Talk:Quodlibet

Simon&Garfunkel's "Scarborough Fair"
That's a Quodlibet as well, isn't it?

--188.194.212.40 (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

[Untitled]
uh... 'libet' does not at all mean 'freely'; rather, libet = is pleasing

Why doesn't "Mashup" reference this page?
I'm not sure what the difference between 'Mashups' and regular quodlibets is.

Could that be a new reference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fionnbharr (talk • contribs)


 * I think the term "quodlibet" is traditionally from classical music. People who make mashups might not know the term, though it might be an interesting way of describing what they do. There's also a difference in that mashups sample actual recordings, while quodlibets in this article involve taking part of another song and actually playing it on your own instruments within your own composition. --Grace 01:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

thirteenth century?
The article says "popular through the thirteenth century (1300s)"

The thirteenth century was the 1200s. The 1300s were the fourteenth century. Who originally wrote this sentence? Which is correct? --Grace 01:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

1712 Overture
Does PDQ Bach's parody of the 1812 Overture, where all of the melodies are replaced by similar but easily recognizable tunes (notably the nursery rhyme "Around the Mulberry Bush") count in this category? --Anansii 02:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, but one must also ask about some of the other Schickele works, such as the "Eine Kleine Nicht Music" and the "Chaconne a son Gout".

What about what the dictionary says?
I came across this word in a completely different context different from the explanation pertaining to musical terminology. In the Mirriam-Webster and other dictionary I found that Quodlibet also means a subtle argument within philosophical/scholastic/theological traditions.

Doesn't this alternate meaning of the word warrants for at least a reference to this alternate explanation? --85.145.121.149 (talk) 11:52, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Quodlibet requirements, intentional and unintentional.
A great deal of edits are removed due to the referencing of an intentional construction (ie: Musicals). However the main page cites no necessity for lack of intent. As such, could such a requirement be added with citation, or could the removal of edits on these grounds cease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpaceCorgi94 (talk • contribs) 01:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually it's right there in the definition -- "In a simultaneous quodlibet, two or more pre-existing melodies are combined". ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:17, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Quite so. When various tunes from a musical are later combined in the same score, it is called a medley.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 06:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that "One Day More" from Les Misérables is just a medley. It sounds more complicated than that. I think it's similar to the "Tonight Quintet"" from West Side Story. Then there's Irving Berlin's "You're Just in Love" from Call Me Madam – a quodlibet or just a duet with independent melodies? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:58, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, 'medley' wouldn't fit, as the themes are interlocking -- but the key thing that makes them not a quodlibet (from how I've already understood the term) is the fact they aren't pre-existing. I'm sure someone who is better than me at this sort of thing may be able to find a good source that talks about that. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 12:35, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The melodies in "One Day More" pre-existing when that number is sung at the end of act 1. Same for the "Tonight Quintet". In "You're Just in Love", both melodies are introduced separately, then combined, so they are pre-existing at that point. The article "Quodlibet" in Grove Music Online by Maniates, Branscombe and Freedman opens with: "A composition in which well-known melodies and texts appear in successive or simultaneous combinations." -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)