MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035267348 · doi:10.7202/1014486ar

The Piano Music of Percy Grainger: A Pianist's Perspective on Pedalling

2013· article· en· W2035267348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Glen Carruthers

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian University Music Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPianoMusicalArtPerspective (graphical)Interpretation (philosophy)Performing artsVisual artsNotationConcertoLiteratureAestheticsArt historyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eminent pianist and composer Percy Aldridge Grainger (1882–1961) filled his original music and folksong arrangements with detailed, though idiosyncratic instructions to performers. The extent to which his own meticulous pedal technique is mirrored in careful directions to pianists is both unusual and revelatory. Grainger's scores are examined here from the standpoint of the damper, sostenuto and una corda pedals. Numerous musical examples serve two purposes: 1) they give information concerning the complexity of Grainger's pedal technique and 2) they exhibit the array of notational methods the composer employed, at various stages in his career, to enable performers to replicate as nearly as possible his own scrupulous pedalling. As well, by examining in detail this one aspect of Grainger's rich artistry, light is shed on the relationship between composer and performer, and notation and interpretation, that Grainger sought to understand and articulate ever more clearly throughout his career.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.167 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian University Music ReviewSame topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207