I am reporting that I have added the Johann Sebastian Bach catalogue to my website.
It took four months, but I finally managed to finish it.
If you find any errors while consulting it, even just a typo, please let me know so I can make the appropriate corrections. No matter how much one reads and rereads something, things always slip through.
When I embarked on the adventure of this site, I immediately raised the issue of copyright and gathered a commission of lawyer friends for dinner. The verdict was that I can easily copy under these conditions:
The site must absolutely not have a profit motive.
I cannot (obviously) pass off others' texts as my own writing.
I must always accurately cite the sources. If you read the legal notes that I agreed upon with S. Cecilia, it is clearly written.
By respecting these conditions, I can do as I please.
Good manners, however, tell me to try to obtain authorization from the owners of the texts, which is something I regularly attempt to do. However, it is not always possible to reach the rights holders because I cannot find a phone number or an email address. All the authors or institutions with whom I have had contact so far have proven to be enthusiastic about my initiative.
I discovered that a large part of the staff at Santa Cecilia consults my site to get information on pieces to program in upcoming concerts!
For anyone who does not want to see their texts published, it is sufficient to notify me and I will remove them immediately, even though legally I could ignore the request. So far, this has only happened to me in two cases, a publisher and a musicologist, and I accommodated them immediately.
Ah, but my nature was of a completely opposite nature
I mean that an eventual bibliography could be interesting to gain more or less trust from the reader... to put it briefly, if you based yourself on texts like "Frau Musika di Basso", apart from any copying errors you may have made, the information could certainly be genuine and therefore the site can truly become a point of reference in the absence of a specific text on the subject. In the event that the eventual "copy-paste" (even if legitimate) was done from unreliable texts, then the credit of trust would decrease.
Therefore, personally I enjoyed your work very much, I was just curious to know which texts you had based yourself on ⦠not to sue you, of course, but to eventually disseminate the fruit of your work to my contacts.
Ah, but my nature was of a completely opposite nature
I mean that an eventual bibliography could be interesting to gain more or less trust from the reader... to put it briefly, if you based yourself on texts like "Frau Musika di Basso", apart from copying errors you may have made, the information could certainly be genuine and therefore the site can truly become a point of reference in the absence of a specific text on the subject. In the event that any "copy-paste" (even if legitimate) was done from unreliable texts, then the credit of trust would decrease.
Therefore, personally I very much enjoyed your work, I was just curious to know which texts you had based yourself on ⦠not to sue you, of course, but to eventually disseminate the fruit of your work to my contacts.
The work started from the Enciclopedia della Musica (the Bach entry was edited by Basso) comparing it with Grove and Frau Musika.
The real problem in Bach's case is the dates which, excluding the cantatas, are mostly unknown. The Enciclopedia della Musica gives a composition as an early work (circa 1707) while Grove places it comfortably in his maturity (circa 1740) and vice versa.
I have partially resolved the problem by explaining the situation at the beginning of my pages.
The problem derives mainly from the ignoble dispersal of manuscripts caused by Bach's heirs (especially Wilhelm Friedemann). Bach never dated his manuscripts except for the Cantatas, on which he had the habit of noting the occasion for which they were composed.