Talk:Georg Philipp Telemann

Stubby

Telemann deserves more that the pathetic little stub I found.....

---

I've temporarily removed this:

Telemann turned down a prestigious job for a better payed job. The result: Bach got the job Telemann turned down.

This may well be true, but it seems pretty useless in its present form. I'll look into it, and if I can verify it, and turn it into something a bit more useful, I'll add it. --Camembert

Telemann and Bach both applied for the job as music director in Leipzig, and Telemann was offered and declined the position, which then was given to Bach (so Bach was the second choice, which I guess may show the contemporary view of the importance of these composers). This info can be found in the bio section I added a few days ago. Bobhobbit 21:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect, the job was first offered to Telemann, then to a couple of others, and only then to Bach, making him 4th or 5th choice. Dunnhaupt 20:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

800 works?

"The Guinness Book of World Records lists Telemann as the most prolific composer of all time with more than 800 credited works. Put in other terms, it has been estimated that Telemann wrote more notes than Johann Sebastian Bach and Georg Frideric Handel combined!"

800 isn't really that many-- certainly less than Bach wrote, and probably Handel as well. I think Telemann boasted of having written over 600 suites or concertos alone (I can't remember which, though I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote over 600 of each). Does anybody know of a more accurate estimate of his total output?

More than 3,000, but the exact number will probably never be known. Many of the manuscripts were destroyed; the catalogues compiled in the 1980s and 1990s are probably close to complete, and probably contain at least the names of the lost works. The online New Grove has a good compilation. Antandrus (talk) 05:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

800 works is decidedly fewer than 1080 (in the Bach catalogue) or even 965 (in Deutsch's Schubert catalogue). How could Guinness be so far off? 3000 is decidedly larger, but how accurate is it? Also, "most prolific composer of all time" seems to imply not just that he wrote more works but that he is more well known, has a bigger "profile." That claim cannot be defended. Most prolific composer of his time, as the New Grove suggests, is believable.

This is ridiculous. Mozart's output is numerically inferior to Bach's, yet it runs to several hours more in total. Likewise, Simon Sechter wrote thousands of pieces, far more than Telemann - but many are incredibly short fugues. I suggest the word 'claimed' be added, since this is obvious a highly contestable statement.

82.40.163.5 (talk) 22:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC) (CRCDraper)

Trivia Section

Could someone please rewrite the Trivia Section... It is of horribly poor quality right now and not fit for wikipedia.

I agree; hopefully I fixed it to your satisfaction. I renamed it "works and reputation" (there's nothing trivial about his famous prolificity, and even less so his decline and sudden rise in reputation). Antandrus (talk) 05:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Prolificacy

New Grove clearly states in the lead to its Telemann article: "The most prolific composer of his time". Again, unless there is a counterexample, I am inclined to accept New Grove's judgment. —Sesquialtera II (talk) 02:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

First known concerto for viola

He also wrote a concerto for two violas, etc. (see Goebel's Archiv recording or the complete works edition) - and is it positively his only solo viola concerto? (I suspect so but do not know.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 17:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"Der Schulmeister" spurious?

Are there any references for this edit? --Phrood 13:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

External links section and Referencing

I've added more information as to where the links lead. I've also moved the links to free scores and to the catalogues of publishers for the modern editions to the links section, where they more appropriately belong. However, Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. I left in the Prima la Musica! link, but really, it's only a catalogue of scores for sale and does not contain any appreciable extra information about Telemann or his works. Something to think about. As I said in the edit summary when I edited the references, this article could use A LOT more improvement in its referencing. Links to commercial sites selling scores far outnumber the listing of sources for the assertions, lists, etc in the article. If some of the informational links, e.g. the detailed biography on baroquemusic.org, were actually used as sources for the article, then they belong in the References section to acknowledge this. Not in the External links section. Presumably the contents of this article did not come out of nowhere. Voceditenore (talk) 06:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is a weak B; the musicology needs expansion, and personal details are lacking. My detailed review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 01:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

TVWV vs. TWV?

Does someone know what the deal is? I entered what I could glean here and in TWV, but I'm not sure. Are Telemann's vocal works identified both by a TWV and a TVWV? Or has TVWV been superseded by TWV? -- Kai Carver (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)