This is a very complete work. You get a very detailed description of every important notation system used from 900 to 1600. Even the slightly different systems, like Milán's vihuela tablature, are not just mentioned... they are discussed.
If you are interested in white notation, tablature (lute or keyboard), you need this book.

This is by far the best book on musical notation. It's field covers the notation of soloist music (keyboard as well as lute tablatures) and ensemble music (vocal or instrumental). It is very coherent, having lots of facsimiles which can be transcribed. The transcriptions are offered at the appendix, so the reader may first try to transcribe the examples by himself. Generally, any musician with no great knowledge of theory can learn the musical notation of the past centuries using Apel's book. Recognized worldwide by musicologists.

I have just received my Harvard Brief Dictionary of Music and am thrilled. As an adult without formal musical training who is singing in a college choir, this book will be invaluable. It not only explains musical terms and other basics of the machanics of music, but it also covers such topics as music theory, musical works, etc. The entries are comprehensive, but short and understandable to a person without musical training. And it is small enough so that I can carry it with me to rehearsals!

Willi's deft and powerful retelling of the Spanish-American war from the standpoint of a violincello: priceless. While I thought the sexual themes in the later chapters were almost a little too much - I mean, come on, Marlene Dietrich? - for the most part, this book is the cat's meow, the dog's pajamas. It's great, is what I'm saying, and not buying it is like smelling your own beard: meaningless and stupid.

As someone who knows extemely little about classical music who wants to know more, I bought this book some time ago and, it has been quite helpful. However, it is also true that although this the twenty first printing was in 1997, this, the Revised Edition was copyrighted in 1972 by Willi Apel (and previous copyright dates of the book were 1944 and 1969 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College). This Second Edition undoubtely needs to be revised. Since I have had it, I have noticed only a of couple areas in which I think it needs to be changed (and it has been extremely helpful as to others). Firstly, The entry on "Ballet" on pages 73-76. On page 75 this book still says "There is still much disagreement about the quality of the ballet in the Soviet Union" and proceeds with a brief paragraph about ballets performed and produced there. Since it not only is the Soviet Union not the Soviet Union any more, and since other things have changed as well since Willi Apel's page 75, there really ought to be revisions in this book reflecting that. Secondly, as to the entry "Voices-ranges" on page 920, this book says, "Human voices are usually divided into six ranges: three female voices, soprano, mezzo-soprano and contralto, and three male voices, tenor, baritone and bass" and subsquesntly gives subcategories of these, but omits countertenor entirely from this entry which it should not. It isn't that countertenor can't be located in this book. It is not with the rest of the voice types where it belongs, in my opinon. When I found it what it said was "OLD (CAPS MINE) name for (male) alto, derived from CONTRATENOR ALTUS [See Contratenor] which I did on page 204 which said in part, that it explains, that four part writing and the consequent separation of ranges resulted in a renaming so that there existed contratenor altus (alto) and contrateor bassus (bass) which, the book says, explains the name alto "for a part that, from a modern point of view, can hardly be considered 'high', as well as countertenor for the male alto". This entry sounds to me like it has relegated countertenors, who are alive and performing and recording now, to history. In my opinion the term countertenor should be included in the entry "Voices-ranges" with the rest of the male and female voice types, so they are all together where they belong. This entry also refers the reader to the word alto page on page 31, which states of the male alto "....(2) Originally the alto was a high male voice....this type of voice, also known as countertenor, was cultivated especially in England, where the church music of the 16th and 17th centuries definitely implies its use." What this entry and these entires taken together also imply is that countertenors, male altos as such, are history since they are not included in the entry "Voices-ranges" as extant in the world which is to say living now , performing now, and recording now. Saying that this voice type (p. 31) was cultivated in England where the church music of the 16th and 17th centuries implies its use says nothing to me about the use of this voice type in the latter half of the 20th cantury and in the 21st century. I am very new to classical music and I am living proof that it doesn't require a lot to know that t here are countertenors : Charles Brett, countertenor, one of the male soloists ( the soloists on this CD which is of Händel's Messiah are: one soprano, one mezzo-soprano, the aforementioned countertenor, one tenor, one bass, and one boy soprano) singing as recorded on this exceptional recording of this 18th century work conducted by John Eliot Gardiner is one. I also have at the present time one recording each of Dunstable's Motets and The Old Hall Manuscript by The Hilliard ensemble (two countertenors, three tenors, two baritones) which I been able to listen to as much as I'd like to, but have enjoyed nevertheless. This book needs to be revised as to this subject matter and with a view to enabling readers to become aware of all of the voice types that there are as well as what they capable in the appropriate place which is in the same place. Additionally, since there have been recordings of works on period instruments for more than a few years, it would help if the differences between, for example, a period violin and modern violin were addressed in this book and they are not. As someone who knows little about this I hope that, for others( I am not in a position to buy a new edition of this book, if ever there will be one), there will be a revised edition without these problems. Highly recommended otherwise , however, at this time.

This is the dictionary that I used when I attended the USC School of Music. The entries are unsurpassed so far as classical music is concerned, but I did have to look for other resources when I needed accurate indepth information on jazz or popular music. It would be difficult in this day and age to have one all-encompassing reference on every musical style in existence, so I think that the work stands on its own and may dilute its effectiveness if it were to overextend itself by trying to accomodate everybody. As a former composition student and someone who scored in the top 3% on the music theory portion of the graduate record exam, I wholeheartedly recommend this dictionary.

This reference book has it all. I have never been disappointed when looking up a musical term -- everything from musical periods, notation, tempo markings in all languages I've come across, descriptions of musical forms, and theory concepts. It should be on the bookshelf of every serious musician.

Apel's book on chant was the standard work on the subject until David Hiley's Western Plainchant: A Handbook was published in 1993. Nevertheless, I turn to Apel again and again for his analyses of the standard phrases found in certain genres of chant (Great Responsories, Graduals, Tracts). Its an eminently readable book, and still a "must have" for students of Gregorian chant.

It's one of the most complete books on Gregorian Chant. Now there is an important italian edition, by LIM (Libreria Musicale Italiana), Lucca, 1998. It's translated and brought up-to-date by the italian musicologist Marco Della Sciucca.