Talk:Obbligato

Music theory Low‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spelling[edit]

Currently the heading labels the spelling "obligato" as "acceptable". What is the authority for this? It's very commonly seen, but not easily defended. I think this comes too close to endorsing an illiteracy. It's understandable that English speakers should make this error, but it's an error nevertheless. DR

The article spelled with 2 'b' characters is redirected from the spelling with just 1 'b' character, and the introduction goes on and on about how Britishese uses 2 b's, but Americañol uses 1 b. This redirection is supposed to go the other way around, as en.wikipedia rules specifically call for Americañol versions of language before others. Could someone please fix the redirection, and edit the introduction to reduce or get rid of all that needless blather about 1 or 2 b's? As americañol communicators, we are not "obilgato"-ed to use a 2nd b. Ace Frahm (talk) 08:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are no authorities for most of the material in this article. The spelling issue is trivial by comparison. The entire article cites only five dictionary references, one of which is "wordnik." There are no citations for the many musical pieces named and given as examples. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric

contradictory usage[edit]

If I understand this part right, then I would suggest translating it thusly: The easier and reduced set of notes, called obligato, is the minimum of notes which the composer feels absolutely necessary. At least this seems logical to me and it resolves the apparent contradiction. --BjKa 11:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a description of what to me is the more common "contradictory" usage, an optional solo part without which the piece is still complete. I could not come up with a good example from commonly known pieces off the top of my head, however (although I have written a couple myself, they are unpublished). I would welcome an example or citation. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 01:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary usage[edit]

I'd argue that anyone coming across this concept is far more likely to have seen it used for a countermelody. This article only mentions this very briefly and links to an article with lacking information. I'm not sure if I can get around to writing something up, but for anyone venturing into the talk page, this might be what you're looking for: http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/423637/obbligato Blanksteg (talk) 09:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced example -- (of the word's use as a noun)[edit]

The last sentence of the lede (at least as of this version of the article), says:

The word can stand on its own, in English, as a noun, or appear as a modifier in a noun phrase (e.g. organ obbligato).

That quoted sentence does not sound right to me. The "example" given, at the end -- "(e.g. organ obbligato)" -- is one which illustrates the use of the word ["obbligato"] as a noun. So it is misplaced. That "example" belongs closer to the part of the sentence that says "as a noun", but now (as shown above) it is closer to the part of the sentence that mentions "as a modifier".

In the noun phrase "organ obbligato", the word "organ" is being used as an adjective, and "obbligato" is the noun. (right?)

So (IMHO), the sentence should be changed to say something more like this:

The word can stand on its own, in English, as a noun, (e.g. organ obbligato) or appear as a modifier in a noun phrase (e.g. the obbligato horn section).

Any comments? [before I start editing] - ? - --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too late, but there is no adjective in the noun phrase "organ obbligato." Both words are nouns. A noun phrase comprising a noun modifier preceding a noun head word is perfectly grammatical and many eventually become single words: Compare "snow shovel" and "snowman." When a noun and adjective are homonymous, the noun-noun phrase can be distinguished from the adjective-noun phrase by stress: Compare the stress patterns of "white board" meaning "a board which is white" with "white board" meaning a piece of classroom equipment. Jackaroodave (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Metaphorical too[edit]

1. Excellent article - thanks. 2. I have arrived here having found this:

Their common mantra, over the obligato of ...

in The Spectator. -》 We may add such extended usage here. Zezen (talk) 05:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]