User talk:Kahhe

Kahhe, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kahhe! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! Great work on Agricola

Kahhe, I'd like to welcome you to WP! Your work on (Alexander) Agricola is terrific, and I see you've recently created a draft composition list as well. I've worked on quite a bit of early music content here, so do let me know if you need any assistance in your editing or have any questions. Best – Aza24 (talk) 07:47, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words! Kahhe (talk) 15:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of compositions by Alexander Agricola has been accepted

List of compositions by Alexander Agricola, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

ThadeusOfNazereth^{Talk to Me!} 16:38, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Josquin

Thanks for your helpful (as usual) edits on the Josquin article! I've been rewriting most of it for WP:FAR. As you might have noticed, the Milan and travels, Milan and France and Condé-sur-l'Escaut sections are not done (and still have outdated info in them), which is probably the cause for some of your corrections there. I think after those sections are updated and I finish the legacy section it'll be in pretty good shape. What are your thoughts on this? Aza24 (talk) 19:54, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the hard work on the Josquin article! It takes a lot of effort to thoroughly update a large article like this, and I'm impressed by the changes I've seen so far. I contemplated doing something similar since I bought the Fallows book but can't summon enough motivation to take on such a large task, so I'm doing something much more modest instead and am just reading through and trying to patch up a few holes and polish up some rough corners. I hope my changes so far aren't too pedantic.

As you say, the biography for these sections may need more work, although I haven't noticed any blatant errors there apart from the citation note that I inserted. I'm personally not very satisfied with the music/style section, I think a little more detail won't hurt, although that may just be my own preferences. For example, the canonic masses section is just a list works. I think there are several points worth mentioning including exact vs diatonic canon and Josquin's preference to the latter, Josquin's debt to Orto's mass, the development between the two canonic masses and the wonderful variety in the latter mass, the tonal ambiguity and the debt to Ockeghem, etc. However I don't have a copy of the Josquin Companion at hand and I may have to scrounge references from different sources to do that. Kahhe (talk) 08:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My motivation for it comes and goes!—Which is why it's been a project of mine for so long. The Masses subsections were actually the ones I touched the least, since they were more or less fully sourced, but I would agree with adding more detail. Actually, I'm a little concerned that the division of mass types is not optimal, like the 'solmization masses' for example, well, there's only really two of them, so it doesn't really seem like just "another mass category" of Josquin's. I personally like the way Grove does it better (early masses vs later masses), but even the Josquin Companion splits up the mass genres differently than the WP article. All of this being said, I don't know that this reorganization would be too necessary for a Wikipedia article, but more detail is definitely a good idea, and you are most welcome to add some of the suggested additions you mention—I will try to take a look at those as well. Aza24 (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, there are three solmization pieces by Josquin, two of which are masses, the Missa Hercules Dux Ferrariae and the Missa La sol fa re mi, as well as the the Vive le roy fanfare. Am I missing any? Aza24 (talk) 20:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's uncontroversial to add Illibata Dei Virgo (cantus firmus La-Mi-La for "Ma-ri-a") to that list, and of course, the hexachord motet Ut Phoebi Radiis. Peter Urquhart called the Missa Faisant Regretz a solmization motto mass, and he cites a 16th century print which named it as such to back it up, although I'm not entirely convinced on that one since the motto takes four different forms throughout the piece. I'm also thinking of the Salve Regina a 5, which seems to me a structural twin to the Hercules mass, since the tenor repeats the incipit of the chant which is solmized as "La-Sol-La-Re", but I don't think it has been recognised as such in the literature.

This is a fascinating (and vexing) question since the "solmization pieces" overlap with both the "ostinato pieces" and the "cantus firmus pieces". The 5 voice Salve Regina is a good example of the former. For the latter, is the Missa L'ami Baudichon a solmization piece? The almost childish cantus firmus has a fixed form throughout with a simple solmization "Mi-mi Re-re Ut-ut Ut-ut Mi-mi Re-re Ut/Sol-sol Fa-fa Mi-mi Mi-mi Sol-sol Fa-fa Mi". There is also the issue that singers at that time Solmized everything, if Urquhart is to be believed, so in some sense all polyphony are solmization pieces?

Personally, I think people mean "Soggetto cavato" when they say "Solmizatio piece", and the Hercules mass is the best example. Unfortunately that leaves the Hercules mass (and possibly Illibata and Vive le roy) as the only example since the "lesse faire a me" story for the La sol fa re mi mass seems to me to be a post-facto justification much like Newton's apple. In terms of music, the Hercules mass is a uncomplicated cantus firmus mass, while the La Sol Fa Re Mi mass is a tenor mass with a rhythmically free ostinato, and I think it's often misleading in lumping the two together. The Ut Phoebi motet is not "Soggetto cavato" because the cantus firmus is just a scale which is not derived from an existing word or phrase. The Faisant Regretz mass is a tenor mass with a rhythmically free ostinato, so in that sense it resembles the La Sol Fa Re Mi mass far more than the Hercules mass, even if the source of its ostinato came from a chanson.

Unfortunately once you begin to ponder these music terms they seem to fade into thin air like the Cheshire Cat so it's probably best not to overthink like I just did :). Kahhe (talk) 09:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, those first two are rather obvious! I suppose even though I said 'pieces' I was thinking of mainly masses. Urquhart's rationale for Missa Faisant Regretz seems a bit radical.

I'm not really convinced by the Glarean story and it seems controversial in scholarship anyways. Actually though, there was an article I saw (I think mentioned in Josquin's oxford bibliographies entry, or possibly Grove) that passionately defends the Glarean story, and that might be worth mentioning. Indeed these terms are very loose, though I didn't actually know that Josquin had parodied English composers until recently, I guess I never looked into the source material for some of those masses.

By the way—I'm going to leave a comment at the Josquin talk page, where you thoughts would be most welcome. Aza24 (talk) 20:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Frye is a really exceptional figure. He worked on the continent and I think the continentals treated him as one of them. In particular quite a few chansonniers open with his song-motet Ave Reginae caelorum that Obrecht wrote a mass and motet on. Although I probably should mention that Tout a par moy also has an (likely erroneous) attribution to Binchois.

The fascinating thing about the Faisant regretz mass is that it's not based on Frye's song, at least not directly. It's based on Agricola's reworking of Frye's song (I think it's mentioned in Fallows 2020), and it doesn't borrow Agricola literally, it borrows the concepts. The whole thing is really another demonstration of Josquin being out there as a composer, and ought to be mentioned in the article on the mass. Kahhe (talk) 18:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award

On behalf of the FAR coordinators, thank you, Kahhe! Your work on Josquin des Prez has allowed the article to retain its featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. I hereby award you this Featured Article Save Award, or FASA. You may display this FA star upon your userpage. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 04:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in

Haven't seen you around here in a while! I hope you're doing well – Aza24 (talk) 05:48, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]