# Teares before bedtime
**URL:** https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565
**Category:** Classical
**Tags:** style
**Created:** [February 22, 2018, 11:41pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565 "2018-02-22T23:41:44Z")
**Posts on this page:** 11
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 22, 2018, 11:41pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/1 "2018-02-22T23:41:45Z")
Started editing this: [Log in - MusicBrainz](https://beta.musicbrainz.org/work/caf5b4ea-bda8-4de3-950c-8a6c6bd01fbc)
The idea was to make the spellings consistent with each other and also with the original MS and Wikipedia. However I stopped at No.7, because I wasn’t sure that the remaining “divers pavans” should be prefixed with “Lachrimæ or seaven teares” at all. They are not part of that work although they were published together with it (as “Lachrimæ or seaven teares figured in seaven passionate pavans, with divers other pavans, galliards and allemands”). Arguably, the whole publication might be considered a collection rather than a work - in which case it would have 15 works - the Lachrimae and the other 14 divers pieces. Any thoughts?
---
### Author:  [@reosarevok](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/reosarevok)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 6:15am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/2 "2018-02-23T06:15:24Z")
FWIW both [IMSLP](http://imslp.org/wiki/Lachrimae,_or_Seven_Tears_(Dowland,_John)) and [Allmusic](https://www.allmusic.com/composition/lachrimae-or-seaven-teares-for-5-viols-violins-lute-mc0002369686) consider them all part of the work. I’d still say this is definitely a collection rather than a “play this from start to end” work, yeah - but I’d just indicate that with the work-work “part of collection” attribute. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@obtext](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/obtext)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 8:17am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/3 "2018-02-23T08:17:20Z")
> [@MetaTunes](#):
>
> Arguably, the whole publication might be considered a collection rather than a work - in which case it would have 15 works - the Lachrimae and the other 14 divers pieces. Any thoughts?
Sounds right to me. The Lachrimae Pavans seem like they should be a work with seven sub-works: they are variations on a theme, and “there has been speculation that they form some sort of narrative”. The others would then be separate works, but all belonging to one collection.
---
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 9:29am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/4 "2018-02-23T09:29:48Z")
> [@reosarevok](#):
>
> but I’d just indicate that with the work-work “part of collection” attribute
Surely I should remove the prefixes from the “divers” work names as well - they make no sense.
---
### Author:  [@dosoe](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/dosoe)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 11:00am UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/5 "2018-02-23T11:00:01Z")
BTW, is there a way to change a work into a collection/Series? I think it would be appropriate for [Work “Der getreue Music-Meister” - MusicBrainz](https://musicbrainz.org/work/3add4f53-f8f4-40cc-a2bc-0957cb5dd86d) .
---
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 2:12pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/6 "2018-02-23T14:12:32Z")
Those look like they already have a “part of collection” relationship.
---
### Author:  [@dosoe](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/dosoe)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 3:57pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/7 "2018-02-23T15:57:54Z")
Yes, but is it a work, or would a series be more appropriate?
---
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2018, 4:45pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/8 "2018-02-23T16:45:01Z")
Obviously @ProfChris thinks it a work, otherwise he wouldn’t have laboriously linked them all that way. It does look a bit like a series though. I’d be interested in what the style-meisters think.
---
### Author:  [@ProfChris](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/ProfChris)
#### Post date: [February 24, 2018, 8:08pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/9 "2018-02-24T20:08:52Z")
Last year there was a discussion on Works and parts of Works etc… (Unfortunately I can’t find the reference to it). My recollection of the conclusion was that Series should not contain a set of works, and that the Work hierarchy with the modifiers of Movement, Number, Collection… should be used wherever Works are involved. Hence “Der Getreue Music-Meister” [[Work “Der getreue Music-Meister” - MusicBrainz](https://musicbrainz.org/work/3add4f53-f8f4-40cc-a2bc-0957cb5dd86d)] is a container Work rather than a Series
---
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 24, 2018, 8:28pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/10 "2018-02-24T20:28:19Z")
> [@Levels in the structure of works](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/levels-in-the-structure-of-works/293047/127):
>
> Apologies for not replying earlier - I seem to have missed some of the discussion. I agree with the structure proposed. Suggest that “Collection” here is used to denote works which are related either by the composer (Wagner’s Ring Cycle), or by being frequently recorded/performed together (Bach’s Well Tempered Klavier Book 1). IMO the use of this “Collection” relationship versus the Work/Series relationship needs clarification. Perhaps the latter should be reserved for Opus (Bach BWV series)…
---
### Author:  [@MetaTunes](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/MetaTunes)
#### Post date: [February 27, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/teares-before-bedtime/361565/11 "2018-02-27T22:52:14Z")
> [@reosarevok](#):
>
> I’d still say this is definitely a collection rather than a “play this from start to end” work, yeah - but I’d just indicate that with the work-work “part of collection” attribute.
> [@obtext](#):
>
> Sounds right to me. The Lachrimae Pavans seem like they should be a work with seven sub-works: they are variations on a theme, and “there has been speculation that they form some sort of narrative”. The others would then be separate works, but all belonging to one collection.
I have made the edits which I hope reflect this thinking correctly. This all looks a bit messy until the edits go through, so if anyone could help that along, I’d be grateful 😀
I realise I also ought to turn the "ae"s into "æ"s for the sub-works too, but I’ll leave that after the structure is resolved.