Talk:Historical musicology

Thia article has NOTHING to do with the academic discipline of historical musicology.

I agree, putting up a vote for deletion, this is about a 2004 Schotland rave phenomenon --Jahsonic 00:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Article now rewritten

I have now rewritten the article so that it is about a discipline of historical musicology.

Capitalistroadster 06:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Vote for Deletion

This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 00:59, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

No popular music?

On what basis is it asserted that "the history of popular music is generally not studied within the discipline of musicology."? I don't believe the disciplines are, um, disciplined that stringently.Rikyu 23:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The statement is inaccurate as "discipline of musicology," however, as "discipline of historical musicology," this is generally true. Departments which have subfields of "historical musicology" tend to do so in order to separate out non-Western or popular music studies. --Myke Cuthbert 20:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

That's not the case in my experience at the UW-Madison, where history, theory, and ethno play mix-and-match...theorists study cellphone ringtones, ethnomusicologists look at Wagner, historians study radio broadcasting. I feel more comfortable with a less-sweeping statement, and have edited to suit--take a look.Rikyu 20:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Music History?

Please give a look at the article Music History (not History of Music) and see if you agree that the two articles should be merged. Music History, is generally speaking, what the discipline of Historical musicology is called when taught at the undergraduate level. It might be better to merge Music History into Historical musicology rather than vice versa, since people will always want to know why "Music History" doesn't cover popular and non-western music (reason: classes called "Music History" and scholars who call themselves "Music historians" tend not to; those who do tend to choose other titles). --Myke Cuthbert 20:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Given that the thrust of "Music History" is "academic study" of the history of music, which is another way of saying "historical musicology," I see no problem in merging the entries. It also seems to me that "Music history" is a more likely search term. It certainly gets more Google hits (1.3 million versus 50,000, give or take).Rikyu 20:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)