ANyone knows where to get free sheet music?????????????

[lilpep4ever]

Does anyone know where to get Rhapsody in Blue in Gershwin sheetmusic? I need it for my school presentationwhere my project theme is Jazz and Blues...please help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gyzzzmo]

Hi,

isnt there a library with a music department in your neighbourhood?
You should look there and just copy the thing.

Gyzzzmo

is it a very important presentation or is it just for highschool?
For the last thing you could also do 'Take Five' from Brubeck. Everybody knows the theme.

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

Do you really need it for free? Is there a specific reason why you can't pay for it? I'm not sure if it's in public domain, (of course, it really depends on what country you live in) and I have never seen a free sheet music site that has it.

Try buying it. The thing about buying music rather than downloading it and printing it is that you value it a lot more. When I first bought my own book of Beethoven sonatas when I was 12, I appreciated it more than I would have if I would have just printed it off of my computer.

Plus, the quality is better when you buy it, because you get it in a book, which is much sturdier and harder to lose.

If you cannot possibly stand the thought of paying for it -

www.pianofiles.com

Just do a search and email somebody that has it. However, be willing to trade something of your own first, because most people there will not give you something unless they expect something in return.

I hope I have helped.

[Awakening]

www.sheetmusicarchive.net

Should be the answer to all (or most) of your problems.

[Ludwig Van Rachabji]

www.sheetmusicarchive.net

Should be the answer to all (or most) of your problems.

Did you bother to read the post? They specifically said what they wanted, and sheetmusicarchive.net does not have it.

[SteinwayTony]

Do you really need it for free? Is there a specific reason why you can't pay for it? I'm not sure if it's in public domain, (of course, it really depends on what country you live in) and I have never seen a free sheet music site that has it.

Try buying it. The thing about buying music rather than downloading it and printing it is that you value it a lot more. When I first bought my own book of Beethoven sonatas when I was 12, I appreciated it more than I would have if I would have just printed it off of my computer.

Plus, the quality is better when you buy it, because you get it in a book, which is much sturdier and harder to lose.

If you cannot possibly stand the thought of paying for it -

www.pianofiles.com

Just do a search and email somebody that has it. However, be willing to trade something of your own first, because most people there will not give you something unless they expect something in return.

I hope I have helped.

Glad someone feels the same way I do.  But on this forum and others there seems to be a growing demand for "free" sheet music.

If it's too good to be true, it probably is.  If you download a PDF or something, you don't know what edition you're getting, not to mention it will look painfully tacky on your music rack.  Whenever I develop the slightest interest in a piece I buy the score.  If money is an issue then buy a Dover or a Schirmer edition...the libraries are huge.  If money isn't a problem then buy a high-quality edition with intelligent scholarly comments (my favorites are Wiener Urtext and G. Henle) and you will treasure it forever.

[Troldhaugen]

If you really want to play Rhapsody in Blue, just buy one for yourself. I highly doubt it's in public domain. There are some risks/disadvantages associated with using free sheetmusic. I just would get one from a reputable publisher. 

[theodopolis]

Glad someone feels the same way I do.  But on this forum and others there seems to be a growing demand for "free" sheet music.

Personally, I have no qualms of conscience when it comes to Free Sheet Music. If the composer has left this world, then I have no sympathy for those trying to capitalise on that man's artistry.
It's a completely different story if the composer is still with us of course.

Thanks
Theodopolis

[SteinwayTony]

Personally, I have no qualms of conscience when it comes to Free Sheet Music. If the composer has left this world, then I have no sympathy for those trying to capitalise on that man's artistry.
It's a completely different story if the composer is still with us of course.

Thanks
Theodopolis

Conscience?

No.  It's just tacky and inconsistent.

[Stolzing]

https://www.piano.ru/ger.html

[theodopolis]

I have had experience on these types of sites who consider it stealing, criminal etc.

They cannot be denied as useful for score-reading, particularly when listening to music on the computer.

