Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Maple Leaf Rag 1906

Maple Leaf Rag 1906

 * Reason: I'm at risk of being tarred with the "Maple Leaf Rag" brush as this is another nomination by me of this piece. However, according to a variety of sources (explained on both the Maple Leaf Rag page and the file description page) this is the first-known recording of the Maple Leaf Rag. It was recorded in 1906 by the US Marine Band. The recording is limited in its fidelity, although I believe it has significant historic value and also a high EV. There are rhythmical problems in the playing, and it is also probably played too fast (it is almost a minute shorter than my earlier delist nomination) and omits 2 repeats. For all that I think the high EV counter-balances the problems of the performance; it does demonstrate that a work by an African-American in the early part of the century was performed by the US Marine Band because his composition was known widely. It also illustrates the pages Maple Leaf Rag and Scott Joplin well.


 * Creator: Converted to OGG by Major Bloodnok
 * Articles in which this recording appears: Maple Leaf Rag, Scott Joplin


 * Nominate and support. Ben (Major Bloodnok) (talk) 09:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have yet to be convinced that the first known recording of a song over comes the extreme Lo-Fi of this recording. Chalk me up as a neutral leaning towards oppose.--Guerillero &#124; My Talk  17:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Leaning towards oppose for the same reason. (1) VERY boxy. (2) Tempo is unsettled: a sense the conductor is pushing them up in tempo quite often, giving a hurried effect. Funnily enough, this robs the music of the weight and energy it should have (and would have on the intended piano. Again, we seem to promote an awful lot of band arrangements ... not happy about this.) Tony   (talk)  01:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * A few questions are in order. What label was this originally released by? I ask because: 1, we should cite this information in our featured sounds, and 2, I'm not sure about the copyright status of the recording. All Edison recordings are treated as PD, but a recording by Victor might still be under copyright (PD-1923 is incorrect for sound recordings due to a loophole). If the recording would be released commercially, the PD-USGOV tag would be incorrect.  About the sound quality itself: I've heard better for a 1906 record... is there anyway that a cleaner source could be obtained? I don't mind the crazy interpretation: in the early 20th century performances were less standardized, and since this wasn't a familiar tune the band didn't have much to go by (besides, they weren't musically trained in ragtime). Is there any way the playing speed could be verified as correct and uniform throughout the recording? (I don't have perfect pitch and I'm not familiar with this recording, so I can't help here). An incorrect or nonuniform playing speed could account for the musical disturbances. As a side note, conductors oftentimes did have to hurry up performances in the 78 rpm era to ensure that the performance fits on the record, perhaps that is the issue here.   Them  From  Space  23:12, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * According to the discography I have it was published by Victor (I don't know how that affects the copyright - I know the copyright of sounds is fairly complex), but I was taking 1906 as being pre-1923 and in the PD. In addition the composer died in 1917, and the US Marine Band as part of the US Gov produce work in the PD. I didn't know about anything specifically Victor-related. I may have tagged it as US gov incorrectly. I agree with you that the tempo may have been influenced by the technical limitations of 78 records. As far as sound quality goes, there may be an alternative digital copy of this particular disk out there, but I found the a CD of this performance on Amazon (here) and listened to it and it appears that whoever uploaded it to archive.org had got it off CD as they are essentially the same.Ben (Major Bloodnok) (talk) 06:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Procedural close. This isn't going to pass and the FS process has died. Sorry Major. Drop me a Talk page note if you have further questions--Guerillero &#124; My Talk  20:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)