Category talk:Keyboard reduction

From ChoralWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Orchestral works

Can we use this category for editions that have a keyboard reduction of an Orchestral accompaniment too? Both the category description and the {{KbdRed}} template specify that they should be reductions of a cappella works. —Carlos Email.gif 03:07, 16 September 2008 (PDT)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 04:42, 16 September 2008 (PDT)


The proper template to use is Template:KbdVer which is for "a keyboard version of the original accompaniment". I know that "reduction" is sometimes used to denote keyboard versions of orchestral (or other) accompaniments, but the issue at CPDL is resolved by having this latter meaning of "reduction" transferred to the word "version."

Thanks for the hint, Chuck! Do you think it's really necessary to differenciate between these two situations? Couldn't we have just one single category for all score pages that have a non-original keyboard accompaniment? —Carlos Email.gif 05:46, 16 September 2008 (PDT)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 08:17, 16 September 2008 (PDT)


I definitely feel these must be differentiated. Typically, keyboard reductions of an a capella vocal score are for rehearsal only and only to be used in performance when singers are not up to singing without aid of the keyboard. On the other hand, keyboard versions of orchestral (or other original) accompaniment are generally essential to the performance of a work - or to the rehearsal of a work before a performance with the originally intended accompaniment (since such instrumentalists may only be available by hire or limited rehearsals before the performance). Indeed, many oratorios and other large scale works were originally scored for orchestra or other instruments but, in wide practice, are performed solely with a keyboard version of the accompaniment.

Hi, I agree that they should be differentiated, but the terminology is confusing: see Sancta Maria, mater Dei, KV 273 (Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart), neither an a cappella piece nor an a cappella edition. Why not use "reduction" in its common sense of orchestral reduction and change KbdRed to KbdReh (as in "for rehearsal only")? Richard Mix 23:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Richard and I touched upon this subject elsewhere and he reminded me of this discussion. I tend to agree with him about the current terminology being somewhat confusing. —Carlos Email.gif 19:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
How about Category:Rehearsal accompaniment and Category:Orchestra reduction then? I think they're relatively unambiguous, unless we expand hosting of reduced orchestrations. Richard Mix (talk) 02:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Richard, as I'm not a native English speaker, I'd rather leave the name choices up to you guys! :) —Carlos Email.gif 15:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 19:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


Okay, I'll chime in here. The template {{KbdRed}} is/was only to be used in the Editorial notes section for specific editions, since it is meant to signify that the Editor has provided a keyboard reduction of the vocal parts. It is not an indication of "accompaniment" and has no place in the Instruments section. The template {{KbdVer}} is the one that designates an keyboard version of the original instrumental accompaniment. I really don't see any problem with the current names of the templates, except Richard seems to feel that "version" is know elsewhere as "orchestral reduction" ... I made the original distinction the way it is currently. If there is strong sentiment to change names, then go ahead.

Yes, the KbdRed is used in the Ed. notes section of the Mozart page above, but with evidently unintended result. Richard Mix (talk) 21:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Richard. I've changed the Mozart by replacing {{KbdRed}} with {{KbdVer}} (which should have been there in the first place. – Chucktalk Giffen 23:26, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! My point remains that it was a natural mistake in the first place, and might have occurred other times as well. Richard Mix (talk) 01:05, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, Rob seems to have made here the same confusion that I make sometimes. However, many people also understand "keyboard reduction" in the same way than Chuck: [1]. To simplify things, I would suggest splitting this discussion in two parts: a) template names; and b) category names. I don't mind keeping {{KbdVer}} with its current title, but we could create aliases for it, as the KbdReh suggested by Richard. {{KbdRed}} could also become a redirect to it, once it is replaced by {{Instruments}} in all works pages. Template Instruments can be configured to understand the phrase "keyboard reduction" as meaning "Orchestra reduction" and categorize accordingly. Regarding the current categories, I concur that they are somewhat ambiguous. My suggestion to Richard was to rename "Keyboard version" to "Keyboard reduction of instrumental accompaniment", and "Keyboard reduction" to "Keyboard reduction of vocal parts". These titles are quite long, though; Richard's suggestions are easier to type. What about "Orchestra reduction" and "Vocal reduction"? The word reduction seems to already imply a keyboard, and therefore it wouldn't be necessary to include "keyboard" in the titles. —Carlos Email.gif 05:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm with Chuck on keeping editor-added material in the edition notes field and using {{Instruments}} in the general information. The rare cases where a rehearsal accompaniment would be mentioned in gen. info. are where the composer has supplied one: Drei Gesänge, Op. 42 (Johannes Brahms) is not quite correctly categorized in my opinion. Rehearsal accompaniments are also not necessarily a strict reduction, btw: they should be readily playable by two hands and may in some cases support by expanding the sonority: Opus 110 has filling in as well as thinning out of chords in the accompaniment, which is clearly labeled for rehearsal only. For that reason (as well) I would prefer Rehearsal accompaniment to "reduction". KbdRed & KbdReh differing by one character might still be confusing; it is the first and not the second that should redirect to KbdVer, right? I currently favor OrchRed and RehAcc for template names. Richard Mix (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 03:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


I really like Richard's suggestion of {{OrchRed}} and {{RehAcc}}, too, although I wouldn't mind something like {{ChoralRed}} for a strict reduction of the vocal parts, since {{RehAcc}} might entail rather more, for a work that has additional accompaniment but for which {{OrchRed}} would be innappropriate; for example, a rehearsal accompaniment might include elements both from the vocal parts (not realized in the actual accompaniment) as well as from the orchestral accompaniment. But if this is slicing the salami to thin, then jut going with OrchRed and RehAcc is okay by me.