[Motrax]

As for computer-printed sheet music, it becomes perfectly pleasing to the eye if you just stick everythign neatly into a binder. Or you can even bind the pages nicely with a cover sheet and everything. Not to say I don't appreciate the feel of a good, solid book, but there's much too much music to go out and buy everything on a whim (for me, anyway. If I bought everything I wanted to play, I wouldn't be able to afford this internet connection, for starters...  )

[Troldhaugen]

I used to appreciate the value of free sheet music, but after seeing inconsistency between free scores and store-bought ones, I just decided not to resort to free sheet music at all. They could be good for just sight-reading, but not for serious pianists. Plus you cannot freely write on them with protective sheets covering them.

[aquariuswb]

The disadvantages of free online sheet music have already been pointed out, so a couple things in favor of them:

Firstly, and to me, most importantly, sheet music books (rather than individual scores) are a pain in the butt to use. Pages are constantly turning when you don't want them to, I find myself folding the book so that the pages stay put! By the time I'm done with one or two pieces, the book is not what I'd call in good condition.

Online sheet music, on the other hand, can be printed and nicely placed into a binder that basically gets rid of the above problem... furthermore, even if something happens to the version in the binder, you have it backed up on your computer ready to re-print on a whim.

On a related note, keeping your scores organized is obviously quite easy on the computer -- you also don't have to worry about losing it.

And of course, often times it's free!

And BTW, I still go out and buy sheet music, obviously, because you can't find everything for free online, and, as others have said, it is always best to compare editions and scholarly notes. But there is certainly merit to the online method, as well, IMO.

[bernhard]

https://www.findfreesheetmusic.com/pages/Piano/
(comprehensive guide to free sheet music sites)

https://www.free-scores.com/centre-uk.php?CATEGORIE=70&Submit=Show
(An even more comprehensive guide to free sheet music sites)

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[quasimodo]

Btw, is the two pianos version of Rhapsody in blue (played by Labeque sisters) an original Gershwin score or a third party arrangement ?

[Hmoll]

Personally, I have no qualms of conscience when it comes to Free Sheet Music. If the composer has left this world, then I have no sympathy for those trying to capitalise on that man's artistry.
It's a completely different story if the composer is still with us of course.

Thanks
Theodopolis

Nice try at rationalizing thievery.

If a composer has passed away, often proceeds from sales of his music go to his estate, which is usually the surviving family members, or descendents, as stipulated by his will. By stealing  music in this way you are going against the composers wishes. Publishers also make money by selling music, but they own the copyright, so they have a right to. They also have a right to protect their ownership from thieves.  Downloading music illegally is not a victimless crime. Publishers provide a service. Without them there would be no sheet music.

[aquariuswb]

Nice try at rationalizing thievery.

If a composer has passed away, often proceeds from sales of his music go to his estate, which is usually the surviving family members, or descendents, as stipulated by his will. By stealing  music in this way you are going against the composers wishes. Publishers also make money by selling music, but they own the copyright, so they have a right to. They also have a right to protect their ownership from thieves.  Downloading music illegally is not a victimless crime. Publishers provide a service. Without them there would be no sheet music.

Then would you say that getting sheet music in the public domain is immoral? I mean, you could go out and buy a version that has been edited, so that the proceeds go to the publisher and the composer's family (sometimes, and their cut is rarely more than dismal), but public domain versions are available for free, and in the sense that you are describing, would go "against the composers wishes." Legality and morality oftentimes have nothing to do with another. Sorry, but I side with Theodopolis on this one. I don't think Beethoven would really care that much if my Waldstein sheet music were free or bought from a publisher; I think he'd be flattered either way by the number of musicians out there still playing his music today.

[aquariuswb]

Futhermore, just because the publishers "have the copyright" does not mean they are MORALLY entitled to the proceeds. Maybe legally, but how do you know that the publisher didn't exploit or swindle the previous owner of the work? Did they write it? No, the composer wrote it.

