[...] refused to let me merge 2 recordings because they had different
AcoustIDs but all the literature I read said they were the same. I
tested the process and pointed out that it was possible those IDs were
erroneously added [...]
please keep in mind that lukz asked lots of people to
3. Versions of a release that are mastered in audibly different ways
should use separate recordings.4. If audio restoration is used to create
remastered audio from an earlier recording, a track containing the
remastered audio should use a recording specific to that remaster.
isn't 3)
Am 05.11.2012, 12:53 Uhr, schrieb Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl:
So I would prefer to just give tracks proper MBIDs again (and disable
re-use of tracklists by different releases). Having those ids, I would
be far less opposed to seeing recordings merged.
i once suggested moving all the mastering
2012/10/31 Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net
Academic to you, but not to everyone. For example, someone studying the
Loudness War would have interest in tracking the changes of different
remasters over time.
isn't that the meaning of academic?
Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com:
Am 29.10.2012, 02:32 Uhr, schrieb SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com:
Let's get rid of them ;-)
+1
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Am 25.09.2012, 00:07 Uhr, schrieb Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com:
Do you mean there is currently a way to switch them off? I couldn't find
any.
no, i just meant there is no need for a switch to toggle display for the
dis.comment on ARs (imho), just disabling display completely on
Am 23.09.2012, 16:01 Uhr, schrieb Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com:
Good point, the instrument could be useful. But then wouldn't trumpet
or bassoon be enough? Or should we request to be able to switch on and
off the disambiguation comments in ARs?
just switch them off completely
concering sortorder i like
soloist, orchestra, conductor
that's also the most common order on my releases (mainly DG).
and i'm against reintroducing cond., we have ARs to attribute roles.
best, lorenz.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
It could be nice to include a table of keys
done.
--
regards, lorenz pressler
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
/Symphonie
Instead of Symphonie you should use Sinfonie.
--
mit freundlichen gruessen,
lorenz presslermailto:l...@gmx.at
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman
this RFC will expire on 2012/8/21
--
mit freundlichen gruessen,
lorenz presslermailto:l...@gmx.at
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz
So now it's a suffix? :)
since even prefix is wrong:
changed to Präposition/preposition
--
mit freundlichen gruessen,
lorenz presslermailto:l...@gmx.at
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
Am 18.05.2012, 17:38 Uhr, schrieb Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net:
On 05/18/2012 10:21 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
magnificently non-descriptive. Does anyone know if it's intended to be
used for spokenword, the art form, or for spoken word stuff, as in,
anything from a speech to a
Am 02.04.2012, 22:36 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt phi...@foolip.org:
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
I haven't understood since the introduction of NGS.
One the one hand, disambiguation comments aren't used for tagging
(right?) so moving information
Am 02.04.2012, 23:17 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt phi...@foolip.org:
afair:
recording - disamig. comment only
tracklist - if its on the tracklist then it should be included in the
trackname
Is this documented anywhere, and is it how everyone is actually
editing? Is no one using the
Am 03.04.2012, 00:29 Uhr, schrieb Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.org:
There is ETI that should remain in the
title; remix and edit titles.
i agree ofc!
--
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
and test it and if it works out fine introduce it to the main server.
until then only style updates to release/track and works should be made.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style
,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
pabouk wrote
I think the only reason why editors do not add ARs is not
just the tedious procedure in MB web UI but also the fact
that they simply do not have the required information
at the track level. For example in which tracks an artist
sung in which tracks an artist played certain
Am 31.01.2012, 05:32 Uhr, schrieb David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 09:03, lorenz pressler l...@gmx.at wrote:
why should i bother adding composer at work lvl if i can do it at
release lvl?
Here is the practical problem I see with playing too much with track
ACs
already used regexp to extract this from the
title field where this performer had been allowed to add. and then write
it into a custom ID3 tag so that you can sort your releases in your
personal music collection after this field?
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
that this should be used to split
composer/performers. however i'm fine with ANY character, i just think we
should keep it as short as possible (2 chars max)
btw, its ALT+0183 (on my windoes machine)
best,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
all composers of all works
on the release into one new field that can be mapped to album-artist.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo
the old CSG performer disambiguation (add performers to the title of the
release and releasegroup) does not apply anymore.
this is about recording AC so release or releasegrp is irrelevant.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz
ARs attached to the recording or to the release, if
that would be changed this could work. however ARs don't allow for 'is
credited as' and i think this is important at release level.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing
,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
movement is a hierarchy/sorting description not a work type.
these should not be mixed up.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo
it anymore).
best,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
of other work to filter a
works list by full works only, they would be filtered out.
sry, i think you are over-structuring this, making things needlessly
complicated. humongous amount of additional stress to the editors for
minimal benefit imho.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
a recording)
some recordings have multiple works attached
some releases have one work for multiple recordings
but yes, having to maintain all these title-lvls with different formatting
rules will be quite bothersome.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
like some fancy artist fields that are linked to ARs with
special flags but do we really want to continue with pre-NGS guidelines
until that we will eventuall have the for every gerne ideal structured
database?
