text:
ATRAC

Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding (ATRAC) is a family of proprietary audio compression algorithms developed by Sony. MiniDisc was the first commercial product to incorporate ATRAC, in 1992. ATRAC allowed a relatively small disc like MiniDisc to have the same running time as CD while storing audio information with minimal perceptible loss in quality. Improvements to the codec in the form of ATRAC3, ATRAC3plus, and ATRAC Advanced Lossless followed in 1999, 2002, and 2006 respectively.

Files in ATRAC3 format originally had the .aa3 extension; however, in most cases, the files would be stored in an OpenMG Audio container using the extension .oma. Previously, files that were encrypted with OpenMG had the .omg extension, which was replaced by .oma starting in SonicStage v2.1. Encryption is no longer compulsory as of v3.2.

Other MiniDisc manufacturers such as Sharp and Panasonic also implemented their own versions of the ATRAC codec.

History
ATRAC was developed for Sony's MiniDisc format. ATRAC was updated with version 2, then version 3, version 4, version 4.5, and Type R and Type S.

The first major update was ATRAC3 (not to be confused with version 3 of original ATRAC) in 1999. ATRAC3 was used on MiniDisc as well as the Network Walkman and Vaio Music Clip. ATRAC3plus launched in 2003 for Hi-MD, but was also compatible with some PlayStation, VAIO and Xplod devices.

On 31 March 2008 Sony all but dropped the ATRAC-related codecs in the United States and Europe, and in their SonicStage powered Connect Music Store (Sony's equivalent of iTunes and iTunes Music Store). This was partly due to low adoption of the format, with a source claiming that 90% of European Walkman users did not use ATRAC. Walkman digital players outside Japan no longer worked with ATRAC after September 2007.

Until October 1, 2012, ATRAC was the only codec available to download music from mora until they transitioned to a DRM free model and began offering FLAC files the next year.

ATRAC9 was designed for PlayStation audio and debuted with the PlayStation Vita.

Bitrate quality
ATRAC's 292 kbit/s bitrate used on the original MiniDiscs was designed to be near to CD audio quality. Years later ATRAC was improved over earlier versions at similar bitrates. For comparison, CDs are encoded at 1411.2 kbit/s, and lossless encoders can encode most CDs below 1000 kbit/s, with further bitrate reduction for easier-to-encode content such as voice.

Performance
ATRAC algorithms were developed in close cooperation with LSI integrated circuit development engineers within Sony in order to deliver a product that could encode at high speeds and with minimal power consumption. This contrasts with other codecs developed on computers without regard for the constraints of portable hardware. This is reflected in the design of the ATRAC codecs, which emphasize processing smaller groups of samples at a time to save memory at the cost of compression efficiency and additional multiplies. These trade-offs are logical for DSP systems, where memory was often at a premium compared to multiplier performance.

Sony Walkmans offer better battery life when playing ATRAC files than when playing MP3 files. However, as Sony only pushed ATRAC compatibility in Sony Ericsson Walkman series phones in the Japanese market, it is not supported in GSM/UMTS market phones. Sony's Xplod series of car audio CD players support ATRAC CDs. Minidiscs with ATRAC format songs have, in the past, been supported on Eclipse brand car stereos.

ATRAC (1) (versions 1.0–4.5, Type R/S)
ATRAC1 was first used in Sony's own theater format SDDS system in the 1990s, and in this context is a direct competitor to Dolby Digital (AC3) and DTS. SDDS uses ATRAC1 with 8 channel encoding, and with a total encoding rate over all the channels of 1168 kbit/s.

Two stacked quadrature mirror filters split the signal into 3 parts:
 * 0 to 5.5125 kHz
 * 5.5125 to 11.025 kHz
 * 11.025 to 22.05 kHz

Full stereo (i.e., independent channel) encoding with a data rate of 292 kbit/s.

High-frequency lowpass depends on the complexity of the material; some encodings have content clear up to 22.05 kHz.

ATRAC1 can also be used in mono (one channel) mode, doubling recording time.

FFmpeg has an implementation of an ATRAC1 decoder.

ATRAC3 (LP2 and LP4 Modes)
Like ATRAC1 and MP3, ATRAC3 is also a hybrid subband-MDCT encoder, but with several differences.

In ATRAC3, Three stacked QMF split the signal into 4 parts:
 * 0 to 2.75625 kHz (DC to f/16)
 * 2.75625 to 5.5125 kHz (f/16 to f/8)
 * 5.5125 to 11.025 kHz (f/8 to f/4)
 * 11.025 to 22.05 kHz (f/4 to f/2)

The four subbands are then MDCT encoded using a fixed-length transform. Unlike nearly all modern formats, the transform length cannot be varied to optimize coding transients. Instead, a simpler transient encoding technique called gain control is used, in which the gain of different subbands is varied during a transient prior to MDCT and then restored during decoding after the inverse MDCT to try to smooth over transients. Additionally, prior to quantization, tonal components are subtracted from the signal and independently quantized. During decoding, they are separately reconstructed and added back to reform the original MDCT coefficients.

Sony claims the major advantage of ATRAC3 is its coding efficiency, which was tuned for portable DSP which provides less computing power and battery life. However, as ATRAC is a hybrid subband-MDCT codec that is algorithmically very similar to MP3, any advantage is probably exaggerated. Compared to newer formats such as Ogg Vorbis which use a simple MDCT rather than a hybrid, ATRAC3 must perform an additional computationally expensive inverse-QMF, although the hybrid system significantly reduces memory usage, which was likely a factor given the limited memory available when ATRAC was first developed.

This uses a 132 kbit/s data rate, the quality of which is advertised to be similar to that of MP3 encoded at a similar bit rate. However, in an independent double-blind test (2004/05) without format encoding parameters reference against Ogg Vorbis, AAC, and LAME VBR MP3, ATRAC3 came last.
 * LP2 Mode

 * LP4 Mode

This reduces the data rate to 66 kbit/s (half that of LP2), partly by using joint stereo coding and a lowpass filter around 13.5 kHz. It allows 324 minutes to be recorded on an 80-minute MiniDisc, with the same padding required as LP2.

 * Notes

FFmpeg has an implementation of an ATRAC3 decoder, which was converted to fixed precision and implemented in the Rockbox series of firmware for ARM, Coldfire and MIPS processors. RealAudio8 is a high-bitrate implementation of ATRAC3 (up to 352.8kbit/s). Atracdenc is an open source implementation of ATRAC3 compatible encoder which also can use RealAudio container.

The PlayStation 3 video game Race Driver: Grid uses 224 simultaneous streams of ATRAC3 compressed audio, with between one and eight channels per stream at sample rates between 24 and 48 kHz, each filtered using 512 frequency bands of adaptive equalisation, routed via six reverb units running on the same SPU co-processor (one of eight on the PS3's Cell chip), alongside 7.1 channel hybrid third-order Ambisonic mixing.

ATRAC3plus
This codec is used in Sony Hi-MD Walkman devices (e.g., "Hi-LP and Hi-SP"), Network Walkman players, Memory Stick players, VAIO Pocket, PS3 and PSP console, and ATRAC CD players. It is a hybrid subband/MDCT codec based on a 16 channel QMF followed by a 128-point MDCT. Prior to MDCT coding, Generalized Harmonic Analysis (GHA) is used to extract tonal components, an improved version of the process used in ATRAC3. As in previous ATRAC versions, gain control is used to control preecho rather than variable sized transforms, although different MDCT windows are apparently possible.

SonicStage version 3.4, released in Feb 2006, introduced ripping CDs in bitrates 320 and 352. The available bitrates are: 48, 64, 96, 128, 160, 192, 256, 320 and 352 kbit/s. The newer bitrates are not always compatible with all older hardware decoders, however, some of the older hardware has been found to be compatible with certain newer ATRAC3plus bitrates.

MiniDiscs recorded in this format are incompatible with older players.

In a test conducted by an independent firm, but financed by Sony, it was concluded that ATRAC3plus at 64 kbit/s is equal in subjective sound quality to an obsolete MP3 encoder at 128 kbit/s. Performance against modern high quality MP3 encoders was not evaluated.

ATRAC Advanced Lossless
ATRAC Advanced Lossless is a "scalable" lossless audio codec that records a lossy ATRAC3 or ATRAC3plus stream, and supplements it with a stream of correction information stored within the file itself that allows the original signal to be reproduced, if desired. A player/decoder can extract and use just the ATRAC3 or ATRAC3plus data, or it can combine that with the correction stream to perfectly reproduce the original audio information. This allows the file to be decoded as either lossless or lossy. It is implemented in such a way that allows the file size to be smaller than uncompressed or compressed versions of the same file. Compression is approximately 30–80% of the original file. Benefits of scalable compression include providing backward compatibility, such that older devices that are not AAL-aware can still have the ATRAC3 stream available for playback without understanding the AAL format, and faster transfer speed between portable audio devices and PC.

ATRAC Advanced Lossless is widely supported in older Walkman players and SonicStage version 4 or later. SonicStage 4 allows download of ATRAC Advanced Lossless to MiniDisc Players, PlayStation Portable, and PlayStation 3. Recent Walkman players do not support ATRAC Advanced Lossless/ATRAC.

AAL's use of a "core" (lossy) and "residual" (correction) stream is similar to the idea behind Opus, MPEG-4 SLS, DTS-HD Master Audio, Dolby TrueHD and Ogg Vorbis bitrate peeling. In fact, AAL was the first to be released in the commercial market with this scheme for backward compatibility.

WavPack hybrid mode and OptimFROG DualStream are in the same category, but store the correction stream in a separate file.

ATRAC9
According to Sony ATRAC9 is a high-compression audio codec optimized for games, offering low delay (granularity) and low CPU and memory usage. It is used in the PS5, PS4 and PS Vita consoles. Audio middleware such as FMOD and Audiokinetic Wwise supports it.

FFmpeg has an implementation of an ATRAC9 decoder.

title: ATRAC


text:
MiniDisc

MiniDisc (MD) is an erasable magneto-optical disc-based data storage format offering a capacity of 60, 74, and later, 80 minutes of digitized audio.

