MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735200414 · doi:10.1353/not.2017.0097

Premier Livre d'Orgue (1699), with references to the copies of J. S. Bach and J. G. Walther. Musical text eds. by Wayne Leupold and James David Christie

2017· article· en· W2735200414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Edward Higginbottom

Bibliographic record

VenueNotes · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMusicology and Musical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusicalExtant taxonArtArt historyBaroqueClassicsSAINTPhilosophyHumanitiesLiteratureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Premier Livre d'Orgue (1699), with references to the copies of J. S. Bach and J. G. Walther. Musical text eds. by Wayne Leupold and James David Christie Edward Higginbottom Nicolas de Grigny. Premier Livre d'Orgue (1699), with references to the copies of J. S. Bach and J. G. Walther. Musical text edited by Wayne Leupold and James David Christie. Preface by H. Joseph Butler, Lenora McCroskey, and Sandra Soderlund. Colfax, NC: Wayne Leupold Editions, 2015. [Acknowledgments, p. iv; preface, p. v–lxxiii; editorial principles, p. lxxiv–lxxv; score, p. 1–121; editorial and interpretive commentary, p. 122–59; bibliog., p. 160–62; appendix, p. 163–66. Pub. no. WL 500025. $55.] The extant repertory of French baroque organ music is substantial. The contents of various livres d'orgue, from Guillaume Gabriel Nivers to André Raison, published between the 1660s and the 1710s, number well over one thousand pieces. In addition, there are significant collections in manuscript, notably the 400 works of the so-called Livre d'orgue de Montréal. And yet this represents but a tiny proportion of the music turned out by Parisian, let alone French organists over this period. The alternatim performance of liturgical items at First Vespers, Matins, Lauds, Terce, the Mass, and Second Vespers, and maybe also Compline required on a principal feast day the performance of some one hundred separate organ versets. There were many feast days during the year. And the ordinary Sundays were also celebrated with much organ music. In the course of a year, an organist would be required to turn out thousands of pieces. He could not survive such demands without being a fluent improviser. Which raises the question, what were all these published livres d'orgue for? Or more interestingly, how did their contents relate to the music commonly improvised within the liturgy? Insights into this aspect of the practice are afforded by the manuscript collections, some of which provided very clearly working musical resources for the loft, used by their owners, on the job. Such a collection might be MS Paris Conservatoire, Rés. 476, which reveals two important aspects of the practice: the first, that organ versets were ordinarily short (the Mass Offertory always the exception) taking up scarcely more time than the plainchant with which they alternated (bearing in mind the slow tempo adopted in those days for the chant); the second, that the level of musical development was modest. We can also see something of these characteristics in the printed sources, in for instance the first and third livres d'orgue of Nivers, collections of versets gathered together according to their church tone. It does not mean that the music lacks interest, sophistication, or indeed beauty, but it does mean that it is modest in scope. After all, it has a clear role to play in the liturgy, part of which is to not unreasonably extend the ritual. But as we get to the end of the seventeenth century, we encounter in the 1690 Pièces d'orgue of François Couperin a new development in the tradition. Couperin's organ versets (for the Mass) are at least twice as long, and twice as elaborate, as Nivers's (a tendency also revealed in the contemporaneous published work of Jacques Boyvin and Gilles Jullien, 1689 and 1690 respectively). Couperin was twenty-one, but now well-established at St. Gervais in Paris, where he had been playing since his early teens. He was clearly a remarkable musician, and fluent improviser. Why did he choose to publish a book of pieces which on the face of it were too elaborate for normal use, or which at least pushed the boundaries of what was required of alternatim practice? The preface by Michel Richard de Lalande makes that clear: to project to a wider public his superlative qualities as an organist and composer. Lalande's approbation speaks of the pieces as being "very beautiful and fully worthy of publication." And the gambit paid off. Three years later, in 1693, Couperin was appointed one of the king's organists at Versailles. So, a publication could be as much about showing off prowess as about providing for the...

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2730.166

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNotesSame topicMusicology and Musical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207