Case in point (classical music aside for a second): Michael Jackson owns the rights to most of the Beatles songs. The funny thing is, before he bought them, Paul McCartney gave Jackson some business advice in general -- namely, to take a business opportunity when it's available (I don't know the specifics of their conversation, obviously, but stick with me for a second). When the rights to the Beatles songs were up for sale, Jackson actually outbid McCartney himself, the writer of the works! So, let me ask you: if you bought a Beatles sheet music book, would you honestly care if Michael Jackson did or did not get the proceeds? I doubt Paul McCartney, the composer in this case, would. The composer is even still alive in this case! His "wishes" were clearly that the proceeds would go to himself. So would obtaining a pirated version go against this? I'm just trying to point out that things are not as simple as you tried to make them. "Thievery" in the legal sense is one thing; but in the moral sense, wouldn't you say that Michael Jackson stole the rights to McCartney's music (I don't know if they are on good terms or not, but it's besides the point)?

https://www.snopes.com/music/artists/jackson.htm

[Hmoll]

Then would you say that getting sheet music in the public domain is immoral? I mean, you could go out and buy a version that has been edited, so that the proceeds go to the publisher and the composer's family (sometimes, and their cut is rarely more than dismal), but public domain versions are available for free, and in the sense that you are describing, would go "against the composers wishes." Legality and morality oftentimes have nothing to do with another. Sorry, but I side with Theodopolis on this one. I don't think Beethoven would really care that much if my Waldstein sheet music were free or bought from a publisher; I think he'd be flattered either way by the number of musicians out there still playing his music today.

I'm not talking about music in the public domain, and the thread is not about Beethoven's music.

Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" was published in 1924. Music published before 1923 in the U.S. is in the public domain. Music published from 1923-1963 has an initial copyright of 28 years, and that copyright can be renewed for an additional 67 years (the original 47 years was extended 20 years). If Gershwin or his estate renewed the copyright for "Rhapsody in Blue," it will be in the public domain in about 2018.

In terms of copyright owners swindling the artists, everyone knows that happens. Two wrongs don't make a right, though.   If you steal from the copyright holder and try to excuse your act on moral grounds, you're still stealing.

If it makes you feel better, though, go ahead and rationalize. 

[aquariuswb]

I'm not talking about music in the public domain, and the thread is not about Beethoven's music.

Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" was published in 1924. Music published before 1923 in the U.S. is in the public domain. Music published from 1923-1963 has an initial copyright of 28 years, and that copyright can be renewed for an additional 67 years (the original 47 years was extended 20 years). If Gershwin or his estate renewed the copyright for "Rhapsody in Blue," it will be in the public domain in about 2018.

In terms of copyright owners swindling the artists, everyone knows that happens. Two wrongs don't make a right, though.   If you steal from the copyright holder and try to excuse your act on moral grounds, you're still stealing.

If it makes you feel better, though, go ahead and rationalize. 

First of all, it's not about trying to rationalize so I feel better. To be capable of making myself feel better about it, I'd need to have a moral qualm with it in the first place -- which I don't. It's not about two wrongs making a right, either. I mean, with that kind of logic, then it was wrong of the world to war with Hitler's regime and stop the Holocaust, because killing is wrong, no?
You can call it whatever you want, including stealing. It's just a name. Point is, you have your morals, I have mine, and if a copyright holder swindles an artist for the rights to the music, I'd rather my money NOT go to the copyright holder.

You made a comment about "the composer's wishes," and I was just saying that there's a lot more to it than that. You argued that obtaining the sheet music without paying for it goes against the composer's wishes, as no profit will go to his/her family, and I am suggesting that with such logic, the public domain also goes against the composer's wishes -- no money is going to the families, let alone anybody, if the sheet music is free (obviously). And I also must point out that paying a publishing company has nothing to do with the composer's wishes, either, in most cases.