Sony announced the MiniDisc in September 1992 and released it in November of that year for sale in Japan and in December in Europe, North America, and other countries. The music format was based on ATRAC audio data compression, Sony's own proprietary compression code. Its successor, Hi-MD, would later introduce the option of linear PCM digital recording to meet audio quality comparable to that of a compact disc. MiniDiscs were very popular in Japan and found moderate success in Europe. Although it was designed to succeed the cassette tape, it did not manage to supplant it globally.

By March 2011 Sony had sold 22 million MD players, but halted further development. Sony ceased manufacturing and sold the last of the players by March 2013.

Market history
In 1983, just a year after the introduction of the compact disc, Kees Schouhamer Immink and Joseph Braat presented the first experiments with erasable magneto-optical compact discs during the 73rd AES Convention in Eindhoven. It took almost 10 years, however, before their idea was commercialized.

Sony's MiniDisc was one of two rival digital systems introduced in 1992 that were intended to replace the Philips Compact Cassette analog audio tape system: the other was the Digital Compact Cassette (DCC), created by Philips and Matsushita (now Panasonic). Sony had originally intended the Digital Audio Tape (DAT) to be the dominant home digital audio recording format, replacing the analog cassette. Because of technical delays, the DAT was not launched until 1989, and by then the U.S. dollar had fallen so far against the yen that the introductory DAT machine Sony had intended to market for about $400 in the late 1980s then had to retail for $800 or even $1,000 to break even, putting it out of reach of most users.

Relegating DAT to professional use, Sony set to work to come up with a simpler, more economical digital home format. By the time Sony came up with the MiniDisc in late 1992, Philips had introduced a competing system, DCC, on a magnetic tape cassette. This created marketing confusion very similar to the videocassette format war of the late 1970s and early 1980s. Sony licensed MD technology to other manufacturers, with JVC, Sharp, Pioneer, Panasonic and others producing their own MD products. However, non-Sony machines were not widely available in North America, and companies such as Technics and Radio Shack tended to promote DCC instead. Despite having a loyal customer base largely of musicians and audio enthusiasts, the MiniDisc met with only limited success in the United States. It was very popular in Japan and parts of Asia, and relatively so in Europe during the 1990s and into the 2000s, but did not enjoy comparable sales success in other markets. Since then, recordable CDs, flash memory and HDD and solid-state-based digital audio players such as iPods have become increasingly popular as playback devices.

The slow uptake of MiniDisc was attributed to the small number of pre-recorded albums available on MD, because relatively few record labels embraced the format. The initial high cost of equipment and blank media was also a factor. Additionally, home MiniDisc decks were less widely available, with most consumers instead connecting a portable MD device to their hi-fi system in order to record.

MiniDisc technology was faced with new competition from the recordable compact disc (CD-R) when it became more affordable to consumers beginning around 1996. Initially, Sony believed that it would take around a decade for CD-R prices to become affordable – the cost of a typical blank CD-R disc was around $12 in 1994 – but CD-R prices fell much more rapidly than envisioned, to the point where CD-R blanks sank below $1 per disc by the late 1990s, compared to at least $2 for the cheapest 80-minute MiniDisc blanks.

The biggest competition for MiniDisc came with the emergence of MP3 players. With the Diamond Rio player in 1998 and the Apple iPod in 2001, the mass market began to eschew physical media in favor of more convenient file-based systems.

By 2007, because of the waning popularity of the format and the increasing popularity of solid-state MP3 players, Sony was producing only one model, the Hi-MD MZ-RH1, available as the MZ-M200 in North America packaged with a Sony microphone and limited macOS software support.

The MZ-RH1 allowed users to freely move uncompressed digital recordings back and forth from the MiniDisc to a computer without the copyright protection limitations previously imposed upon the NetMD series. This allowed the MiniDisc to better compete with HD recorders and MP3 players. However, most pro users like broadcasters and news reporters had already abandoned MiniDisc in favor of solid-state recorders, because of their extended recording time, open digital content sharing, high-quality digital recording capabilities and reliable, lightweight design.

On 7 July 2011, Sony announced that it would no longer ship MiniDisc Walkman products as of September 2011, effectively killing the format.

On 1 February 2013, Sony issued a press release on the Nikkei stock exchange that it would cease shipment of all MD devices, with last of the players to be sold in March 2013. However, it would continue to sell blank discs and offer repair services. Other manufacturers continued to release MiniDisc players long after Sony stopped, with TEAC & TASCAM producing new decks up until 2020 when both its consumer and professional products, TEAC MD-70CD and TASCAM MD-CD1MKIII, were discontinued.

Physical characteristics

The disc is fixed in a cartridge (68×72×5 mm) with a sliding door, similar to the casing of a 3.5" floppy disk. This shutter is opened automatically when inserted into a drive. MiniDiscs can either be blank or prerecorded. Recordable MiniDiscs use a magneto-optical system to write data: a laser below the disc heats a spot to its Curie point, making the material in the disc susceptible to a magnetic field. A magnetic head above the disc then alters the polarity of the heated area, recording the digital data onto the disk. Playback is accomplished with the laser alone: taking advantage of the magneto-optic Kerr effect, the player senses the polarization of the reflected light as a 1 or a 0. Recordable MDs can be rerecorded repeatedly, with Sony claiming up to one million times. By May 2005, there were 60-minute, 74-minute and 80-minute discs available. 60-minute blanks, which were widely available in the early years of the format's introduction, were phased out.

MiniDiscs use a mastering process and optical playback system that is very similar to CDs. The recorded signal of the premastered pits and of the recordable MD are also very similar. Eight-to-Fourteen Modulation (EFM) and a modification of CD's CIRC code, called Advanced Cross Interleaved Reed-Solomon Code (ACIRC) are employed.

Differences from cassette and CDs
MiniDiscs use rewritable magneto-optical storage to store data. Unlike DCC or the analog Compact Cassette, MiniDisc is a random-access medium, making seek time very fast. MiniDiscs can be edited very quickly even on portable machines. Tracks can be split, combined, moved or deleted with ease either on the player or uploaded to a PC with Sony's SonicStage V4.3 software and edited there. Transferring data from an MD unit to a non-Windows PC can only be done in real time, preferably via optical I/O, by connecting the audio out port of the MD to an available audio in port of the computer. With the release of the Hi-MD format, Sony began to use Mac OS X-compatible software. However, the Mac OS X-compatible software was still not compatible with legacy MD formats (SP, LP2, LP4). This means that an MD recorded on a legacy unit or in a legacy format still requires a Windows PC for faster than real-time transfers.

The beginning of the disc has a table of contents (TOC, the System File area), which stores the start positions of the various tracks, as well as metadata (title, artist) and free blocks. Unlike a conventional cassette, a recorded song does not need to be stored as one piece on the disc, it can be scattered in fragments, similar to a hard drive. Early MiniDisc equipment had a fragment granularity of 4 seconds of audio. Fragments smaller than the granularity are not monitored, which may lead to the usable capacity of a disc shrinking over time. No means of defragmenting the disc is provided in consumer-grade equipment.

All consumer-grade MiniDisc devices have a copy-protection scheme called the Serial Copy Management System. An unprotected disc or song can be copied without limit, but the copies can no longer be digitally copied. However, as a concession, the last Hi-MD players can upload to PC a digitally recorded file which can be resaved as a WAV (PCM) file and thus replicated.

Audio data compression
The digitally encoded audio signal on a MiniDisc has traditionally been data-compressed using the ATRAC (Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding) format.

ATRAC was devised to allow MiniDisc to have the same runtime as a CD. ATRAC reduces the 1.4 Mbit/s of a CD to a 292 kbit/s data stream, roughly a 5:1 reduction. ATRAC was also used on nearly all flash memory Walkman devices until the 8 series.

The ATRAC codec differs from uncompressed PCM in that it is a psychoacoustic lossy audio data reduction scheme. Like other lossy audio compression formats, it is intended to be acoustically transparent, but some listeners claim to be able to hear audible artifacts.

There have been four versions of ATRAC, each claimed by Sony to more accurately reflect the original audio. Early players are guaranteed to play later version ATRAC audio. Version 1 could only be copied on consumer equipment three or four times before artifacts became objectionable, as the ATRAC on the recorder attempted to compress the already compressed data. By version 4, the potential number of generations of copy had increased to around 15 to 20 depending on audio content.

The latest versions of Sony's ATRAC are ATRAC3 and ATRAC3plus. Original ATRAC3 at 132 kbit/s (also known as ATRAC-LP2 mode) was the format that was used by Sony's defunct Connect audio download store. ATRAC3plus was not used in order to retain backwards compatibility with earlier NetMD players.

In the MiniDisc's final iteration, Hi-MD, uncompressed CD-quality linear PCM audio recording and playback is offered, placing Hi-MD on par with CD-quality audio. Hi-MD also supports both ATRAC3 and ATRAC3plus at various bitrates, but not the original ATRAC (except for playback only).

Anti-skip
MiniDisc has a feature that prevents disc skipping under all but the most extreme conditions. Older CD players had been a source of annoyance to users as they were prone to mistracking from vibration and shock. MiniDisc solved this problem by reading the data into a memory buffer at a higher speed than was required before being read out to the digital-to-analog converter at the standard rate of the format. The size of the buffer varies by model.

If a MiniDisc player is bumped, playback continues unimpeded while the laser repositions itself to continue reading data from the disc. This feature allows the player to stop the spindle motor for significant periods, increasing battery life.

A buffer of at least six seconds is required on all MiniDisc players, whether portable or full-sized units. This ensures uninterrupted playback in the presence of file fragmentation.

Operation
The data structure and operation of a MiniDisc is similar to that of a computer's hard disk drive. The bulk of the disc contains audio data, and a small section contains the table of contents (TOC), providing the playback device with vital information about the number and location of tracks on the disc. Tracks and discs can be named. Tracks may easily be added, erased, combined and divided, and their preferred order of playback modified. Erased tracks are not physically erased, but are only marked as deleted. When a disc becomes full, the recorder can simply direct the data into sections where erased tracks reside. This can lead to fragmentation but unless many erasures and replacements are performed, the only likely problem is excessive searching, reducing battery life.

The data structure of the MiniDisc, where music is recorded in a single stream of bytes while the TOC contains pointers to track positions, allows for gapless playback of music, something which competing portable players such as most MP3 players, fail to implement properly. Notable exceptions are CD players, as well as all recent iPods.

