate WP:OR
• Insert bar numbers when I can find them

Ready for movement! :) Insorak ♫ talk 02:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved by Graeme Bartlett. Jafeluv (talk) 13:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

---

User:Insorak/Ballades → Ballades (Chopin) — Per discussion on Talk: Ballade No. 4 (Chopin). I have finished the draft on my userspace and would like to have it moved over an already-existing redirect. Insorak ♫ talk 03:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support. Article looks good. Ucucha 12:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Score Image Misprint

The score image of the fourth ballade contains a note misprint: the second note in the left hand is also e-natural. It should be changed so that it agrees with the current Henle edition and all out of copyright editions on IMSLP:

http://imslp.org/wiki/Ballade_No.4,_Op.52_(Chopin,_Frederic) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.182.197.180 (talk) 19:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the remark, I fixed it in the file.

As I said on Commons: "Edited left hand's second note to e-natural, according to en:Talk:Ballades (Chopin)#Score Image Misprint. I don't know if that's right, but that seemed documented/legit enough, and was strengthened by a note on the article since july 2010 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ballades_%28Chopin%29&diff=374085586), so as it was technically very simple to change I decided to do it. If someone feels that's a mistake, please revert to the previous version."

Cos-fr (talk) 18:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

dolce = soft? sweet? or sugary?

On this change from "soft" to "sweet" [1]

Definition of dolce in Elson's Music Dictionary :

• sweetly, softly, delicately

so why change from "soft" to "sweet"?

--Frania W. (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

"sweet" is a more literal translation. I wouldn't worry about it too much; both are context-appropriate. Ocean ♫ Etude 07:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Ballad or Ballade?

I know they're usually known by their French name, but in the same way as valse becomes "waltz", shouldn't ballade become "ballad". At least in the body of the article.--Fauban 19:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Belatedly, no. Ballad has various meanings, including songs and narrative poems, most of which don't fit here. It is not a translation of ballade, and even if it were, which it isn't, these pieces are never but never called anything but "ballade". "Waltz", on the other hand, is simply the English translation of the French valse and the German Walzer, and these pieces are just as often called "waltzes" as anything else. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

1835 or 1831

The first paragraph states they were composed from 1835 to 1842, yet the section on the first ballade says it was composed in 1831 - which is it? Kisch (talk)

Undine vs Switezianka

Ballade nr 3 is said to be inspired by Mickiewicz's poem called "Undine" or "Switezianka". I believe "Undine" is english translation of "Switezianka" and in fact it's the same poem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4898:80E0:EE43:0:0:0:4 (talk) 21:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Spam in link

The external link in note 11 redirects to spam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.96.37.144 (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ballades (Chopin). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413130554/http://www.listentochopin.com/OthersBallades to http://www.listentochopin.com/OthersBallades

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:20, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Ballade no. 3 Sheet Error

For the image "Opening Bars of Ballade No. 3", the E on the 4th beat of the 2nd measure, Left Hand, should not be natural; it should be regular E flat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:3E88:8100:785A:D874:5B2:C6D0 (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

13 April 2020: Fixed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

questionable content in ballade 3

The second paragraph isn’t complete, and the form is not rondo - all his ballades are roughly written in free form. Slee329 (talk) 11:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Split into four articles

Wouldn't it be better to split this article into four separate articles? As the articles writes: "Besides sharing the title, the four ballades are entities distinct from each other." If we consider Template:Frédéric Chopin, we can see that almost all pieces are separate articles, such as the Scherzos. Given that the four ballades are monumental piano works on their own, a split would be more than justified. --intforce (talk) 13:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

As seen on Talk:Ballade No. 4 (Chopin), it seems that they were merged more than 10 years ago. However, the article has been greatly expanded since then. --intforce (talk) 13:29, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

No objections. Problems: the Commons category C:Category:Ballades by Frédéric Chopin should probably appear on each article; interlanguage links for various languages for the individual Ballades need to be created – which means the existing interlanguage links for the set will be lost. Maybe a brief placeholder for the set could be maintained just for that purpose. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

As far as the loss of ILLs is concerned, that could be handled by having a "disambiguation" page like Late string quartets (Beethoven). While we're at it, String Quartets, Op. 76 (Haydn) also should be split into several articles. These (i.e. Haydn's) are some of the most respected works in music history and they deserve better than to have all those details on them crammed into a single entry. Toccata quarta (talk) 07:13, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• The article is not properly sourced at the moment. I added (a) the high resolution original manuscript of Ballade No. 4 and (b) a detailed summary of Jim Samson's book on "Chopin: The Four Ballades" from there. I wrote that rather rapidly. If the whole of Samson's source was used properly, the whole article would be improved. For the four individual ballades, more carefully editing is required, preferably with sources supplied. I don't believe that a long article would result from having an articles on all Four Ballades, as I think Samson's paperbook book shows. Mathsci (talk) 11:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Split is done now. The summaries on each ballade on this page can be expanded surely, but the four articles look good. intforce (talk)