MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2500034695

Musical Mannerism: a Recurring Stylistic Phenomenon in Keyboard Variations by J.S. Bach, Beethoven, and Liszt

2016· article· en· W2500034695 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Lahan

Bibliographic record

VenueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonMusicalCommunicationArtPsychologyVisual artsPhilosophyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT \n\t \n\tMannerism was an artistic style that flourished in the sixteenth century between the High Renaissance and the emergence of the Baroque era. Originating in Rome and Florence in the 1520s, Mannerism eventually spread throughout Europe. Important Mannerist painters include Michelangelo, Pontormo, Parmigianino, Rosso, Bronzino, and El Greco. \n\tMannerism as an artistic style was not limited to painting and the visual arts. Mannerism thrived throughout the sister arts as well. Notable examples of Mannerism can be found in architecture, literature, and music. In music, the Italian madrigal is the purest expression of the Mannerist style. \n\tFrom roughly 1600 until 1900, the dominant critical view of Mannerism was negative. Mannerism was viewed as a degradation of the virtuous style of the Renaissance. As a result, Mannerism was largely ignored by critics and scholars. However, in the early twentieth century, this view began to change as scholars from across the artistic disciplines began studying Mannerism with renewed interest. A common goal amongst many of these scholars was to imbue Mannerism with positive qualities. \n\tAs scholars began to focus on this neglected style, ideas about Mannerism proliferated. One such idea that has gained traction across disciplines is that Mannerism is a recurring stylistic phenomenon not necessarily isolated to the sixteenth century. A proponent of this idea in the field of music was Canadian musicologist Maria Rika Maniates. \n\tThis document seeks to expand on Maniates’ arguments concerning recurring Mannerism. Specifically, this document will provide an overview of the history of Mannerism and analysis of keyboard works using Maniates’ criteria for recurring Mannerism. The keyboard works are J.S. Bach’s Goldberg Variations, Ludwig van Beethoven’s Diabelli Variations, and Franz Liszt’s Variations on a Theme of Bach, Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.158 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma)Same topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207