IMSLP Forums

and citing us wrong, and about a score we don't even have a copy of (Fétis' symphonic fantasy for organ and orchestra)

See http://www.worldcat.org/title/fantaisie ... c/60625865 - referring to 3 libraries specifically (Newberry, Alcuin, and St Pancras (London).) It's definitely Worldcat*, not the member libraries (two of which member libraries have "18--", one of them the more accurate [1869]), -- that is inserting the [1885 or 1886] publication date information with the explanatory line here

"Publication date determined from information maintained at the IMSLP/Petrucci Music Library website."

It's not quite clear what information of ours Worldcat is using, though, given that the date is probably wrong. The (Paris: Schott) score was composed in 1866 (for the 50th anniversary of the 1816 re-establishment of the Academy of Arts and Sciences...) and published in 1869 or 1870 (from Hofmeisters Monatsbericht) at latest (plate 1312 Schott)...

I don't have an account yet on Worldcat, so really can't contact them as yet, I don't think (and is this really important enough to irritate them about? ... Maybe. OTOH, any publicity is good publicity. Maybe. Sort of.)

*Actually, not definitely, sorry, my mistake. The list of libraries you see in a Worldcat entry is incomplete; some libraries are "hidden"- the Free Library of Philadelphia doesn't show even if it's got something, for instance- but any information that its library catalog can contribute to the Worldcat entry will still show up there (instrumentation, etc.) It's possible that this is from, not Worldcat, but one of the increasing number of hidden libraries... (and no, don't know why. Seems that Library of Congress, and U. Rochester NY, may be among those one no longer sees in that list, or not for all their contents anyway...)

Why do some libraries adhere to one or more collective catalogs like Worldcat and others adhere to none? See: http://imslp.org/wiki/IMSLP:Other_information_resources

Eric wrote:The list of libraries you see in a Worldcat entry is incomplete; some libraries are "hidden"

This list you see adapts itself to where Worldcat believes you are. Just above the field mentioning these libraries you can enter a country or US state and the list will adapt itself accordingly.

Erm... Worldcat rightly thinks I'm in central New York, USA, so I'm not sure why it's hiding results from libraries very near me but displaying results from libraries in Poland. I'm interested in both. I should be clear here. I'm not, not, again not, referring to the distance-sorting feature by which it decides to first list the library "hits" nearest me; rather to the fact that some libraries are either hidden from the resulting list or, if they're the only matches- if instead of showing me 4 of 5 possible libraries because one (e.g. FLP) is hidden, the only one in that particular OCLC-number instance is FLP, say- it displays: "Sorry, no libraries with the specified item were found"


(See e.g. http://www.worldcat.org/title/deuxieme- ... c/45203874. Note how the information at the bottom -
Duration: 28 min.
Performer(s): 3-fl (1-pc, III), 2-ob, 2-cl, 1-bcl, 3-bn (1-sar), 4-hn, 3-tpt, 3-trb, 1-tb, tmp, str.
Description: 1 score (189 p.) + parts.
Contents: Allegro --
Andante grave, quasi adagio --
Allegretto --
Allegro con moto.

- is just how a Fleisher entry's internals are formatted. (http://know.freelibrary.org/vufind/Record/138879 - this entry at FLP, to be exact.)

Perhaps this Worldcat enthusiast found the publication date with the plate number in our excellent page http://imslp.org/wiki/Schott? So our efforts deserve publicity

That seems entirely a possibility- but as I said above, if they did so, they got it wrong by almost two decades. The aforementioned rather good page, if used properly from the plate number of 1312 Schott (Paris), gives a date estimate of 1869/1870, not 1883 or 1884. Hofmeisters Monatsbericht does the same. 1869 makes sense too, from the 1866 composition date- much as I gripe and gripe and gripe about making assumptions the one from the other. Still, no reason seems to be given for the 1883/4 date...

Sorry, but here the situation is inextricable because the results of your both Worldcat links vary according to 1:the country I select and 2:the country I have selected in my last attempts and 3: the computer I'm using and ...
Could you please provide the URL of a library online catalog where I will find the Dubois and Fetis works without Worldcat? Then I'll try to understand Worldcat's logic

for the Dubois, I already have. See that other link in the same post, the one that goes know.freelibrary.org &c&c&c.
for the Fétis, I know of no library link that has "1883/4" in it like Worldcat does, but here's a couple that don't:

http://www.sudoc.fr/11739968X (SUDOC France)

Newberry link for another catalog.

I think this is good news. I've always suspected that IMSLP would eventually become an authority on music. We are becoming so expansive that serious musicological research can be done here.

Right now IMSLP is mostly used for finding scores, but I don't see why it can't be so much more. I'm working on that...

Eric wrote:for the Dubois, I already have. See that other link in the same post, the one that goes know.freelibrary.org &c&c&c.

Here I obtain the Philadelphia library. So this library is not "hidden! So is there only the remark about the Fleisher-like information?

Eric wrote: for the Fétis, I know of no library link that has "1883/4" in it like Worldcat does, but here's a couple that don't: http://www.sudoc.fr/11739968X (SUDOC France) Newberry link for another catalog.

Then the Clignancourt library adhered to SUDOC and not to Worldcat. I only obtain apologies typing "France" in Worldcat. But I obtain the Newberry library typing "illinois".

Eric wrote:Seems that Library of Congress, and U. Rochester NY, may be among those one no longer sees in that list, or not for all their contents anyway...)

You see LOC in the Sheet Music Consortium: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/sheetmusic/ Seems the world is partitioned in zones of authority

I wonder if they've worked the formal treaties out... erm... that's either not actually the joke I think it is, or a bit obscure historically. Never mind.
(The SBN collator's an interesting one too, by the way, for all its lacks.)

Eric wrote:I wonder if they've worked the formal treaties out... erm... that's either not actually the joke I think it is, or a bit obscure historically. Never mind. .

We will all be busy suggesting some libraries to adhere to either collective catalog

Eric wrote:(The SBN collator's an interesting one too, by the way, for all its lacks.)

I know examples of organ pieces missing in SBN. I imagine Italian organists still have to browse an old-fashioned card catalog when they visit a library.

Well, by lacks I meant more that SBN.it doesn't seem to often have the plate (number/information)/cotage of its catalog entries (though quite a few SBN entries do have that information, too). That sort of lack; entries with insufficient (for our purpose) detail

But yes on the last point. ... Then again, I remember decades ago when many libraries (especially, I recall being told, European ones?...) had barely started digitizing their physical catalogs. (And I remember (decades ago, again...) when the only complete documents - (as opposed to pointers thereto) - I thought would ever be digitized were really important things from mathematics and literature (on the order of Euclid's Elements and Shakespeare's plays, and similarly important books from all over the world)- not the tremendous numbers of documents musical and otherwise that have since been made available! ... Really neat and rather wonderful, though off this topic, of course... )