IMSLP Forums

Hamm's concertante works are named with a number + gespräch to designate a conversation between a specific number of instruments, i.e. a conversation between three or four instruments.

We have categorized the two we have differently -- the Viergespräch is under "4 Gespräch", so it alphabetizes under G, and the Dreigespräch is done as it is in the title -- one word -- so it alphabetizes under D.

http://imslp.org/wiki/4_Gespr%C3%A4ch_( ... _Valentin)
http://imslp.org/wiki/Dreigespr%C3%A4ch ... _Valentin)

I understand the logic of separating the two components so they alphabetize under the G, but on the other hand, the original is one word, not two.

On the other hand (we're up to three now), both of these works should be handled in the same way.

Opinions?

In these cases the number at the start doesn't refer to the number of pieces in the collection, and it's an integral part of the title. More of a "3-part conversation", rather than "3 Part-conversations", for example. There is no space in the original titles and the following word, although the Viergespräch has a tiny hyphen in the title page that could be mistaken for a space.

On that basis I think they should appear as "Dreigespräch" and "Viergespräch" respectively. (Sorry, Eric)

Sure, no worries. (There's even a Zweigespräch or something listed in HMB that hasn't been scanned or uploaded yet, I noticed.) But on the other hand cleaning up the double-redirects- please do that, please.