Template talk:Voicing

Making third parameter optional

I'd like to suggest an improvement to this template in order to simplify its use: to make optional the use of the third parameter. This can be accomplished with the following addition to the code (in red):

Number of voices: {{{1}}}vv Voicing: [[:Category:{{{2}}}|{{{3|{{{2}}}}}}]] [[Category:{{{2}}}]]

This way we could use just {{Voicing|4|SATB}} instead of {{Voicing|4|SATB|SATB}}, and still have the option of specifying a third parameter when it ought to be different from the second one.

I'm also working on a way to show 1v instead of 1vv when there's just one voice, but haven't come to a simple solution yet ;) -- Carlos^Talk 17:01, 9 April 2008 (PDT)

Hi Carlos. I have just implemented your suggestion (I would have done it eventually, since I'm making a major review of templates). One of the major disadvantages of the present template is that it does not handle other frequently encountered situations: (1) the presence of soli, (2) alternate voicings (eg. when different transpositions of a score are given), (3) a mix of the previous two items, (4) various other descriptive words such as "optional". It's a sticky wicket, and the template is probably left as intended for the canonical situation. I'll fix the "v" versus "vv" thing, although previously searches for number of voices made use of the "vv" standard. This, however, is a moot point, since the Wiki search engine ignores search keys of 3 or fewer characters. And that is why I reorganized the Voicing categories by number of voices. -- Chuck _talk Giffen _♫ 01:44, 10 April 2008 (PDT)

Hi Chuck, thank you. I was unaware of the Wiki search problem, and of the many other variable situations this template should handle to be completely functional. -- Carlos^Talk 03:01, 10 April 2008 (PDT)

Hi again! You did a great work with the singular vs plural, thanks a lot! I was trying with #switch and #if, as I saw on Wikipedia, that's why it wasn't working! :) -- Carlos^Talk 12:28, 10 April 2008 (PDT)

Line break

Hi Rob, I saw that you added a line break to the template, unfortunately you'll probably have to revert your last edit. There are a few situations in which the line break isn't desirable, as when we have more than one voicing possibility:

{{Voicing|5|SSATB}} or {{cat|SAATB}}<br>

that would appear as

Number of voices: 5vv Voicing: SSATB or SAATB

If you want to keep the line break, perhaps you could change the template to accept a new parameter (the 5th?) for the extra text. Regards, --Carlos^Talk 09:43, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Fair enough. I'll ask the template genius Chuck to do this when he has a moment. --Bobnotts talk 21:17, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Verse anthems

The comma producing "or" is good to know, but would it be easy to produce "and" or even "Verse: SS" with an extra parameter? See for example Nunc Dimittis from the Second Service (Orlando Gibbons) (total no. of vv. = 6?) and Category:Verse anthems. The present way of doing things is to add stuff before the line break, as noted above, but it would be interesting to be able to search for example Bach cantatas or oratorios by the minimum number of soloists. Richard Mix (talk) 23:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Richard, replying to your first question: have you considered using the {{MultiVoicing}} template? I think it can do what you want:

Number of voices: 5vv Voicings: SAATB (full) and Solo SSAT (verse)

The way you did in Nunc Dimittis is also fine, but please use {{vcat}} instead of {{cat}} for voicings. —Carlos (talk) 05:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Aha, I see what vcat does. Seems like Help:CPDL_Templates#Works_templates is due for a rewrite! Was it somehow not feasible to make {{voicing}} do {{MultiVoicing}}'s job, with n=1 as default? Richard Mix (talk) 05:57, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, I've just updated Help:CPDL Templates with the new templates. Regarding your suggestion to merge both templates, it would be somewhat complex but not impossible :) I need to have a better look at their codes. Best, —Carlos (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

N-part music

Parameter 2 seems to have no problem with Category:Solo voice, so it's worth clarifying whether only "A string of letters including only the letters S A T B, with no spaces" gets characters counted and placed in N-part music, or only categories missing from Category:Solo vocal music. Richard Mix (talk) 18:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

You are correct, Richard. Thanks for pointing this out. And this is indeed complicated! I have started into describing what might happen, will probably finish tomorrow. — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:04, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for all the enhancements to the documentation, Barry! Much better now. —Carlos (talk) 23:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Multiple voicings

A quirk of the template is that the 3rd parameter doesn't work when parameter 2 uses commas (SATTB,SAATB). Also, is there a way to suppress an unwanted comma in front of the add= text? Missa Gaudeamus (Tomás Luis de Victoria)#General Information would ideally read "SSAATB or SSATBB (SSATTBB in dona nobis pacem)" without a comma before the parentheses. Richard Mix (talk) 00:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I will work on your first "quirk" – probably will take a few days. Would you want a display option for all of the voicings in parameter 2 (up to 5 of them)?

But I'm not sure why "SSAATB or SSATBB, SSATTBB in Dona nobis pacem" doesn't work for you? (There are around 700 pages that user the add= parameter.) I can put an additional little parameter in there to suppress the comma if you really want. — Barry Johnston (talk) 01:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I see the problem with my request: What I expected was categorization in all of the voicing categories, with only parameter 3 displayed, so "3|TTB,TBB|TBarB" would have to produce TBarB linking to either instead of both. As for the comma, why include it at all? Richard Mix (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, with your first request we have to allow the possibility that the entries in the second parameter might have a different number of voices, which makes this a little complicated, but not insurmountable I think.

To us, the comma was the best possible way of separating the primary voicing(s) from whatever text the editor might have appended. This text takes many different forms, from minority voicings (as in your case) to simple comments ("low voices") to performance suggestions, and others. If we take the comma out, I would have to go back over the 750 (or so) pages to clean them up, which I had to do last year when "add=" was added. If you wish to see a sample of these pages, I could email it to you. — Barry Johnston (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I'd say more proofreading than cleanup: "SATBarB, with optional S descant." and "SATB.SATB, with Alto and Tenor solos." are perfectly correct without commas, though editors may reinsert them to taste; ambiguity is merely diminished in cases like "SATTB or SATBB, with optional S descant." where the comma makes it less likely the descant is only for the SATBB voicing. Richard Mix (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)