Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Liszt - Vallee d'Obermann

Liszt - Vallee d&#39;Obermann

 * Reason: One of my better outputs – a few technical flubs, but hopefully not too severe. As I have stated before, I'm not very open to the idea of post-recording editing, nor is it possible for me to do so even if I were so inclined, as, truthfully ... I only can get to record at no monetary cost during a live performance, and thus I only have one take. Volume is much better, as well. (Side note that can be tl;dr'd, I care not - the events regarding my former participation in FS involved several regrettable moves and statements on my part. I was hasty in cutting off involvement with the project altogether, and my sincere apologies to all parties involved. I will continue to participate at Featured Sounds with civility, as I have always strived to (though not always with success), and will not hesitate to respond to constructive comments in a more concise and professional manner. Yes, Tony, I'm sorry. What's passed is past.)
 * Composed by: Franz Liszt
 * Creator:
 * Articles in which this recording appears: Années de pèlerinage

Promoted Liszt - Vallee d'Obermann.ogg. —  James ( Talk •  Contribs ) • 11:20am • 01:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. &mdash;  La Pianista  ♫ ♪ 09:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't yet listened, but why are you nominating a recording with "technical flubs"? Tony   (talk)  09:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Simply because I feel that in the other sections I miraculously "get it right." :p It's a minor disclaimer only; I feel the musical value ever so slightly outweighs the slips. &mdash;  La Pianista  ♫ ♪ 09:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Support this is beautiful --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  06:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Question Is the abrupt cutoff at the end part of the file, or just the way Wikipedia's player is handling it? Otherwise I'd support, a wonderful performance outweighing reservations about too-reverberant recording. ReverendWayne (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The cutoff is due to the applause starting immediately afterward. Would you rather I keep the applause in the recording? &mdash;  La Pianista  ♫ ♪ 04:45, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd rather have the applause, faded out quickly. I know applause in a recording bugs some people, but I think it's better to leave it in when it can't be edited out cleanly. ReverendWayne (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose, but with work you might get me to Support. I am OK with the musical performance.  Think we need to evolve and that having someone who is reasonably adept and gets a single take is a fair balance at this point in Wiki evolution.  My concern is that the song and even Annee de Pelerinage are not described in the Liszt article.  If there was more textual connection (at least of AdP) and perhaps the file dropped into those list articles and Liszt (haha) article, than I would be change to support.  BTW, I don't know if this is just a lacking of the writeups or if the piece is so obscure (thinking the former), but in any case, I can't support until there is stronger usage in article space.TCO (reviews needed)  01:55, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I like applause.TCO (reviews needed) 01:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support I thought it sounded great. I can see what TCO means, but I think it does illustrate the Années de pèlerinage page well. Although there might be a worry that this is part of a larger work (see the on-going debate on the talk-page), I think its length does indicate this is not really a worry as it is substantial in its own right. Therefore high EV, and a very high performance standard. I would love to hear the applause too; leave it in there for a few seconds and then fade it out. Welcome back La Pianista! I look forward to hearing more of your work! Ben (Major Bloodnok) (talk) 21:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)