nwestbury said the following on 01/30/2006 06:47 PM: > Listener Wrote: > >>I looked at Musicbrainz with some hope but they made a decision to store >>the Composer name in the Artist tag and place the major performer name >>in parens after the work name in the album field. >> >>That choice to live with the Artist, Album, track title set of tags >>supported by most players removes any real value for this project. >> >>Bill > > > I could not agree more with you. All your comments agree spot on with > the problems I see with Musicbrainz and why the Musicbrainz data is not > really usable for classical music. The problem is what can we do about > it. It the developers at Musicbrainz are just not interested in > supporting classical music then one option is to fork the software and > the data. However, this would be a drastic option and would require a > lot of work to keep the project going. The best thing may be if we > could somehow work with Musicbrainz to put in support that allows us to > plug-in our own tables (performers table, composition table, etc.) and > our own bits of code. Perhaps I need to familiarize myself with > Musicbrainz internals and come up with a proposal that allows support > of a classical music database while only have minimal impact on the > core of Musicbrainz.
When I last looked at MusicBrainx they were talking about supporting Classical music through the introduction of AdvancedRelationships. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/AdvancedRelationships http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalAdvancedRelationships However, it doesn't seem to have moved on since early last year. Might be worth giving them a kick. R. _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
