Talk:Figured bass

This should be rolled into the Basso continuo article, no? Are there any situations when they are not synonyms? I'll wait for comments before I combine. - Dreamword 02:23 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

My instinct was to roll them into one as well, but I think we can reasonably keep them separate. They are different subjects, in fact, though they're almost always found together - "basso continuo" is the accompaniment, "figured bass" is the notation that indicates how that accompaniment should be realised. However, I think there's enough to write about in each subject to keep them separate, and, in any case, sometimes you find parts for continuo that don't actually have figured bass (they just have a bass line, and you have to work the rest out for yourself).

I hope to work on both the articles in the near future, by the way. --Camembert

Well, I've had a go at expansion - I've sort of written it off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure everything is correct. I hope it's clear to everybody. (This could probably do with a section on the practical realisation of figured bass, by the way - avoidance of doubled thirds, ways to elaborate the part, and so on.) --Camembert

The argument for keeping the articles separate was strong. Any chance of reconsidering it? Wahoofive 22:38, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Contents

1 Johnny Mehegan Jazz Improvisation 1 Figured bass markup 2 added extensive history section 3 further discussion of yesterday's alterations

Johnny Mehegan Jazz Improvisation

In response to the statement that figured base is not used in contemporary music: Johnny Mehegan used figured bass as the basis for his approach to jazz notation, in his Jazz Improvisation (http://www.google.com/search?&q=johnny%20mehegan%20jazz%20improvisation) series. --ShawnHarrison

I've inserted the word "generally" - I'll bet a number of people use figured bass or similar systems, actually. There's virtually nothing that nobody does in music. --Camembert

Figured bass markup

For figured bass markup see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music_standards#Musical_mark_up. Hyacinth 00:54, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

added extensive history section

In adding a more extensive history section just now, I have removed nothing from this article, and should have offended no one. I do not know why my addition was removed, but I have restored it. If there is some reasonable reason why this was done, or if it is an overlap or other misunderstanding, please contact me at the e-mail address in my page. I would like to contribute to the wikipedia's music pages on a regular basis, but if this is the type of attitude that prevails here, then it is not the "open-source" project it is made out to be, and I will not trouble myself over it. Vaux 21:30 EDT, 31 May, 2005.

Your additions are great, and it's silly that anyone reverted them. But your history section is under "Figured bass notation" whereas most of the history you cite is of continuo accompaniment itself. It's unfortunate that these two concepts got integrated into one article, but in the meantime you might move the history (and maybe the mysterious "contemporary uses") to a ==top-level heading==.—Wahoofive (talk) 02:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

further discussion of yesterday's alterations

I didn't write the "contemporary uses" section. As for the history section, there already was a history heading, so I just put the history where I found it. It might be a bit better to have it at the top level, but we'll see what others think. Vaux 19:39 EDT, 1 Jun 2005