Talk:Méthode pour la Guitare

It is true that Coste revised Sor's treatise. However, 'travesty' means to 'make ridiculous' - too strong a viewpoint in this case and one not supported here by any citation. Nevertheless I personaly agree will Gregory that Coste's 'improvements' were a diservice to his teacher's legacy, if not to his memory. RichardJ Christie 10:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Coste's revised work is thus Coste's take and it's brilliant! (So is Sor's - and Coste would have thought the same, and the mentioning of Sor is a sign of respect!) MySorAccount (talk) 19:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you completely. Napoleon Coste's version presents numerous stunning miniature pieces (that take into consideration the progression of technique). I find it extremely disturbing that people are critical of Coste: As if Sor belongs into some museum! Sor himself has written in his method, that he does NOT explain how things MUST be done (in art there is no MUST), but that he simply explained what has worked for him; and that he will hold it in much higher esteem if the reader use reason (rational reasoning) to form an own valid opinion, than a blind following of a "teacher".

Just FYI, Fernando Sor in Catalan is Ferran Sor Catalanreader83.32.59.37 (talk) 18:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Méthode pour la Guitare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100407211504/http://www.tecla.com/catalog/0389.htm to http://www.tecla.com/catalog/0389.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)