The Sixth New Beethoven Research Conference November 2-3,2016, Vancouver, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HE SIXTH NEW BEETHOVEN RESEARCH CONFERENCE featured not only a witty and deeply informative keynote address about forgeries by the longtime director of the Beethoven-Haus museum and curator of the collection, Dr. Michael Ladenburger, but also our first collaboration with the Haydn Society of North America and a lull panel of scholars who work at the Beethoven-Archiv in Bonn. The presence of Beethoven-Archiv researchers at American conferences, as well as attendance from other scholars working in Europe, has built much deeper connections between the American community of Beethoven scholars and our European counterparts. The importance of these relationships cannot be overemphasized.The conference was organized by Joanna Biermann, University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa (chair); William Kinderman, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana (on leave in Vienna this year); David Levy, Wake Forest University; Julia Ronge (Beethoven-Archiv, Bonn), and myself. The conference was supported by the American Beethoven Society and the University of Alabama. Beethoven scholars are indebted to both. Special thanks are due to Dr. Biermann for her devoted organizational work and Dr. Michael Ruhling, who proposed the collaboration with the Haydn Society in 2014. The conference was field at the Sheraton Vancouver Wall Centre Hotel in downtown Vancouver; all the sessions were well attended. The combination of Haydn and Beethoven scholars in the first session was particularly fruitful.SESSION ONEWednesday, November 2Beethoven and Haydn Intersections(joint session with the Haydn Society of North America)Chairs: William Meredith and Michael RuhlingErica Buurman (Canterbury Christ Church University, England), began the conference with an illuminating exploration of Haydn, Beethoven, and the Viennese Fine Artists' Pensions Society. The society of visual artists (bildender Kunstler) field an annual fundraising ball on the Sunday before St. Catherines Day (November 25) from 1792 to 1870. The society's archives, which are unpublished, are in the Stadt- und Landesarchiv, Vienna; they contain many but not all of the scores of dances performed at the balls (as well as a set of twelve minuets, WoO 12, composed in fall 1799, by Beethoven's brother Caspar Carl that were not performed), receipts, posters, and lists of tickets. The balls were field both in the large and small Redoutensaal of the Imperial Palace. Haydn's music was performed in the large hall at the first banquet. The documents related to Haydn have been previously studied by H.C. Robbins Landon and Gunter Thomas, but Buurman placed Haydn's and Beethoven's musical contributions in much broader context than has previously been understood. Her excellent handout listed all the composers from the years 1792 through 1830 for both halls. During this period, Haydn's music was only performed in the large hall in 1792 and small hall in 1820. In the same span, Beethoven's music was performed in the small hall in 1795 and repeated in the small hall in 1797 and 1818. By way of comparison with other composers, the music of Adalbert Gyrowetz (1763-1850) was performed on ten years, Moritz von Dietrichstein (17751864) eight years, Anton Teyber (1756-1822) eight years, and Joseph Evbler (1765-1846) six years. None of these composers-most of whom had associations with the imperial court-are household names. Buurman's most interestingconclusions were that the most important patrons of these fundraisers were members of the Imperial Family, that the patrons of the elite and sophisticated musical scene in Vienna-the high aristocracy such as Princes Lichnowskv and Lobkowitz-are missing, and that Haydn and Beethoven are not representative of the normal level of composer. Though the 1795 ball retains pride of place in Beethoven studies as the orchestral debut of Beethoven's music in Vienna, his music flourished and was nourished not in this public environment but in the more sophisticated private circles of musical patronage in Vienna. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".