At the end of recording, after the "Stop" button has been pressed, the MiniDisc may continue to write music data for a few seconds from its memory buffers. During this time, it may display a message ("Data Save", on at least some models) and the case will not open. After the audio data is written out, the final step is to write the TOC track denoting the start and endpoints of the recorded data. Sony points out in the manual that the power should not be interrupted or the unit exposed to undue physical shock during this time.

Copy protection
All MiniDisc recorders use the SCMS copy protection system which uses two bits in the S/PDIF digital audio stream and on disc to differentiate between "protected" vs. "unprotected" audio, and between "original" vs. "copy":
 * Recording digitally from a source marked "protected" and "original" (produced by a prerecorded MD or an MD that recorded an analogue input) was allowed, but the recorder would change the "original" bit to the "copy" state on the disc to prevent further copying of the copy. A CD imported via a digital connection does not have the SCMS bits (as the CD format predates SCMS), but the recording MD recorder treats any signal where the SCMS bits are missing as protected and original. The MD copy, therefore, cannot be further copied digitally.
 * Recording digitally from a source marked "protected" and "copy" was not allowed: an error message would be shown on the display.
 * Recording digitally from a source marked "unprotected" was also allowed; the "original/copy" marker was ignored and left unchanged.

Recording from an analogue source resulted in a disc marked "protected" and "original" allowing one further copy to be made (this contrasts with the SCMS on the Digital Compact Cassette where analogue recording was marked as "unprotected").

In recorders that could be connected to a PC via USB, it was possible to transfer audio from the PC to the MiniDisc recorder, but for many years it was not possible to transfer audio in the other direction. This restriction existed in both the SonicStage software and in the MiniDisc player itself. SonicStage V3.4 was the first version of the software where this restriction was removed, but it still required a MiniDisc recorder/player that also had the restriction removed. The Hi-MD model MZ-RH1 was the only such player available.

MD Data
MD Data, a format for storing computer data, was announced by Sony in 1993. Its media were generally incompatible with standard audio MiniDiscs. MD Data can not write to audio MDs, but only the considerably more expensive data blanks. It did see some success in a small number of multi-track recorders such as Sony's MDM-X4, Tascam's 564 (which could also record using standard audio MD discs, albeit only two tracks), and Yamaha's MD8, MD4, & MD4S.

MD Data2
In 1997, MD Data2 blanks were introduced with 650 MB. They were only implemented in Sony's short-lived MD-based camcorder, the DCM-M1.

MDLP
In 2000, Sony announced MDLP (MiniDisc Long Play), which added new recording modes based on the new codec ATRAC3. In addition to the standard, high-quality mode, now called SP, MDLP adds LP2 mode, which doubles the recording time – 160 minutes on an 80-minute disc – of good-quality stereo sound, and LP4, which allows four times more recording time – 320 minutes on an 80-minute disc – of medium-quality stereo sound.

The bitrate of the standard SP mode is 292 kbit/s, and it uses separate stereo coding with discrete left and right channels. LP2 mode uses a bitrate of 132 kbit/s and also uses separate stereo coding. The third mode, LP4, has a bitrate of 66 kbit/s and uses joint stereo coding. The sound quality is noticeably degraded compared to the other two modes, but is sufficient for many uses.

Tracks recorded in LP2 or LP4 mode play back as silence on non-MDLP players.

NetMD
Debuting in late 2001, NetMD recorders allow music files to be transferred from a computer to a recorder (but not in the other direction) over a USB connection. In LP4 mode, speeds of up to 32× real-time are possible and three Sony NetMD recorders (MZ-N10, MZ-N910, and MZ-N920) are capable of speeds up to 64× real-time. NetMD recorders all support MDLP.

When transferring music in SP mode using NetMD with SonicStage, what is transferred is actually padded LP2. That is to say that the quality of the music is that of LP2 but recorded as SP.

NetMD is a proprietary protocol that initially required proprietary software such as SonicStage. A free *nix based implementation, libnetmd, has been developed. The library allows the user to upload SP files in full quality. In 2019, a programmer named Stefano Brilli compiled the linux-minidisc CLI into a web browser-based application, allowing users to transfer music via USB on modern devices.

Hi-MD
Hi-MD is a further development of the MiniDisc format. Hi-MD media will not play on non-Hi-MD equipment, including NetMD players. The Hi-MD format, introduced in 2004, marked a return to the data storage arena with its 1 GB discs and ability to act as a USB drive. Hi-MD units allow the recording and playback of audio and data on the same disc, and can write both audio and data to standard MiniDisc media – an 80-minute MiniDisc blank could be formatted to store 305 MB of data.

Recording and transfer modes
Modes marked in green are available for recordings made on the player, while those marked in red are available for music transferred from a PC. Capacities are official Sony figures; real world figures are usually slightly higher. Native MP3 support was added in second-generation Hi-MD players in the spring of 2005. SonicStage version 3.4, released in Feb 2006, introduced ripping CDs in bitrates 320 and 352 and added track transfer in ATRAC 192 kbit/s to Hi-MD devices.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: MiniDisc


text:
User:Gianfranco

it:Utente:Gianfranco fr:Utilisateur:Gianfranco

title: User:Gianfranco


text:
Talk:The English Patient (1996 movie)

I am not native English speaker, but shouldn't that be The English Patient the movie? just asking out of curiousity szopen

It was a movie and a book. Personally I don't see why they can't both be on the same page. I'll keep that in mind as something to fix. Eclecticology
 * i know, i saw the movie and read the book - and they have separate pages on wikipedia of course. It just my english teacher always correct me when i said "Matrix film" "English patient film" etc szopen

Film=movie. Very Generally, USAmericans say 'movie', except when it's more highbrow, as in a 'foreign film'. British people generally say 'film'. It doesn't matter for the wikipedia, since it's all forms of native English. JHK

title: Talk:The English Patient (1996 movie)


text:
Anton Bruckner

Josef Anton Bruckner (4 September 1824 – 11 October 1896) was an Austrian composer and organist best known for his symphonies and sacred music, which includes Masses, Te Deum and motets. The symphonies are considered emblematic of the final stage of Austro-German Romanticism because of their rich harmonic language, strongly polyphonic character, and considerable length. Bruckner's compositions helped to define contemporary musical radicalism, owing to their dissonances, unprepared modulations, and roving harmonies.

Unlike other musical radicals such as Richard Wagner and Hugo Wolf, Bruckner showed respect, even humility, before other famous musicians, Wagner in particular. This apparent dichotomy between Bruckner the man and Bruckner the composer hampers efforts to describe his life in a way that gives a straightforward context for his music. Hans von Bülow described him as "half genius, half simpleton". Bruckner was critical of his own work and often reworked his compositions. There are several versions of many of his works.

His works, the symphonies in particular, had detractors, most notably the influential Austrian critic Eduard Hanslick and other supporters of Johannes Brahms, who pointed to their large size and use of repetition, as well as to Bruckner's propensity for revising many of his works, often with the assistance of colleagues, and his apparent indecision about which versions he preferred. On the other hand, Bruckner was greatly admired by subsequent composers, including his friend Gustav Mahler.

Early life
Anton Bruckner was born in Ansfelden (then a village, now almost a suburb of Linz) on 4 September 1824. The ancestors of Bruckner's family were farmers and craftsmen; their history can be traced as far back as the 16th century. They lived near a bridge south of Sindelburg, which led to their being called "Bruckhner an der Bruckhen" (bridgers on the bridge). Bruckner's grandfather was appointed schoolmaster in Ansfelden in 1776; this position was inherited by Bruckner's father, Anton Bruckner Sr., in 1823. It was a poorly paid but well-respected position in the rural environment. Bruckner Sr. married Therese Helm, and they had eleven children, Anton Bruckner being the eldest.

Music was a part of the school curriculum, and Bruckner's father was his first music teacher. Bruckner learned to play the organ early as a child. He was very dedicated to the instrument just as he was later in life in composing, often practising for 12 hours a day. He entered school when he was six, proved to be a hard-working student, and was promoted to upper class early. While studying, Bruckner also helped his father in teaching the other children. After Bruckner received his confirmation in 1833, Bruckner's father sent him to another school in Hörsching. The schoolmaster, Johann Baptist Weiß, was a music enthusiast and respected organist. Here, Bruckner completed his school education and refined his skills as an organist. Around 1835 Bruckner wrote his first composition, a Pange lingua – one of the compositions which he revised at the end of his life. When his father became ill, Anton returned to Ansfelden to help him in his work.

Teacher's education
Bruckner's father died in 1837, when Bruckner was 13 years old. The teacher's position and house were given to a successor, and Bruckner was sent to the Augustinian monastery in Sankt Florian to become a choirboy. In addition to choir practice, his education included violin and organ lessons. Bruckner was in awe of the monastery's great organ, which was built during the late baroque era and rebuilt in 1837, and he sometimes played it during church services. Later, the organ was to be called the "Bruckner Organ". Despite his musical abilities, Bruckner's mother sent her son to a teaching seminar in Linz in 1841.

After completing the seminar with an excellent grade, Bruckner was sent as an assistant teacher to a school in Windhaag. The living standards and pay were appalling and Bruckner was constantly humiliated by his superior, teacher Franz Fuchs. Despite the difficult situation, Bruckner never complained or rebelled; a belief in his own inferiority was to remain one of Bruckner's main personal traits during his whole life. He stayed at Windhaag from age 17 to 19, teaching subjects that had nothing to do with music.

Prelate Michael Arneth noticed Bruckner's bad situation in Windhaag and awarded him an assistant teacher position in the vicinity of the monastic town of Sankt Florian, sending him to Kronstorf an der Enns for two years. Here he would be able to have more of a part in musical activity. The time in Kronstorf was a much happier one for Bruckner. Between 1843 and 1845, Bruckner was the pupil of Leopold von Zenetti in Enns. Compared to the few works he wrote in Windhaag, the Kronstorf compositions from 1843 to 1845 show a significantly improved artistic ability, and finally the beginnings of what could be called "the Bruckner style". Among the Kronstorf works is the vocal piece Asperges me (WAB 4), which the young assistant teacher, out of line given his position, signed with "Anton Bruckner m.p.ria. Comp[onist]". This has been interpreted as a lone early sign of Bruckner's artistic ambitions. Otherwise, little is known of Bruckner's life plans and intentions.

