Talk:Classical period (music)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Classical music
WikiProject icon Classical period (music) 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.
WikiProject Music/Music genres task force (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon Classical period (music) is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good and 1.0 standards.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Dates of the Classical Period[edit]

This article suggests a start date of 1750 and a finishing date of 1820. The Oxford Dictionary says roughly 1750 to 1830, however someone has been putting a start date of 1730 into related articles. Should we make all the articles consistent? How about using the Oxford dates unless we have good reason to adopt different dates? (I'm letting the Classical Music project know about this issue.) --Kleinzach 03:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

We should clarify that not all sources are together with the dating and that the dates are approximate (there being no clear break between periods). If we need to set a strict timeframe to the article than 1750-1830 sounds fine with me. Many sources use 1750 as a starting point.. what sources use 1730? I think 1830 is a pretty clear finishing date as well. ThemFromSpace 06:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps we need more sources? The dates will be arbitrary, of course, but I think they should follow major reference books. --Kleinzach 08:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
The traditionally accepted start of the Classical period is 1750 because it is the year of J.S Bach's death, this marking the end of the Baroque Period. This is consistent across almost all resources I've referenced (including Oxford) Comradeyeltsen (talk) 22:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

It naturally goes without saying that stylistic changes are not the immediate process that the 1750 start date makes it out to be, of course. Domenico Scarlatti's sonatas are in a style that could be described as proto-classical, after all. It is true that they do not yet display every characteristic of the Classical style, but even if we were to delineate the Classical period simply by the first and last masterpieces written in that style over a continuous period, it would have to start at 1777 with Mozart's KV 271 and end at 1828 with Schubert's D 960. Double sharp (talk) 14:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Where does F.X.Brixi fit in?[edit]

F.X.Brixi is "somehow" missing. He is (much) more "classical" than e.g. Boccherini and even Stamitz. He is clearly important in the transition phase from Baroque to core Classical, and he also paved the way for Mozart in Prague. IMHO, he should be mentioned before e.g. A.Soler (whom I do not know, in contrast to Brixi's - but that may be my Viennese education ...). --haraldmmueller 08:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


It seems to me that Albrechtsberger should be mentioned also - first as a teacher and friend to many important classical composers (Beethoven, of course), but then also as a composer of the transition period. His works are important as an example of that playful, experimenting time - standing out are of course his concertos for Jew's harp(!), mandora and orchestra. --haraldmmueller 08:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haraldmmueller (talkcontribs)

"close paraphrasing" warning[edit]

There was a "close paraphrasing" warning in one section. A look at the results of the Duplication Detector report gave the following:

and art music traditions list of music students by teacher music theory music notation music patronage music rehearsal v t e music history
main article major melody metal minimalist music movement music genres music theory music traditions music videos musical forms musicians musicology notes opera orchestra
(3 words, 18 characters)
hop music pop music soul music rock music heavy metal music punk rock performance ensembles choir concert band conducting instrumentalist musical ensemble musician
original overture percussion performance piano sonata piece pitch played popular music punk rock radio ragtime record reggae rhythm rock and roll rough guide
(3 words, 15 characters)
traditional music blues country music jazz folk music popular music hip hop music pop music soul music rock music heavy metal music punk
free documentation guide is licensed guide to world guitar harmony hip hop music home improvisation influence interval isbn karaoke main article major melody
(3 words, 13 characters)

What happened is that the detector matched the huge list of links at the end of the article, especially the "Music" section, with something at Google - and voila, "hip hop music" and something else both turned up. Useless, therefore removed. --User:Haraldmmueller 07:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Nope. The "detector" was my human eyes.
But I thank you! As you may have noticed, I was unsure of your standards.
Now I know better.
/Johan M. Olofsson (talk) 00:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)