Jump to content

Talk:Violin Concerto No. 1 (Bruch): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Not actually listed in OTD on 2011-04-24 (script-assisted edit)
major classical work
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Classical|composition=yes}}
{{Classical|composition=yes|importance=high}}
==Other Bruch violin concertos?==
==Other Bruch violin concertos?==
Did Bruch write another violin concerto? Both the recordings I have of this one say only "''Violin Concerto''", etc. etc. &mdash; [[User talk:Springeragh|<font style="background:#808;color:#fff;">&nbsp;'''''$PЯING'''''rαgђ&nbsp;</font>]] 23:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Did Bruch write another violin concerto? Both the recordings I have of this one say only "''Violin Concerto''", etc. etc. &mdash; [[User talk:Springeragh|<font style="background:#808;color:#fff;">&nbsp;'''''$PЯING'''''rαgђ&nbsp;</font>]] 23:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:10, 9 May 2012

WikiProject iconClassical music: Compositions
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Other Bruch violin concertos?

Did Bruch write another violin concerto? Both the recordings I have of this one say only "Violin Concerto", etc. etc. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  23:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bruch wrote three numbered violin concertos. #1 is Op. 26 in G minor, #2 is Op. 44 in D minor, #3 is Op. 58 in D minor. The first one is much more popular, but recordings of the other two are not too hard to find. DavidRF 04:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV??

Is it just me or does the article read rather NPOV? It feels almost as if I am being told "this piece is so beautiful" without too many facts/information/history. Not sure if I should edit. 131.191.39.156 (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone is welcome to edit. But it is recoomended that you first create an account. Addaick (talk) 06:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I would agree that it does seems to have a POV, saying that the parts are "ravishing" and such. It is beautiful, but perhaps this fluff could be toned down a little and little more could be added on the analysis? Minidude09 (talk) 03:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Phillip Huscher is the program annotator for the Chicago Symphony Orchestra." This would seem to imply that this is just copied from the CSO, which would make it copyrighted content. 24.46.69.10 (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be from [1], which states "Program notes copyright © 2009 by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. All Rights Reserved. Program notes may be reprinted only in their entirety and with written consent of Chicago Symphony Orchestra." The program notes are definitely no in their entirety, so I deleted the paragraph. 83.199.117.8 (talk) 15:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]