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
anyone (or did i miss something?) but it will improve the way data is
displayed in lists.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo
just read through it again and i'm quite satisfied with the changes.
+1
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
for picking this up again hawke! i hope this leads to long awaited
and needed changes in this area.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman
Am 10.01.2012, 14:34 Uhr, schrieb Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com:
So, what do people prefer here, Study or Étude? It's ready for RFV,
except that I need to know what name to use! :)
Étude!
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
+1
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
this RFC.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2011-November/014077.html
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
it is unreliable
but then you should (i guess you should?) exactly the same unreliable data
as recording time. makes no sense to me and just adds addidtional work to
the editor.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
Am 09.12.2011, 10:16 Uhr, schrieb Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com:
2011/12/8, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com:
Sorry, when I think of it more carefully, I realize that session is
not the correct word either.
edit, version or mix.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
media. you can't
measure it exactly and it will be probably only an aproximation, so what?
how can i enter the time of a vinyl only release then?
cheers,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style
hi again,
thx for the great input and sry i didn't have the time to respond earlier.
my RFC here was rather vague and resulted because of my irritation about
what a MBrecording is, how it is handled and what it should be ideally.
right now MBrecordings are mastering events. (guideline: don't
,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Am 06.10.2011, 00:31 Uhr, schrieb Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca:
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 03:57 +0200, lorenz pressler wrote:
Am 05.10.2011, 03:15 Uhr, schrieb Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca:
+1 to us simply answering the question, What is a cover?
a cover is a performance (MBrecording
of this song but
it still remains a cover-version of this song. i don't know if you just
want to enter too much detail where there's not much more detail to add.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style
be a pain to fix them. also that would be a new candidate for
relationship clusters ;P
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz
) [
http://www.secondhandsongs.com/work/4779 ] ..they (and MB) miss the single
released in dec '62 though (unsourced wikipedia info)
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
in for tracing MB data is a very weak argument.
style-guidelines make MB date very 'unique' and easy spotable even on a
subset of our data.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
be
derived from the AC and AR already (if classical AC proposal [i think it's
ready for RFC^^] gets offical and ARs are correctly set).
best,
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
differ
(using pre-recorded parts) however i dunno if precise data that much
granularity is widely available. if it is available you can set it and it
would override the inherited date.
thoughts?
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style
.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
on the radio very often. i think they should stay
part of the tracktitle if there is no other better 'name' for that
work-subpart.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
there and it is quite frequent used by labels. i guess it can't be that
hard to just fetch the favicon of every domain we link.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
the idea but there are some serious issues connected. i would move
this discussion elsewhere and not let it influence CSG AC right now.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
the main artists there is a real gain of
information here! it's kind of a clumsy implementation of the featured
artist attribute we are discussing here as a yet to come maybe better
solution in the future.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
guess ;P
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
i too think that AC on recording lvl should just list performers!
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
will happen if there's more than one composer? I was thinking about
Mozart's requiem +Xüssmayr similar stuff.
i'm sure it will be no problem to join them or create multi-value field.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing
and/or are linked to works?
i'm pushing it up constantly :P
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
heard one single good argument why we shouldn't include
performers into AC.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
, no matter whats printed on the cover.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
by symphonick.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
them
to the Track-Level
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
. should not be part of the tracktitle
in most occasions. if the feat. artist is not in parentheses and written
in the same size/style as the rest of the track i would keep it in the
tracktitle.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style
do see your point and now i agree of not adding the
distributor to the label field. however i'm still in favour of giving
(especially independent) artists to link to several shops/distribution
channels.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
]. if a there
is a 'real' label behind the bandcamp release, its still possible to add
both companys into the label column.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org
the data should be modified to fit into the
title/artist table; otherwise, whats the point in having an artist column
on tracklevel, a one-dimensional array would suffice.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz
bearable to listen to. so maybe we should credit
sound/balance/mixing/mastering (? i don't know the exact differences..)
engineers on a fuzzy release lvl for these kind of releases to inhibit
that recordings get stained by these ARs?