Organist in Sankt Florian
After the Kronstorf period, Bruckner returned to Sankt Florian in 1845 where, for the next 10 years, he would work as a teacher and an organist. In May 1845, Bruckner passed an examination, which allowed him to begin work as an assistant teacher in one of the village schools of Sankt Florian. He continued to improve his education by taking further courses, passing an examination giving him permission to also teach in higher education institutes, receiving the grade "very good" in all disciplines. In 1848 Bruckner was appointed an organist in Sankt Florian and in 1851 this was made a regular position. In Sankt Florian, most of the repertoire consisted of the music of Michael Haydn, Johann Georg Albrechtsberger and Franz Joseph Aumann. During his stay in Sankt Florian, Bruckner continued to work with Zenetti.

Study period
In 1855, Bruckner, aspiring to become a student of the famous Vienna music theorist Simon Sechter, showed the master his Missa solemnis (WAB 29), written a year earlier, and was accepted. The education, which included skills in music theory and counterpoint among others, took place mostly via correspondence, but also included long in-person sessions in Vienna. Sechter's teaching would have a profound influence on Bruckner. Later, when Bruckner began teaching music himself, he would base his curriculum on Sechter's book Die Grundsätze der musikalischen Komposition (Leipzig 1853/54).

Largely self-taught as a composer, Bruckner only started composing seriously at age 37 in 1861. Bruckner studied further with Otto Kitzler, who was nine years younger than him and who introduced him to the music of Richard Wagner, which Bruckner studied extensively from 1863 onwards. Bruckner considered the earliest orchestral works (the "study" Symphony in F minor, the three orchestral pieces, the March in D minor and the Overture in G minor, which he composed in 1862–1863), mere school exercises, done under the supervision of Otto Kitzler. He continued his studies to the age of 40. Broad fame and acceptance did not come until he was over 60 (after the premiere of his Seventh Symphony in 1884). In 1861 he had already made the acquaintance of Franz Liszt who, like Bruckner, had a strong, Catholic religious faith and who first and foremost was a harmonic innovator, initiating the new German school together with Wagner. In May 1861 he made his concert debut, as both composer and conductor of his Ave Maria, set in seven parts. Soon after Bruckner had ended his studies under Sechter and Kitzler, he wrote his first mature work, the Mass in D Minor. From 1861 to 1868, he alternated his time between Vienna and Sankt Florian. He wished to ensure he knew how to make his music modern, but he also wanted to spend time in a more religious setting.

The Vienna period
In 1868, after Sechter had died, Bruckner hesitantly accepted Sechter's post as a teacher of music theory at the Vienna Conservatory, during which time he concentrated most of his energy on writing symphonies. These symphonies were poorly received, at times considered "wild" and "nonsensical". His students at the Conservatory included Richard Robert. His student, Friedrich Klose, wrote a book about his impressions of Bruckner as a composer and a teacher.

He later accepted a post at the Vienna University in 1875, where he tried to make music theory a part of the curriculum. Overall, he was unhappy in Vienna, which was musically dominated by the critic Eduard Hanslick. At the time, there was a feud between advocates of the music of Wagner and Brahms; by aligning himself with Wagner, Bruckner made an unintentional enemy out of Hanslick. He was not without supporters, though. Deutsche Zeitung music critic Theodor Helm, and famous conductors such as Arthur Nikisch and Franz Schalk constantly tried to bring his music to the public, and for this purpose proposed "improvements" for making Bruckner's music more acceptable to the public. Bruckner bequeathed his original scores to the Austrian National Library in Vienna.

In addition to his symphonies, Bruckner wrote Masses, motets and other sacred choral works, and a few chamber works, including a string quintet. Unlike his romantic symphonies, some of Bruckner's choral works are often conservative and contrapuntal in style; however, the Te Deum, Helgoland, Psalm 150 and at least one Mass demonstrate innovative and radical uses of chromaticism.

Biographers generally characterize Bruckner as a "simple" provincial man, and many biographers have complained that there is huge discrepancy between Bruckner's life and his work. For example, Karl Grebe said: "his life doesn't tell anything about his work, and his work doesn't tell anything about his life, that's the uncomfortable fact any biography must start from." Anecdotes abound as to Bruckner's dogged pursuit of his chosen craft and his humble acceptance of the fame that eventually came his way. Once, after a rehearsal of his Fourth Symphony in 1881, the well-meaning Bruckner tipped the conductor Hans Richter: "When the symphony was over," Richter related, "Bruckner came to me, his face beaming with enthusiasm and joy. I felt him press a coin into my hand. 'Take this' he said, 'and drink a glass of beer to my health.'" Richter, of course, accepted the coin, a Maria Theresa thaler, and wore it on his watch-chain ever after.

Bruckner was a renowned organist in his day, impressing audiences in France in 1869, and the United Kingdom in 1871, giving six recitals on a new Henry Willis organ at Royal Albert Hall in London and five more at the Crystal Palace. Though he wrote no major works for the organ, his improvisation sessions sometimes yielded ideas for the symphonies. He taught organ performance at the Conservatory; among his students were Hans Rott and Franz Schmidt. Gustav Mahler, who called Bruckner his "forerunner", attended the conservatory at this time.

Bruckner was a lifelong bachelor who made numerous unsuccessful marriage proposals to teenage girls. One such was the daughter of a friend, called Louise; in his grief he is believed to have written the cantata "Entsagen" (Renunciation). His affection for teenage girls led to an accusation of impropriety where he taught music, and while he was exonerated, he decided to concentrate on teaching boys afterwards. His calendar for 1874 details the names of girls who appealed to him, and the list of such girls in all his diaries was very long. In 1880 he fell for a 17-year-old peasant girl in the cast of the Oberammergau Passion Play. His interest in teenage girls seems to have been motivated by his fear of sin; he believed that (unlike older women) he could be certain that he was marrying a virgin. His unsuccessful proposals to teenagers continued when he was past his 70th birthday; one prospect, Berlin hotel chambermaid Ida Buhz, came near to marrying him but broke off the engagement when she refused to convert to Catholicism. He suffered from periodic attacks of depression, with his numerous failed attempts to find a female companion only adding to his unhappiness.

In July 1886, the Emperor decorated him with the Order of Franz Joseph. He most likely retired from his position at the University of Vienna in 1892, at the age of 68. He wrote a great deal of music that he used to help teach his students.

Bruckner died in Vienna in 1896 at the age of 72. He is buried in the crypt of the monastery church at Sankt Florian, immediately below his favorite organ. He had always had a fascination with death and dead bodies, and left explicit instructions regarding the embalming of his corpse.

The Anton Bruckner Private University for Music, Drama, and Dance, an institution of higher education in Linz, close to his native Ansfelden, was named after him in 1932 (as the "Bruckner Conservatory Linz" until 2004). The Bruckner Orchestra Linz was also named in his honor.

Compositions
Sometimes Bruckner's works are referred to by WAB numbers, from the Werkverzeichnis Anton Bruckner, a catalogue of Bruckner's works edited by Renate Grasberger.

The revision issue has generated controversy. A common explanation for the multiple versions is that Bruckner was willing to revise his work on the basis of harsh, uninformed criticism from his colleagues. "The result of such advice was to awaken immediately all the insecurity in the non-musical part of Bruckner's personality," musicologist Deryck Cooke writes. "Lacking all self-assurance in such matters, he felt obliged to bow to the opinions of his friends, 'the experts,' to permit ... revisions and even to help make them in some cases." This explanation was widely accepted when it was championed by Bruckner scholar Robert Haas, who was the chief editor of the first critical editions of Bruckner's works published by the International Bruckner Society; it continues to be found in the majority of program notes and biographical sketches concerning Bruckner. Haas's work was endorsed by the Nazis and so fell out of favour after the war as the Allies enforced denazification. Haas's rival Leopold Nowak was appointed to produce a whole new critical edition of Bruckner's works. He and others such as Benjamin Korstvedt and conductor Leon Botstein argued that Haas's explanation is at best idle speculation, at worst a shady justification of Haas's own editorial decisions. Also, it has been pointed out that Bruckner often started work on a symphony just days after finishing the one before. As Deryck Cooke writes, "In spite of continued opposition and criticism, and many well-meaning exhortations to caution from his friends, he looked neither to right nor left, but simply got down to work on the next symphony." The matter of Bruckner's authentic texts and the reasons for his changes to them remains politicised and uncomfortable.

Symphonies
"Bruckner expanded the concept of the symphonic form in ways that have never been witnessed before or since. … When listening to a Bruckner symphony, one encounters some of the most complex symphonic writing ever created. As scholars study Bruckner's scores they continue to revel in the complexity of Bruckner's creative logic."

Bruckner composed eleven symphonies, the first, the Study Symphony in F minor in 1863, the last, the unfinished Symphony No. 9 in D minor in 1887–96. With the exception of Symphony No. 4 (Romantic), none of Bruckner's symphonies originally had a subtitle and in the case of those that now do, the nicknames or subtitles did not originate with the composer.

Style

Bruckner's symphonies are scored for a fairly standard orchestra of woodwinds in pairs, four horns, two or three trumpets, three trombones, tuba (from the second version of the Fourth), timpani and strings. The later symphonies increase this complement, but not by much. Notable is the use of Wagner tubas in his last three symphonies. Only the Eighth has harp, and percussion besides timpani in all versions. (The Seventh, in some versions, features a single cymbal crash alongside a triangle roll at the climax of the second movement). Bruckner's style of orchestral writing was criticized by his Viennese contemporaries (Eduard Hanslick and his circle), but by the middle of the twentieth century, musicologists recognized that his orchestration was modeled after the sound of his primary instrument, the pipe organ, i.e., alternating between two groups of instruments, as when changing from one manual of the organ to another.

Structure
The structure of Bruckner's symphonies is in a way an extension of that of Beethoven's symphonies. Bruckner's symphonies are in four movements.
 * The first movement, in Time signature or Time signature, is, from Symphony No. 2 on, an allegro in modified sonata form with three thematic groups. The first group is mostly displayed in piano or pianissimo on a tremolo of the string instruments and is, after a long crescendo, repeated in tutti. The second group, melodious and in ABA' lied form, is mostly of contrapuntal structure. The third group, mostly rhythmical and often in unison, is sometimes a variant of the first group, as in Symphony No. 4. The often extensive development is followed by a modified and somewhat shortened reprise and a powerful coda.
 * The second movement, mostly an adagio in, is generally in ABA′B′A″ lied form. The first thematic group, sometime rhythmical, is developed and magnified in the third and fifth parts. The second group is mostly a melody in cantilena form. The adagio is put in third position in the first version of Symphony No. 2, and in Symphony No. 8 and Symphony No. 9.
 * The scherzo in Time signature and in minor mode is often fiery. The, sometimes very short, trio is more melodious and often in Ländler form. The da capo reprise, in Bruckner's early symphonies, ends with a short, powerful coda. The revised version of the Symphony No. 4 features a scherzo – the "Hunt scherzo" – in which the outer sections are in and in major mode.
 * The Finale, in or, is, as the first movement, an allegro in modified sonata form with three thematic groups. The first group, often a kind of introduction, is followed by a second, melodious and often contrapuntal group, and a third, rhythmical and often in unison, group, which is sometimes a variant of the first group, as in Symphony No. 2. The development, often of dramatic character, is followed by a less formal reprise, which is sometimes inverted (C′B′A') as in Symphony No. 7, and a coda in which the first thematic group of the first movement is magnified. In the coda of Symphony No. 8, the first thematic group of all four movements are magnified.

Nicholas Temperley writes in the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1980) that Bruckner

"alone succeeded in creating a new school of symphonic writing…. Some have classified him as a conservative, some as a radical. Really he was neither, or alternatively was a fusion of both…. [H]is music, though Wagnerian in its orchestration and in its huge rising and falling periods, patently has its roots in older styles. Bruckner took Beethoven's Ninth Symphony as his starting-point…. The introduction to the first movement, beginning mysteriously and climbing slowly with fragments of the first theme to the gigantic full statement of that theme, was taken over by Bruckner; so was the awe-inspiring coda of the first movement. The scherzo and slow movement, with their alternation of melodies, are models for Bruckner's spacious middle movements, while the finale with a grand culminating hymn is a feature of almost every Bruckner symphony."

"Bruckner is the first composer since Schubert about whom it is possible to make such generalizations. His symphonies deliberately followed a pattern, each one building on the achievements of its predecessors…. His melodic and harmonic style changed little, and it had as much of Schubert in it as of Wagner…. His technique in the development and transformation of themes, learnt from Beethoven, Liszt and Wagner, was unsurpassed, and he was almost the equal of Brahms in the art of melodic variation."

Deryck Cooke adds, also in the New Grove,

"Despite its general debt to Beethoven and Wagner, the "Bruckner Symphony" is a unique conception, not only because of the individuality of its spirit and its materials, but even more because of the absolute originality of its formal processes. At first, these processes seemed so strange and unprecedented that they were taken as evidence of sheer incompetence…. Now it is recognized that Bruckner's unorthodox structural methods were inevitable…. Bruckner created a new and monumental type of symphonic organism, which abjured the tense, dynamic continuity of Beethoven, and the broad, fluid continuity of Wagner, in order to express something profoundly different from either composer, something elemental and metaphysical."

In a concert review, Bernard Holland described parts of the first movements of Bruckner's sixth and seventh symphonies as follows: "There is the same slow, broad introduction, the drawn-out climaxes that grow, pull back and then grow some more – a sort of musical coitus interruptus."

In the 2001 Second Edition of the New Grove, Mark Evan Bonds called the Bruckner symphonies "monumental in scope and design, combining lyricism with an inherently polyphonic design…. Bruckner favored an approach to large-scale form that relied more on large-scale thematic and harmonic juxtaposition. Over the course of his output, one senses an ever-increasing interest in cyclic integration that culminates in his masterpiece, the Symphony No. 8 in C minor, a work whose final page integrates the main themes of all four movements simultaneously."

In 1990, the American artist Jack Ox gave a paper called The Systematic Translation of Anton Bruckner's Eighth Symphony into a series of Thirteen Paintings at the Bruckner Symposium in Linz Austria; here she structurally analyzed all of the Eighth Symphony's themes. She then proceeded to show how she mapped this musical data into a series of twelve large, painted visualizations. The conference report was published in 1993.

The Bruckner Problem
"The Bruckner Problem" refers to the difficulties and complications resulting from the numerous contrasting versions and editions that exist for most of the symphonies. The term gained currency following the publication (in 1969) of an article dealing with the subject, "The Bruckner Problem Simplified" by musicologist Deryck Cooke, which brought the issue to the attention of English-speaking musicians.

The first versions of Bruckner's symphonies often presented an instrumental, contrapuntal and rhythmic complexity (Brucknerian rhythm "2 + 3", use of quintuplets), the originality of which has not been understood and which were considered unperformable by the musicians. In order to make them "performable", the symphonies, except Symphonies No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7, have been revised several times. Consequently, there are several versions and editions, mainly of Symphonies 3, 4 and 8, which have been deeply emended by Bruckner's friends and associates, and it is not always possible to tell whether the emendations had Bruckner's direct authorization.

Looking for authentic versions of the symphonies, Robert Haas produced during the 1930s a first critical edition of Bruckner's works based on the original scores. After World War II other scholars (Leopold Nowak, William Carragan, Benjamin-Gunnar Cohrs et al.) carried on with this work.

Sacred choral works
Bruckner was a devoutly religious man, and composed numerous sacred works. He wrote a Te Deum, five psalm settings (including Psalm 150 in the 1890s), a Festive cantata, a Magnificat, about forty motets (among them eight settings of Tantum ergo, and three settings of both Christus factus est and Ave Maria), and at least seven Masses.

The three early Masses (Windhaager Messe, Kronstorfer Messe and Messe für den Gründonnerstag), composed between 1842 and 1844, were short Austrian Landmessen for use in local churches and did not always set all the numbers of the ordinary. His Requiem in D minor of 1849 is the earliest work Bruckner himself considered worthy of preservation. It shows the clear influence of Mozart's Requiem (also in D minor) and similar works of Michael Haydn. The seldom performed Missa solemnis, composed in 1854 for Friedrich Mayer's installation, was the last major work Bruckner composed before he started to study with Simon Sechter, with the possible exception of Psalm 146, a large work, for SATB soloists, double choir and orchestra.

The three Masses which Bruckner wrote in the 1860s and revised later on in his life are more often performed. The Masses numbered 1 in D minor and 3 in F minor are for solo singers, mixed choir, organ ad libitum and orchestra, while No. 2 in E minor is for mixed choir and a small group of wind instruments, and was written in an attempt to meet the Cecilians halfway. The Cecilians wanted to rid church music of instruments entirely. No. 3 was clearly meant for concert, rather than liturgical performance, and it is the only one of his Masses in which he set the first line of the Gloria, "Gloria in excelsis Deo", and of the Credo, "Credo in unum Deum", to music. In concert performances of the other Masses, these lines are intoned by a tenor soloist in the way a priest would, with a line of plainsong.

Secular vocal works

As a young man Bruckner sang in men's choirs and wrote music for them. Bruckner's secular choral music was mostly written for choral societies. The texts are always in German. Some of these works were written specifically for private occasions such as weddings, funerals, birthdays or name-days, many of these being dedicated to friends and acquaintances of the composer. This music is rarely performed. Biographer Derek Watson characterizes the pieces for men's choir as being "of little concern to the non-German listener". Of about 30 such pieces, a most unusual and evocative composition is the song Abendzauber (1878) for men's choir, man soloist, yodelers and four horns.

Bruckner also composed 20 Lieder, of which only a few have been published. The Lieder that Bruckner composed in 1861–1862 during his tuition by Otto Kitzler have not been WAB classified. In 2013 the Austrian National Library was able to acquire a facsimile of the Kitzler-Studienbuch, the autograph manuscript hitherto unavailable to the public. The facsimile is edited by Paul Hawkshaw and Erich Wolfgang Partsch in Band XXV of Bruckner's Gesamtausgabe.

Bruckner composed also five name-day cantatas, as well as two patriotic cantatas, Germanenzug and Helgoland, on texts by August Silberstein. Germanenzug (WAB 70), composed in 1863–1864, was Bruckner's first published work. Helgoland (WAB 71), for TTBB men's choir and large orchestra, was composed in 1893 and was Bruckner's last completed composition and the only secular vocal work that he thought worthy enough to bequeath to the Austrian National Library.

Other works
During his apprenticeship with Otto Kitzler, Bruckner composed three short orchestral pieces and a March in D minor as orchestration exercises. At that time he also wrote an Overture in G minor. These works, which are occasionally included in recordings of the symphonies, show already hints of Bruckner's emerging style.

A String Quartet in C minor and the additional Rondo in C minor, also composed in 1862, were discovered decades after Bruckner's death. The later String Quintet in F Major of 1879, contemporaneous with the Fifth and Sixth symphonies, has been frequently performed. The Intermezzo in D minor, which was intended to replace its scherzo, is not frequently performed.

A Symphonisches Präludium (Symphonic Prelude) in C minor was discovered by Mahler scholar Paul Banks in the Austrian National Library in 1974 in a piano duet transcription. Banks ascribed it to Gustav Mahler, and had it orchestrated by Albrecht Gürsching. In 1985 Wolfgang Hiltl, who had retrieved the original score by Rudolf Krzyzanowski, had it published by Doblinger (issued in 2002). According to scholar Benjamin-Gunnar Cohrs, the stylistic examination of this "prelude" shows that it is all Bruckner's. Possibly Bruckner had given a draft-score to his pupil Krzyzanowski, which already contained the string parts and some important lines for woodwind and brass, as an exercise in instrumentation.

Bruckner's Two Aequali of 1847 for three trombones are solemn, brief works. The Military march of 1865 is an occasional work as a gesture of appreciation for the Militär-Kapelle der Jäger-Truppe of Linz. Abendklänge of 1866 is a short character piece for violin and piano.

Bruckner also wrote a Lancer-Quadrille (c. 1850) and a few other small works for piano. Most of this music was written for teaching purposes. Sixteen other pieces for piano, which Bruckner composed in 1862 during his tuition by Kitzler, have not been WAB classified. A facsimile of these pieces is found in the Kitzler-Studienbuch.

Bruckner was a renowned organist at the St Florian's Priory, where he improvised frequently. Those improvisations were usually not transcribed, so that only a few of his works for organ has survived. The five Preludes in E-flat major (1836–1837), classified WAB 127 and WAB 128, as well as a few other WAB-unclassified works, which have been found in Bruckner's Präludienbuch, are probably not by Bruckner.

Bruckner never wrote an opera, and as much as he was a fan of Wagner's music dramas, he was uninterested in drama. In 1893 he thought about writing an opera called Astra based on a novel by Gertrud Bollé-Hellmund. Although he attended performances of Wagner's operas, he was much more interested in the music than the plot. After seeing Wagner's Götterdämmerung, he asked: "Tell me, why did they burn the woman at the end?" Nor did Bruckner ever write an oratorio.

Bruckner Gesamtausgabe
Published by Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag in Vienna, the Bruckner Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Bruckner's Critical Complete Edition) comprises three successive editions.
 * The first edition (1934–1944, Editorial Head: Robert Haas) included 'hybrid' scores for Symphonies 2 and 8 and other similar conflations for some other revised works.
 * In the second edition (1951–1989, Editorial Head: Leopold Nowak) Nowak et al. went about publishing several versions of some works, in the process correcting some mistakes of Haas. After Nowak's resignation, (1990 onwards, Editorial Head: Herbert Vogg) William Carragan, Paul Hawkshaw, Benjamin-Gunnar Cohrs et al. are in the process of reviewing and further correcting the work of Haas and Nowak.
 * In 2011 it was decided to issue a new edition (editorial board: Paul Hawkshaw, Thomas Leibnitz, Andreas Lindner, Angela Pachovsky, Thomas Röder), which will include the content of the current edition and integrate it with sources that had been retrieved since its publication.

Reception in the 20th century
Because of the long duration and vast orchestral canvas of much of his music, Bruckner's popularity has greatly benefited from the introduction of long-playing media and from improvements in recording technology.

Decades after his death, the Nazis strongly approved of Bruckner's music because they saw it as expressing the zeitgeist of the German volk, and Hitler even consecrated a bust of Bruckner in a widely photographed ceremony in 1937 at Regensburg's Walhalla temple. Bruckner's music was among the most popular in Nazi Germany.

Near the end of World War II, Adolf Hitler became enamored with the music of Bruckner, and, as a result, planned to convert the monastery of St. Florian in Linz – where Bruckner had played the organ, and where he was buried – into a repository of Bruckner's manuscripts. Hitler evicted the monks from the building and personally paid for the restoration of the organ and the institution of a Bruckner study center there. He also paid for the Haas collection of Bruckner's works to be published, and himself purchased material for the proposed library. Additionally, Hitler caused the founding of the Bruckner Symphony Orchestra, which began presenting concerts in Fall 1943. His plan for one of the bell towers in Linz to play a theme from Bruckner's Fourth Symphony never came to pass. The Adagio from Bruckner's Seventh Symphony was broadcast by German radio (Deutscher Reichsrundfunk) when it announced the news of Hitler's death on 1 May 1945.

Today the Brucknerhaus in Linz, which opened in 1974, is named after him.

The approval by Hitler and the Nazis of his music did not hurt Bruckner's standing in the postwar media, and several movies and TV productions in Europe and the United States have used excerpts from his music ever since the 1950s, as they already did in the 1930s. Nor did the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra ever ban Bruckner's music as they have Wagner's, even recording the Eighth Symphony with Zubin Mehta.

Bruckner's symphonic works, much maligned in Vienna in his lifetime, now have an important place in the tradition and musical repertoire of the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra.

In popular culture
The life of Bruckner was portrayed in Jan Schmidt-Garre's 1995 film Bruckner's Decision, which focuses on his recovery in an Austrian spa. Ken Russell's TV movie The Strange Affliction of Anton Bruckner, starring Peter Mackriel, also fictionalizes Bruckner's real-life stay at a sanatorium because of obsessive-compulsive disorder (or 'numeromania' as it was then described).

In addition, Visconti used the music of Bruckner for his Senso (1954), its plot concerned with the war Italy waged against Austria in 1866. The score by Carl Davis for the restoration of the 1925 film Ben-Hur takes "inspiration from Bruckner to achieve reverence in biblical scenes."

title: Anton Bruckner


text:
Julus

Julus may refer to:

 * Ascanius, also known as Julus, a king in Roman mythology
 * Julus (millipede), a genus of millipedes in the family Julidae

title: Julus


text:
Henry Hudson

Henry Hudson (c. 1565 – disappeared 23 June 1611) was an English sea explorer and navigator during the early 17th century, best known for his explorations of present-day Canada and parts of the Northeastern United States.

In 1607 and 1608, Hudson made two attempts on behalf of English merchants to find a rumoured Northeast Passage to Cathay via a route above the Arctic Circle. In 1609, he landed in North America on behalf of the Dutch East India Company and explored the region around the modern New York metropolitan area. Looking for a Northwest Passage to Asia on his ship Halve Maen ("Half Moon"), he sailed up the Hudson River, which was later named after him, and thereby laid the foundation for Dutch colonization of the region. His contributions to the exploration of the New World were significant and lasting. His voyages helped to establish European contact with the native peoples of North America and contributed to the development of trade and commerce.

On his final expedition, while still searching for the Northwest Passage, Hudson became the first European to see Hudson Strait and the immense Hudson Bay. In 1611, after wintering on the shore of James Bay, Hudson wanted to press on to the west, but most of his crew mutinied. The mutineers cast Hudson, his son, and six others adrift; the Hudsons and their companions were never seen again.

Early life
Virtually nothing of Hudson's early life is known for certain. His year of birth is variously estimated between 1560 and 1570. He may have been born in London and it is possible that his father was an alderman of that city. When Hudson first entered the historical record in 1607, he was already an experienced mariner with sufficient credentials to be commissioned the leader of an expedition charged with a search for a trade route across the North Pole.

Expeditions of 1607 and 1608
In 1607, the Muscovy Company of England hired Hudson to find a northerly route to the Pacific coast of Asia. At the time, the English were engaged in an economic battle with the Dutch for control of northwest routes. It was thought that, because the sun shone for three months in the northern latitudes in the summer, the ice would melt, and a ship could make it across the "top of the world".

On 1 May 1607, Hudson sailed with a crew of ten men and a boy on the 80-ton Hopewell. They reached the east coast of Greenland on 13 May, coasting northward until 22 May. Here the party named a headland "Young's Cape", a "very high mount, like a round castle" near it "Mount of God's Mercy" and land at 73° north latitude "Hold with Hope". After turning east, they sighted "Newland" (Spitsbergen) on 27 May near the mouth of the great bay Hudson later simply named the "Great Indraught" (Isfjorden).

On 13 July, Hudson and his crew estimated that they had sailed as far north as 80° 23′ N, but more likely only reached 79° 23′ N. The following day they entered what Hudson later in the voyage named "Whales Bay" (Krossfjorden and Kongsfjorden), naming its northwestern point "Collins Cape" (Kapp Mitra) after his boatswain, William Collins. They sailed north the following two days. On 16 July, they reached as far north as Hakluyt's Headland (which Thomas Edge says Hudson named on this voyage) at 79° 49′ N, thinking they saw the land continue to 82° N (Svalbard's northernmost point is 80° 49′ N) when really it trended to the east. Encountering ice packed along the north coast, they were forced to turn back south. Hudson wanted to make his return "by the north of Greenland to Davis his Streights (Davis Strait), and so for Kingdom of England", but ice conditions would have made this impossible. The expedition returned to Tilbury Hope on the River Thames on 15 September.

Hudson reported large numbers of whales in Spitsbergen waters during this voyage. Many authors credit his reports as the catalyst for several nations sending whaling expeditions to the islands. This claim is contentious, others have pointed to strong evidence that it was Jonas Poole's reports in 1610, that led to the establishment of English whaling, and voyages of Nicholas Woodcock and Willem Cornelisz van Muyden in 1612, which led to the establishment of Dutch, French and Spanish whaling. The whaling industry itself was built by neither Hudson nor Poole—both were dead by 1612.

In 1608, English merchants of the East India and Muscovy Companies again sent Hudson in the Hopewell to attempt to locate a passage to the Indies, this time to the east around northern Russia. Leaving London on 22 April, the ship travelled almost 2500 mi, making it to Novaya Zemlya well above the Arctic Circle in July, but even in the summer they found the ice impenetrable and turned back, arriving at Gravesend on 26 August.

Alleged discovery of Jan Mayen
According to Thomas Edge, "William [sic] Hudson" in 1608 discovered an island he named "Hudson's Tutches" (Touches) at 71° N, the latitude of Jan Mayen. However, records of Hudson's voyages suggest that he could only have come across Jan Mayen in 1607 by making an illogical detour, and historians have pointed out that Hudson himself made no mention of it in his journal. There is also no cartographical proof of this supposed discovery.

Jonas Poole in 1611 and Robert Fotherby in 1615 both had possession of Hudson's journal while searching for his elusive Hold-with-Hope—which is now believed to have been on the east coast of Greenland—but neither had any knowledge of any discovery of Jan Mayen, an achievement which was only later attributed to Hudson. Fotherby eventually stumbled across Jan Mayen, thinking it a new discovery and naming it "Sir Thomas Smith's Island", though the first verifiable records of the discovery of the island had been made a year earlier, in 1614.

Expedition of 1609
In 1609, Hudson was chosen by merchants of the Dutch East India Company in the Netherlands to find an easterly passage to Asia. While awaiting orders and supplies in Amsterdam, he heard rumours of a northwest route to the Pacific through North America. Hudson had been told to sail through the Arctic Ocean north of Russia, into the Pacific and so to the Far East. Hudson departed Amsterdam on 4 April, in command of the Dutch ship Halve Maen (English: Half Moon). He could not complete the specified (eastward) route because ice blocked the passage, as with all previous such voyages, and he turned the ship around in mid-May while somewhere east of Norway's North Cape. At that point, acting outside his instructions, Hudson pointed the ship west and decided to try to seek a westerly passage through North America.

They reached the Grand Banks of Newfoundland on 2 July, and in mid-July made landfall near the LaHave area of Nova Scotia. Here they encountered Indigenous peoples in Canada who were accustomed to trading with the French; they were willing to trade beaver pelts, but apparently no trades occurred. The ship stayed in the area about ten days, the crew replacing a broken mast and fishing for food. On the 25 July, a dozen men from the Halve Maen, using muskets and small cannon, went ashore and assaulted the village near their anchorage. They drove the people from the settlement and took their boat and other property—probably pelts and trade goods.

