Talk:All the Things You Are

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Jazz Low‑importance

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

R&B and Soul Music Stub‑class

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

How many bars?

The article says it has 34 bars, but according to this picture, there are 36 bars.--Schwalker 14:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3 8-bar sections and one 12-bar section from my experience. These add up to 36. Eman235/talk 04:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's been a request to provide more context and better explanations of the technical details

I'm doing an experiment to see if playable musical examples can be successfully posted in Wikipedia music articles.

I would propose adding this kind of playable example to provide illustrative context for the song form description that is used in this article.

Play this example

I'm trying to find a way to place an <EMBED> tag into a Wikipedia article that would play a MIDI format file. This would allow a play controller to be placed immediately below the example score. It would look like this.

It does seem like the Wikimedia music guidlines would like all music sample postings to be in Ogg Vorbis format.

For this kind of example, an Ogg Vorbis posting would use immense resources compared to a MIDI posting (240Kb for .ogg, 4K for .mid). MIDI is a format universally recognized by web browsers as far as I know.

I did find that translating to Ogg Vorbis formatting using the highest possible bitrate setting produces an acceptable translation of a MIDI sequence. This causes the resulting sequence file size to blow up by a factor of 60.

DLuebbert (talk) 19:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trying a version using the Ogg Vorbis player:

Play the initial A section

Problems playing this file? See media help.

I'm satisfied with this last experiment. I will use this in the published article and will wait for feedback.

DLuebbert (talk) 21:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful. Thank you for helping me understand the tune. Renglish (talk) 14:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we still need the flag that this article may be too technical for a general audience?

All of the technical jargon now points to musical examples where the listener can hear for themselves each concept that is discussed. Any ideas for improvement now that we have playable examples?

DLuebbert (talk) 21:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DLuebbert, I think the article has improved much through your recent edits, especially the scores and the addition of midi-files (?, although unfortunately windows media player does not open them) are great. The Template:technical had been added on 03:56, 21 January 2008. Since the text of that version is still included in the current version, I'm not sure if the concerns of that editor for a "more accessible" article have been addressed yet. I'm not sure either, and actually don't believe, that this content could be communicated in a reasonable way without the use of symbols and terminology of music theory. Greetings, --Schwalker (talk) 10:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schwalker, thanks for your evaluation.

It ends up that I posted OggVorbis translations of the source MIDI files and used those for the playable examples in this article.

Do you know if it's a settled policy that all music examples should be in .ogg format? What would be the proper forum to discuss this question?

I think there might be a case to use MIDI format sequences to illustrate small melody and harmony examples. Similar scores with matching MIDI can be generated via web services in two or three minutes time. Doing a OGG translation plus the additional time to post the translation easily triples or quadruples the time necessary to post each example.

The likelihood that they would play on someone's browser in stock condition is greater than they would play OggVorbis format. I don't believe royalties are due any party for use of MIDI. MIDI sequences are usually hundreds of times smaller than a corresponding ogg file and would start playing much faster than an ogg because of the reduced data transfer. Storage costs and bandwidth for the project would also be better conserved if MIDI could be used in these cases.

I do agree that OGG format should be used to transmit excerpts taken from published recordings, where highest fidelity is necessary, since this avoids the possibility of needing to pay royalties to the companies that own the MP3 patents.--DLuebbert (talk) 04:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline

"The song was written for the musical Very Warm for May (1939)..."

and further down: Notable Recordings: Helen Forrest, Artie Shaw (1938) Joffboff (talk) 16:10, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]