And I think we misunderstood each other in the first place. I was talking about public domain sheet music, which is free and legal, so the whole argument is kind of pointless in the first place I guess. And I was only using Beethoven as an example.

[xvimbi]

... Hitler ...

Wow, it took 21 posts to fulfill Godwin's Law. The discussions are getting tame

[aquariuswb]

Wow, it took 21 posts to fulfill Godwin's Law. The discussions are getting tame

Say as you will, but the logic holds true.

[puma]

I tried downloading Korsakov's score to the Flight of the Bumblebee - it was considered public domain.  But when I compared the score against a recording, I found so many errors,and so many privileges that I said the hell with it and bought the sheet music.  I think the comments mentioned here: you will enjoy the sheet music that much more, better accuracy, neat introductions, is all valid in regards to buying your own sheet music.

[aquariuswb]

I tried downloading Korsakov's score to the Flight of the Bumblebee - it was considered public domain.  But when I compared the score against a recording, I found so many errors,and so many privileges that I said the hell with it and bought the sheet music.  I think the comments mentioned here: you will enjoy the sheet music that much more, better accuracy, neat introductions, is all valid in regards to buying your own sheet music.

I think it boils down to this: if you buy a respected, scholarly edition, you can't go wrong. If you go for the free online sheet music, it's a hit or miss.

[xvimbi]

One has to distinguish between the music being in the public domain, and a certain edition being in the public domain. There is nothing wrong with obtaining scores of music that is in the public domain, provided that somebody was willing to type it out and distribute it for free. But if you decide to make copies of the Paderewski edition, you are in trouble, although Chopin's music is in the public domain.

[aquariuswb]

One has to distinguish between the music being in the public domain, and a certain edition being in the public domain. There is nothing wrong with obtaining scores of music that is in the public domain, provided that somebody was willing to type it out and distribute it for free. But if you decide to make copies of the Paderewski edition, you are in trouble, although Chopin's music is in the public domain.

Can you clarify? Are you talking about morality here or score quality / reliability?

[trix]

LOL:  I wonder if  lilpep4ever had any inkling of the debate his/her simple question for some sheet music would spark?...  They've never returned to this thread either; wonder if they got the sheets they were seeking?  (and wouldn't be afraid to admit it)...LOL....    

[xvimbi]

Can you clarify? Are you talking about morality here or score quality / reliability?

I guess you are referring to the word "trouble". If somone goes through the trouble to nicely edit a score, add comments, makes sure the score is well researched, there is a high print-quality, etc., and then sells it, no question would it be illegal to make copies of that edition. It does not matter that the underlying music is in the public domain.

[athykay]

I'm not sure if anyone posted this site or not.  I quickly scrolled through all of the philosophical debate and didn't see it.  Anyway, it's a great site and you can download up to two pieces per day, for free.  You can also pay for a CD that has the whole archive's worth of music.

https://www.sheetmusicarchive.net/index.cfm

[Hmoll]

I guess you are referring to the word "trouble". If somone goes through the trouble to nicely edit a score, add comments, makes sure the score is well researched, there is a high print-quality, etc., and then sells it, no question would it be illegal to make copies of that edition. It does not matter that the underlying music is in the public domain.

That's because some of the "intellectual property" - ie fingerings, comments, editorial suggestions,  and so on - belong to the editor/publisher.

[aquariuswb]

That's because some of the "intellectual property" - ie fingerings, comments, editorial suggestions,  and so on - belong to the editor/publisher.

Speaking of which, I'm kind of curious how others on this forum use the fingerings provided by scholars in particular editions. What I mean is, how strictly do you follow the fingerings? I tend to use them as a guide, or a recommendation. Sometimes I follow them exactly, but oftentimes I try my own fingerings that seem to fit my own playing better. What about you guys? (I don't have a teacher, BTW, but if you do have a teacher, how does your teacher feel about it? Does your teacher suggest fingerings other than those provided in the score you are using? Or does your teacher usually recommend following precisely the fingerings provided?)