On 4 August, the ship was at Cape Cod, from which Hudson sailed south to the entrance of the Chesapeake Bay. Rather than entering the Chesapeake he explored the coast to the north, finding Delaware Bay but continuing on north. On 3 September, he reached the estuary of the river that initially was called the "North River" or "Mauritius" and now carries his name. He was not the first European to discover the estuary, though, as it had been known since the voyage of Giovanni da Verrazzano in 1524.

On 6 September 1609, John Colman of his crew was killed by natives with an arrow to his neck. Hudson sailed into the Upper New York Bay on 11 September, and the following day encountered a group of 28 Lenape canoes, buying oysters and beans from the Native Americans, and then began a journey up what is now known as the Hudson River. Over the next ten days his ship ascended the river, reaching a point near Stuyvesant Landing (Old Kinderhook), and the ship's boat with five crew members ventured to the vicinity of present-day Albany.

On 23 September, Hudson decided to return to Europe. He put in at Dartmouth, England on 7 November, and was detained by authorities who wanted access to his log. He managed to pass the log to the Dutch ambassador to England, who sent it, along with his report, to Amsterdam.

While exploring the river, Hudson had traded with several native groups, mainly obtaining furs. His voyage was used to establish Dutch claims to the region and to the fur trade that prospered there when a trading post was established at Albany in 1614. New Amsterdam on Manhattan Island became the capital of New Netherland in 1625.

Expedition of 1610–1611
In 1610, Hudson obtained backing for another voyage, this time under the English flag. The funding came from the Virginia Company and the British East India Company. At the helm of his new ship, the Discovery, he stayed to the north—some claim he deliberately stayed too far south on his Dutch-funded voyage—reached Iceland on 11 May, the south of Greenland on 4 June, and rounded the southern tip of Greenland.

On 25 June, the explorers reached what is now the Hudson Strait at the northern tip of Labrador. Following the southern coast of the strait on 2 August, the ship entered Hudson Bay. Excitement was very high due to the expectation that the ship had finally found the Northwest Passage through the continent. Hudson spent the following months mapping and exploring its eastern shores, but he and his crew did not find a passage to Asia. In November, the ship became trapped in the ice in James Bay, and the crew moved ashore for the winter.

Mutiny
When the ice cleared in the spring of 1611, Hudson planned to use his Discovery to further explore Hudson Bay with the continuing goal of discovering the Passage; however, most of the members of his crew ardently desired to return home. Matters came to a head and much of the crew mutinied in June. Descriptions of the successful mutiny are one-sided, because the only survivors who could tell their story were the mutineers and those who went along with the mutiny.

In the latter class was ship's navigator, Abacuk Pricket, a survivor who kept a journal that was to become one of the sources for the narrative of the mutiny. According to Pricket, the leaders of the mutiny were Henry Greene and Robert Juet. The latter, a navigator, had accompanied Hudson on the 1609 expedition, and his account is said to be "the best contemporary record of the voyage". Pricket's narrative tells how the mutineers set Hudson, his teenage son John, and seven crewmen—men who were either sick and infirm or loyal to Hudson—adrift from the Discovery in a small shallop, an open boat, effectively marooning them in Hudson Bay. The Pricket journal reports that the mutineers provided the castaways with clothing, powder and shot, some pikes, an iron pot, some food, and other miscellaneous items.

Disappearance
After the mutiny, Hudson's shallop broke out oars and tried to keep pace with the Discovery for some time. Pricket recalled that the mutineers finally tired of the David–Goliath pursuit and unfurled additional sails aboard the Discovery, enabling the larger vessel to leave the tiny open boat behind. Hudson and the other seven aboard the shallop were never seen again. Despite subsequent searches, including those conducted by Thomas Button in 1612 and by Zachariah Gillam in 1668–1670, their fate is unknown.

Pricket's reliability
While Pricket's account is one of the few surviving records of the voyage, its reliability has been questioned by some historians. Pricket's journal and testimony have been severely criticized for bias, on two grounds. Firstly, prior to the mutiny the alleged leaders of the uprising, Greene and Juet, had been friends and loyal seamen of Hudson. Secondly, Greene and Juet did not survive the return voyage to England (Juet, who had been the navigator on the return journey, died of starvation a few days before the company reached Ireland ). Pricket knew he and the other survivors of the mutiny would be tried in England for piracy, and it would have been in his interest, and the interest of the other survivors, to put together a narrative that would place the blame for the mutiny upon men who were no longer alive to defend themselves.

The Pricket narrative became the controlling story of the expedition's disastrous end. Only eight of the thirteen mutinous crewmen survived the return voyage to Europe. They were arrested in England, and some were put on trial, but no punishment was imposed for the mutiny. One theory holds that the survivors were considered too valuable as sources of information to execute, as they had travelled to the New World and could describe sailing routes and conditions.

Later developments
In 1612, Nicolas de Vignau claimed he saw wreckage of an English ship on the shores of James Bay, located on the southern end of Hudson Bay—while this was discounted at the time by Samuel de Champlain, historians believe it may have credence.

British-born Canadian author Dorothy Harley Eber (1925–2022) collected Inuit testimonies that she thought made reference to Hudson and his son after the mutiny. According to these, an old man with a long white beard and a young boy arrived in a small wooden boat. The Inuit had never seen a white person before, but they took them to an encampment and fed them. After the old man died, the Inuit tethered the boy to one of their houses so he would not run away. Despite the long time passed, the story might be given some credence after long-ignored Inuit testimonies proved reliable enough to lead to the discovery of the wrecks of the two ships in Franklin's lost expedition, HMS Erebus (1826) and HMS Terror (1813), in the 2010s. Charles Francis Hall, who searched for Franklin in the mid-19th century, also collected Inuit stories that he interpreted as references to the even earlier expedition of Martin Frobisher, who explored the area and mined fool's gold in 1578.

In the late 1950s, a 150 lb stone near Deep River, Ontario, which is approximately 600 km south of James Bay, was found to have carving on it with Hudson's initials (H. H.), the year 1612, and the word "captive". While lettering on the stone was consistent with English maps of the 17th century, the Geological Survey of Canada was unable to determine when the carving was made.

Legacy
The bay visited by and named after Hudson is three times the size of the Baltic Sea, and its many large estuaries afford access to otherwise landlocked parts of Western Canada and the Arctic. This allowed the Hudson's Bay Company to exploit a lucrative fur trade along its shores for more than two centuries, growing powerful enough to influence the history and present international boundaries of western North America.

Along with Hudson Bay and Hudson Strait in Canada, many other topographical features and landmarks are named for Hudson. The Hudson River in New York and New Jersey is named after him, as are Hudson County, New Jersey, the Henry Hudson Bridge, the Henry Hudson Parkway, and the city of Hudson, New York.

title: Henry Hudson


text:
Talk:Holocaust revisionism

2004
I think this should discuss the issue of revisionism with a link to historical revisionism and a link to Holocaust denial and a discussion of generally-accepted and not-accepted revision as regards the Holocaust. For example, one revisionist claim is that the numbers of concentration camp victims were inflated. In some cases, particularly as regards the number of Russian and Slav victims, this appears to have been true, since the Soviets inflated the number of non-Jewish victims for politican reasons (to make it appear as if the Jews were not specially targetted, and the Russians were equal victims). On the other hand, many revisionist claims, especially the ones that deny the Holocaust occured at all, are not even close to true.

There should also be some discussion of the political issues. For example, some legitimate revisionism is initially opposed by those who hold sacred absolutely anything having to do with the Holocaust, and is thus detrimental to legitimate history. On the other hand, some purported revisionism is done by those more interested in anti-Semitism than in accurate history, and is therefore also detrimental to legitimate history. --Delirium 06:50, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps this page should be merged with Holocaust denial, which seems to address these issues. --AaronSw 06:18, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It would be better if we could write a reasonable article on revisionism, since denial and revisionism are different issues, but if Ezra continues to insist that any attempt to do so is vandalism while at the same time supporting what is quite clearly a biased article (not to mention formatted terribly) that may be necessary. --Caliper 17:20, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

There has been little to no discussion of this particular entry vs. the Holocaust denial entry since it was protected in the wake of the last flame war. User:Ezra appears to have given up on Wikipedia already, and no one else appears interested in a separate entry on Holocaust revisionism vs. denial. Therefore, unless there are any other objections, I will be redirecting this entry back to the Holocaust denial entry, the way it was before Ezra changed it. --Modemac 08:35, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Haha... this was going to be my project for today, but perhaps this is for the best. There is, after all, an explaination of revisionism on the denial page.  --Caliper 17:24, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

