MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2556972819 · doi:10.1353/not.2016.0138

The Manual of Musical Instrument Conservation by Stewart Pollens

2016· article· en· W2556972819 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueNotes · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueDiverse Musicological Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMusicalIndex (typography)Visual artsArtArt historyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Manual of Musical Instrument Conservation by Stewart Pollens Robert Adelson The Manual of Musical Instrument Conservation. By Stewart Pollens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. [ix, 448 p. ISBN 9781107077805 (hardcover), $150; ISBN 9781316309742 (e-book), $120.] Illustrations, tables, bibliography, index. Stewart Pollens is one of the leading authorities on the care of historical musical instruments, having served as musical instrument conservator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art from 1976 to 2006. Over the course of those three decades, he helped to preserve and restore their collection of over five thousand objects, including some of the world’s most famous keyboard and bowed string instruments. In his most recent book, The Manual of Musical Instrument Conservation, Pollens has distilled the wisdom and experience derived from his museum work, drawing on a “shop notebook” in which he recorded his daily work on the collection. The book is organized in the form of a dictionary, with 118 alphabetically-arranged entries, from “Acoustics” to “Wood-working.” The entries vary in length from a mere few lines in the case of entries for “Gold and gold-plated brass and bronze” or “Epoxy removal,” to veritable articles spanning a dozen or more pages, on such topics as “Historical metrology,” “Organ restoration,” and “Stringed-keyboard restoration.” This is therefore not a book one would necessarily read from beginning to end, but the author provides both a convenient table of contents that includes all of the entry titles, and a detailed index, which can be used for finding matters that are discussed in multiple entries. Moreover, each entry ends with a list of references for further reading on the topic. This book will be useful to many categories of readers, not only the small population of professional conservators of musical instruments. Any museum professional will find Pollens’s work valuable for dealing with myriad situations with which they may be confronted, from restringing a harp to [End Page 313] moving a piano or cleaning a trumpet. Instrument builders will also benefit from Pollens’s observations, especially if they repair historical instruments or make reproductions of such instruments. Finally, musicians who read this book will come away with a better understanding of the issues that concern the preservation of the tools of their trade. The concept of this book is highly original. It does not aim to replace any of the existing texts on the conservation of specific instrument types, such as keyboards or violins. Nor does the book attempt to present a deontological approach to instrument conservation, especially when it comes to the thorny question of whether historical instruments should be restored to playing condition. On this issue, Pollens writes, “In general, I neither advocate nor disapprove of the restoration of historic musical instruments; rather I believe that each instrument and proposed treatment must be considered on a case-by-case basis with consideration given to the requirements and needs of the collection or owner” (p. 2). The only work that resembles Pollens’s book is The Care of Historic Musical Instruments, edited by Robert L. Barclay (Edinburgh, Ottawa: Museums and Galleries Commission, Canadian Conservation Institute, 1997), but the differences in approach and emphases between Pollens, a string and keyboard specialist, and Barclay, a brass specialist, make for stimulating comparisons. The topics covered in the book range from general themes (“Acoustics” and “Authentication”) and philosophical or deontological issues (“Ethics” and “Conservation reports”) to more specialized subjects pertaining to the materiality of conservation (“Benzotriazole,” “Bleach,” “Brass and bronze alloys,” and “Glues, pastes and other adhesives”). Many of the entries take the form of utilitarian research tools and tables (“Cents conversion,” “Dictionary of common and obsolete chemical terms,” and “Historical metrology”) while others give practical information for specific conservation treatments (“Brass and nickel silver cleaning,” “Drill bit sizes (fractional inch, number and letter, and metric),” “Grit size comparison chart,” “Handling, storage, and transportation of musical instruments: general guidelines,” “Tap drill sizes,” and “Tapered reamers”). Pollens also includes a useful entry on recording musical instruments, an activity vital to many conservation projects, particularly if the instrument in question is preserved in a playable state. The interdisciplinary nature of the book results from the multitude of factors that come...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,868
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,095
Tête enseignante GPT0,235
Écart entre enseignants0,140 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle