Talk:Piano Quartet (Schumann)

Untitled

I agree that this article needs to be expanded and sourced. However, the "notability" tag is absurd. This is a major work of the chamber repertoire, referenced in numerous other WP articles but until now with a dead, red link. I added this article so those links would point somewhere. I have removed that tag. mcoverdale (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bilorv (talk) 00:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Piano Quartet, composed by Robert Schumann in 1842, features one of the most beautiful cello themes of the Romantic period in its third movement? 12

• Reviewed: Salmon chaos

5x expanded by Intforce (talk). Self-nominated at 13:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC).

Substantial detailed article, on fine sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. Sorry, the hook doesn't work without saying it was one person's evaluation. I wonder if his wife's reaction - who was probably the pianist at the house performance if not also later - would interest our readers more, and is sourced. I have a few suggestions for the article which are of course not needed for DYK, but I think this could easily go towards GA and even FA (compare Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart)).

• I'd like to see what the lead says about the implication for the future expanded more in the body.
• I'd like to see more of the body summarized in the lead.
• I think an image of Clara S. would be a good addition.
• I think - unless we can specify the performers of the premiere - the info in the infobox could go to a one-liner "performed".

Also waiting for qpq of course. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Still one more: if we go by the hook here, movement needs a link, probably even theme also. Most of our readers will not even know what a piano quartet is, and think that four pianos play ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda, for your detailed comments.

• ALT0b: ... that the Piano Quartet, composed by Robert Schumann in 1842 for piano, violin, viola and cello, is said to feature one of the most beautiful cello themes of the Romantic period in its third movement? 12
• ALT1: ... that the Piano Quartet, composed by Robert Schumann in 1842 for piano, violin, viola and cello, has been described by his wife Clara as "a beautiful work, so youthful and fresh, as if it were his first"? Keller, p. 423

How could the movement be linked? As far as I understand, external links are not allowed. I could engrave the theme so it fits a picture though. GPQ now done. intforce (talk) 13:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I linked "movement" for you, - not the specific one but to distinguish from a political movement. That part of the hook could also go, without much loss. Thank you for expanding and GAN! No need for music engraving, - too many to whom it means nothing. I prefer the ALT, with Clara (GA for GA) ;) - Next time, please link to the review (I did that now), and don't write below the last line (fixed) ;) - In that review, I'd not accept "people in Taiwan" because too general, and the image caption's "restaurant in question" as not encycloypedic, - + the hooks don't even say "restaurant". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt Intforce ALT1 is too long at 203 characters. SL93 (talk) 02:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

ALT1b: ... that Clara Schumann described her husband's Piano Quartet as "a beautiful work, so youthful and fresh, as if it were his first"?

You could also just drop the instruments. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I would prefer ALT1c ... that the Piano Quartet, composed by Robert Schumann in 1842 for piano and strings, has been described by his wife Clara as "a beautiful work, so youthful and fresh, as if it were his first"? intforce (talk) 13:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt What do you think of ALT1c? SL93 (talk) 17:23, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

fine by me --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Approving ALT1c. SL93 (talk) 20:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

The article doesn't mention "a beautiful work, so youthful and fresh, as if it were his first". All the hook facts need to be in the article. 97198 (talk) 00:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I apologize for missing that. I would just go with ALT0c ... that the Piano Quartet, composed by Robert Schumann in 1842 is said to feature one of the most beautiful cello themes of the Romantic period in its third movement? SL93 (talk) 01:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt Intforce SL93 (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Listen to Intforce. I prefer the specific voice of a woman, close to the composer, in the style of the time, to that of a no-name probably man, unspecific and a bit "purple language" superlative. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I've amended the article to mention the quote in the hook. Both are equally valid translations. intforce (talk) 11:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt Why do you think that I wasn't listening to Intforce? It's just that the quote wasn't in the article as stated by 97198. SL93 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Now that it is in the article, I am approving ALT1C again. SL93 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry that I wasn't clear. "Listen to Intforce." was short for "Listen to what Intforce will have to say about this, not to me, but if you want my opinion nonetheless here you go:" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 8 June 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 22:37, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

---

Piano Quartet (Schumann) → Piano Quartet, Op. 47 – This was Schumann's second effort in the genre. Hopefully I'll get around soon to creating an article for the earlier quartet in C minor, and think that giving each work's Opus number in the title is a good way to disambiguate between two. There are three options besides Opus number as far as I can see:

1. Leaving this article where it is, and naming the new article "Piano Quartet in C minor (Schumann)"/"Piano Quartet, Op. WoO 32". There is an asymmetry here which seems potentially confusing to me.
2. Naming both articles with numbers (e.g. "Piano Quartet No. 1 (Schumann)"). The trouble here is that numbering like this is not used frequently used in the literature, and so might be somewhat confusing.
3. Naming both articles according to their keys ("Piano Quartet in E-flat major (Schumann)"). I can't see anything recommending this approach over using Opus numbers, but it is certainly more cumbersome.

Would be interested to have people's thoughts. SaryaniPaschtorr (talk) 18:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 19:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• Keeping this article here and naming the new article "Piano Quartet in C minor (Schumann)" would be standard practice, as we usually do not include opus numbers in the title if it can be avoided. There is an asymmetry, but that is warranted given that this work is more substantial than the earlier quartet (WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). intforce (talk) 19:55, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Classical music has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 19:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• Keep this more substantial quartet as it is, per Intforce. Symmetry is not needed for pieces of different weight. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:01, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per intforce and Gerda. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
• SaryaniPaschtorr having all the bad ideas. I'm starting to wonder if they are actually Francis Schonken or Chuckstreet. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

  V funny. I don't buy that two substantial musical works may be of differing 'weight'. Is it that one is better known? Longer? Neither of those seems a fair comparison – and in any case the piano quartets are of about the same length. But if nobody sympathises I'll drop it. SaryaniPaschtorr (talk) 12:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

  I don't know Shcumann's chamber music well enough to about the 'weight' but there's one piece that is generally reffered to as "Schumann's Piano Quartet" and another that's pretty obscure, then yeah it makes sense to keep it at this title. A good example of this is action is the very well known Cello Concerto (Dvořák) where Dvorak also wrote an early A minor concerto as well. But absolutely there needs to be a Schumann disambiguation, putting an Op. number is ridiculous. Having two articles each with key designations is doable though, but only if the other one actually needs an article in the first place AND the popular one isn't so overwhelmingly known. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 06:19, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.