I oppose the re-direct to Holocaust denial. Holocaust revivisionism is a different, and is often a more accurate term. I mean, one could defend the view that Hitler didn't order the Holocaust because there is no explicit written order by Hitler. To lump this view together with Holocaust denial is, I think, unfair and inaccurate. Andries 19:08, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It is a violation of NPOV to conflate Historical revisionism with Holocaust denial. The logical relationship between the categories is simple, and factually indisputable: Historical revisionism is a superset of Holocaust revisionism, which in turn is a superset of Holocaust denial. Redirecting the article on Holocaust revisionism to an article on Holocaust denial is a transparent application of propaganda techniques, painting all revisionism pertaining to the Holocaust with the brush of apology for genocide. This page is the logical future destination for material on the application of the methods of historical revisionism to the Holocaust which does not qualify as Holocaust denial. Aminorex 05:04, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * The term Holocaust revisionism refers to activities which do not fall under the activities done by historical revisionists, since Holocaust revisionism is not historical enquiry, but rather attempts to prove a pre-ordained conclusion. Moreover, "policitally unpopular" is inherently POV, and implies that the issues historians have with Holocaust revisionism are political, rather than historical, in nature.  If you discover a type of Holocaust revisionism that is true historical revisionism, rather than just an attempt to put a more acceptable face one Holocaust denial, then a non-redirect might make sense. Jayjg  |  (Talk)  15:48, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * found two examples of revised numerical estimates of death at a camp and individual.ghetto numbers which I believe qualify as.true revisionism so made adjustments. Many areas of history have adjustments by reputable scholars that go unprotested so I think it is possible to find more of this. To show how the accepted view has changed over time. Highlighting well sourced revisions as opposed to bad scholarship negation masquerading as it could do more to inform people than a squelching "there were no revisions only denials" message sent by a redirect. --Ranze (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Historians revise things all the times, but that's not what "Holocaust revisionism" is, and none of the sources you have brought indicate that their topic is "Holocaust revisionism". Your claims that these "examples... qualify as true revisionism" are pure original research. Please see the section at the bottom of this page. Jayjg (talk) 23:04, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Historians revising things is exactly what historical revisionism is. The historian making a revision does not actually have to use the word revisionism for it to be recognized as that. Something as obvious as reestimated statistics is clearly a revision.
 * That a change is a revision is not OR that is basic language. They are synonymous. The changes are sourced with references. Redirecting Holocaust revisionism to Holocaust denial is like redirecting science to pseudoscience because it claims to be science. --Ranze (talk) 08:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Page protection
I've protected because of the reverting triggered by, who wants this version but apparently without discussion here. Jab, if you want your edits to stick, you'll need to provide scholarly/reputable sources showing that Holocaust revisionism is not the same thing as Holocaust denial, and you would have to avoid original research. Perhaps you could start an article in your userspace and discuss it here when it's ready? SlimVirgin (talk) 23:21, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * First since this page is redirected to Holocaust denial it is more reasonable to discuss the removal of the reversion there -- which I did. Redirection is particularly problematic because it gets rid of not only the entire article but also the discussion of the redirection.  Secondly, the meaning of "holocaust revisionism" as an English language phrase is obvious by construction -- not by original research.  Moreover, there is ample precedent for distinguishing the two since legislative bodies and courts have not outlawed "historical revisionism" but have outlawed "holocaust denial".  People are being sent to prison or set free based on the distinction so it is hardly up to some "moderators" to claim the distinction doesn't exist.  If anything is POV and original research that is.  I already posted an article which should be an adequate stub -- a stub which linked to Holocaust denial for those concerned with that issue.  It was clearly about "holocaust revisionism" and it was clearly NPOV.  It was, of course, deleted.  Jim Bowery 23:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jim, the problem with your stub was that it was original research, because you were putting forward your own arguments and not using arguments from reputable sources — and in this case reputable would mean scholarly or legal, or at minimum, articles from very good newspapers. The meaning of Holocaust revisionism is not obvious by its construction: it depends, like all language, on how it's used, and the problem here is that all Holocaust deniers seem to call themselves revisionists, but it's not clear that there are revisionists who don't fall into the denial camp. However, the point is that you have to find reputable sources who agree with you, and then write up your article using only those sources, and not expressing any of your own views. Then it will count as an encyclopedic entry and you can put it up for review. For example, you wrote that people are being sent to prison or set free on the basis of the distinction: that's clearly an important point if you can source it. There might be a judge's summing up you could quote from, for example.

By all means copy this to the Holocaust denial talk page if you'd rather continue there. I won't be saying any more about it because I protected the page, and I'm only posting this here by way of explanation, and an attempt to be helpful, but I can't get involved any further. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:58, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * By your criterion any article that doesn't have every fact referenced with an "authoritative source" is original research. No one disputes the facts that I posted.  Its not original research and I referenced a Weisenthal article with link. Jim Bowery 01:37, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Every sentence doesn't need a source, but every contentious edit, or any edit that is challenged, does have to be sourced to a reputable or credible publication, and if it's not, any editor may remove it. Also, if the facts are used to promote a particular position, and that position isn't sourced to a credible publication, that also counts as original research. See No original research and Verifiability, both of which are policy. SlimVirgin (talk) 02:19, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * No you are still very very confused. When I say no one disputes the facts I present I mean it -- I don't mean they might dispute the "argument" I put together because I am not making an argument.  Are you confused by the fact that the Weisenthal center moved the web page describing the reduction of the death toll at Auschwitz?  That's the only way I can make sense of your responses to my  virtual repetition of their argument which you can read at the bottom of this linked page.  This isn't original research.  The history of the Holocaust has been revised in ways that even the Simon Weisenhtal Center agrees with.  Are you saying the Simon Weisenthal Center is a bunch of anti-Semites and neo-Nazis?  I may sound like a satirist but when you say there is no such thing as "Holocaust revisionism" that isn't "Holocaust denial" it is an abuse of the English language. Jim Bowery 05:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I can't carry on arguing about it, but the article you wrote read like a personal essay, not an encyclopedia entry. It's meant to be about revisionism, and yet the only point you mentioned was the example you gave above, which arguably has nothing to do with revisionism, and if it does, you have to say why. But you'd have to start by saying what revisionism is, using good sources, and why it arguably isn't the same thing as Holocaust denial, again using good sources. My guess is that the absence of any of that was why you were being reverted, and that an article written in an encyclopedic style wouldn't be reverted. You might consider writing it in your user subspace and asking the other editors to review it there, rather than getting into a revert war. SlimVirgin (talk) 05:36, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * No I'm not going to waste my time with a futile exercise. It appears we have multiple admins who are incapable of rational thought when it comes to Jewish issues.  Clearly going through a "process' with this sort of environment is worthless.  You'll be hearing from me via another route.  Jim Bowery 19:19, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * "Another route"? That sounds ominous... Jayjg (talk)  20:32, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ominous? Well, yeah. Self-confessed Stormfront activists are by nature ominous. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 20:41, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Whewps, bad cache. I think the redirect needs to be above the pp notice, though.Hipocrite 13:43, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Yet another attempt to separate "revisionism" from "denial"
Using some of the text that had previously been entered into this entry, I've taken a stab at an article describing the difference between "Holocaust revisionism" (the use of genuine historical fact to correct historical errors concerning the Holocaust) and "holocaust denial" (the conspiracy theory that the Holocaust never happened). Take a look at Holocaust revisionism/worksheet and feel free to take part. --Modemac 13:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Recreation
Very surprised this does does exist. If reverting to previous versions is controversial we can make a stub.from scratch. Not all revising of events is enough to demote them from Holocaust status, like adjusting death counts attributed to certain camps or which rooms people were thought to have died in and how long people survived and so forth. --Ranze (talk) 04:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've restored the redirect. --jpgordon:==( o ) 20:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * noticed, restored the article, revisionism exists as a legitimate topic not merely tongue in cheek denialism. Please do not do that again. A link is provided and the relation to negationism explained. --Ranze (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "Holocaust revisionism" is a denialist euphemism for Holocaust denial, as the Holocaust denial article itself makes clear. The examples you've provided are pure original research; none of the sources you've used in your article indicate that what they are talking about is "Holocaust revisionism"; in fact, none of them even use the term. I'm restoring the re-direct - please do not undo this again. Jayjg (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "science" is a pseudoscientist euphemism for pseudoscience. Just because something is a euphemism does not make it the primary meaning of the term. An article saying revisionism should focus on actual revisionism on the topic not redirect to denialism/negationim masquerading as it. The pages do not actually have to use the conjoined term as its meaning is clearly explained. Just as a historian would not have to say "this is revisionism" when making new claims contradicting previous historical claims. If a change/revision is being put forth by reliable scholars and studies then that is revisionism. --Ranze (talk) 08:07, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Identifying revisionism
Just how picky are critics going to get on this? Do we not recognize words vary in tense conjugation and synonyms?

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3020959?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents for example, will someone dispute it because it says "revising the Holocaust" instead of word-for-word "holocaust revisionism" ?

Can someone suggest a.better.term to describe the article I am building? Would you prefer historical revisions of the Holocaust or something? Seems simpler to use the briefer synonymous phrase. --Ranze (talk) 08:12, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

 * Simple term? "History". Just put what's appropriate in Holocaust Denial; history is certainly welcome there. But the stuff you're listing doesn't warrant its own article; the first one, about the corrected memorial tablets, is interesting solely because it's a case where the Polish government was inflating the number of Polish victims with the intent of minimizing the Jewish victims; the number presented on the plaque was never considered by scholars to have any validity as regards the number of victims; the revision of the plaque is often used by deniers to say "look we are right the six million number must be wrong", which is why it's part of the "denial" article, and not the "holocaust" article. The other data is just historical corrections, not "holocaust revisionism" or "denial". --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 14:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

 * All forms of the phrase "Holocaust revision" have been hijacked by the denialists to deny they're denying. It's the same reason "Global warming skepticism" can now only mean "Global warming denial", or a biologist that wants to promote more utilization of living processes can no longer be called "pro-life".  If you have new Holocaust info that has any association with the deniers, it goes in  Holocaust denial.  If it doesn't, it goes in Holocaust.  Everyone's being judged to be either "for" or "against"; WP can't pretend there is a middle ground anymore, or "should be".  --A D Monroe III (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

 * I don't find your claim provable, and will point out that "revisionism" and "skepticism" are not synonyms. "Holocaust skeptic" would sound closer to "Holocaust denier" than to "Holocaust revisor". There is a world of difference between being skeptical that an event happened or denying that it happened compared to those who accept it happened but want to revise details that the current status quo accepts. This might be to adjust death counts up or down, to widen or narrow those who are viewed as being at fault for atrocities, estimates about when certain events happened, the specifics of how people were killed (Holocaust regardless, but how many of the dead died via gunshot and how many were gassed are things people might quibble about) are examples.
 * Wikipedia would not be pretending there is a middle ground, a middle ground certainly exist. The pressure to create a false dichotomy of "accept every detail of what historian X says or you don't think the Holocaust happened at all" is one we should be rejecting here. Ranze (talk) 01:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

 * We both agree that "revisionism" and "skepticism" are not synonyms grammatically, but that doesn't matter; all that matters is how sources use them when referring to the Holocaust. If the ones using "revision" are labeled by the majority RSs as being in the denial camp, that's our "proof" for COMMONNAME.  We can't change the sources, or even remotely influence them; we can only follow them, regardless of what we know to be WP:TRUTH.  --A D Monroe III (talk) 16:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

 * it would only be appropriate to put denialism-related history in that article, not revisionism in history which does not attempt to deny the Holocaust and is only revising statistics. The things listed here individually don't need articles but collectively they certainly do, they're not being observed elsewhere. I am not sure what difference you're trying to make between "corrections" and "revisions" here, sounds like the same thing. I would support you making a Holocaust corrections article but I'm not sure that would fulfill WP:COMMONNAME expectations. Ranze (talk) 01:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Holocaust revisionism