Talk:List of longest non-repetitive piano pieces

Organisation of the page

Also, it might be a good idea to order pieces either by author or length. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Minimal length

What is the minimal piece length that should be allowed on this page? Since this article includes Sorabji's Opus clavicembalisticum, it should also include at least five other Sorabji piano pieces (besides the ones included already). What about Bach's WTC? Toccata quarta (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Missing citations

Why, what, where, and how is this article missing citations or need footnotes and what should be done about it? Hyacinth (talk) 06:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Removals

Having just contributed to Talk:List of longest novels, I'm rather tempted to propose deleting entries from this list. Not on the basis of lack of notability or anything like that, but musical coherency. Beethoven could have stringed his 32 piano sonatas together and called them a single work, but that is obviously not very legitimate. The Sorabji Études and the Curran work do not have large scale motivic organisation, so perhaps they could go. I'm not sure about the status of The Road and Beatus Vir, though.—Toccata quarta (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the Sorabji Etudes weren't meant to be played as a set. "The Road" was, however, and has received at least one complete performance. I'm not familiar with the other two you mentioned. 24.7.178.186 (talk) 07:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of longest bridges above water in India which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of longest non-repetitive piano pieces. 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/20121215043153/http://www.ianpace.com/text/history2.htm to http://www.ianpace.com/text/history2.htm

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) 05:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Expand scope based on AfD discussion

I'm glad the AFD came to the right decision. I do think that expanding the scope to include repetitive pieces is probably best though perhaps as a second table. I think that the criteria for inclusion should involve "where the piece or the composer has received significant attention for its length or the length of her or his compositions." To avoid people like me writing nonsense pieces that last months just to get on this list.  :-) -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 00:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Transcendental studies

Why are Sorabji's transcendental studies listed here? Are they not individual studies, not one big piece? MarcelDupré1886 (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Self-published sources

If I sat down tomorrow and wrote a piece of absolute rubbish that would take a hundred years to play, everyone would ignore it, and rightly so; BUT I could still get it into this article without any trouble. I shouldn't be able to do that.

In this particular case, a self-published source that has not already had numerous public performances recognized in the press, or a commercial recording reviewed in the press, has absolutely zero chance of being notable.

Works on this list may be worthy of notice, but "worthy of notice" is not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is for "already famous" (which is euphemistically called "notability"). I don't think the requirement of prior fame is always the best thing, but it's how things are done here. It's a necessary evil, to keep the encyclopedia from being overrun with garbage entries.

A number of items in the list unfortunately have to go. TooManyFingers (talk) 05:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

For Clive Barker

The article states that "For Clive Barker" was composed by hand by Matthew Lee Knowles, while the YouTube shows the score written on a computer. Χιονάκι (talk) 23:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

PS: Frederic Rzewski's "The Road" is listed in the article as being about 10 hours long, while on YouTube it is about 9 hours long. Χιονάκι (talk) 23:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)