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
Am 12.07.2011, 10:17 Uhr, schrieb jacobbrett jacobbr...@hotmail.com:
My rationale for lowercase is that with is akin to extra title
information
[1]; it is not part of an artist's title, but acts as descriptive text.
+1
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
it for classical music, but would you use it for jazz? Seems not
natural to me...
it seems most people think that way; only on a few jazz pieces i came
across {cover} is used.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz
; however
having 50+ recordings seems wrong to me too.
[1] http://musicbrainz.org/work/07191344-5675-4bb6-bd0c-cdd5431ba063
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http
, but i'm not sure if its better for
data-quality to have lots of recordings that should be just a few, or to
have a few recordings where there might have been some mis-merges included.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing
that are/may be
attached to the work is definitely not leading to a better data quality.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
it, but a lot of work and a
lot of problems coming up just because of a pedantic approach to implement
everthing thats most correct.
usability typographical correctness
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style
this data here will/can be used
for. you are limiting usability for the fuzzy feeling of beeing nerdy.
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman
like to link it to the 2 seperate works
and delete the joined one.
[1] http://musicbrainz.org/work/22dd7c60-dee2-3936-a097-abb955898793
--
lorenz pressler
PGP 0x92E9551A
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
i think in your edit-discussion you came to an agreeable solution for a
future guideline.
- on recording lvl: move all (feat. X) to artist credits
- on release lvl: as close to cover/sleeve as possible (feat. X in
tracktitel included)
imho it's a pity not to use these new artists credit
Simon Austin-3 wrote:
I think a decision needs to be made... I've seen a few cases of
tracklists already changed from Song (feat. Y) by X to Song by Y feat. X.
yes i like that and i thought that was one of the reaseons NGS happened.
artist credits are just perfect to move the 'feat. X' to
Simon Austin-3 wrote:
Multiple countries per release date with matching cat #/barcode (as
mentioned in the bug nikki linked to) would work. Like how labels now
work.
+1 i guess
imho release country is often just indeterminable. i use the origin of the
release label (or sometimes artist)
+1
--
View this message in context:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Works-and-remixes-covers-tp3531609p3551452.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
and vice versa you can say the work of a cover where lyrics where added still
has no lyrics. perfect solution imho would be an additional lyrics field
on recording lvl. however i guess i could live with an own work-entry and
work-work relationships in these cases although i personally won't credit
how big has the percentage of (tracks by n)/(totaltracks) [or (playtime by
n)/(total playtime)] to be to justify an entry in the relase artist field?
eg. Being John Malkovich score
http://musicbrainz.org/release/15d15e38-08a2-4843-8af9-993dd5b399f5
is currently filed under Carter Burwell but has
composer has moved to work and performer to recording level as far as is i
understood so is there no more way to mark these artist in their position on
release level? i hoped it would be possible with NGS to let the user pick
(for tagging purposes) which artist (performer, conductor, composer)
symphonick wrote:
Sounds like a Picard issue to me? To be able to select which recording
AR(s) should be used for tagging (regardless of whether you tag from
recording names or release traclist?)
not exactly. i don't want to have to set for every album i tag the
appropriate fields. i
caller#6 wrote:
Do you disagree with the concept of Derivative Works [1]? How many of
the items listed under Distinctiveness should be removed?
i think a derivate work has to earn it's status of an own work and (as
Frederic said) this would have to be decided for each derivate work. and i
Andrew Conkling-2 wrote:
That seems clear enough, though I think we should change the verbiage a
bit. This should definitely cover the So-and-so's Greatest Hits type
releases though, which would certainly be a good thing. I think the gray
areas would be fewer, and the concerto examples
Andrew Conkling-2 wrote:
Each release belongs to a release group, has a release title, and
consists of one or more tracks. Each release has one release artist who
is the primary artist associated with that release and can have that same
artist, or various different artists, associated with
Dave Smey wrote:
Well, I would have no problem putting this under the soloist, or indeed
any mixed recital of concertos that feature a single, consistent
soloist (so no Brahms Triple Concerto).
I'd have no problem putting a collection of pieces for solo instrument
and piano (with mixed
minor correction (typo?)
http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Classical_Style_Guide#Other_Style_Guidelines
Common Names example:
'Sinfonie in e-moll, Op. 95 Aus der Neuen Welt: II. Largo'
where it should be 'Sinfonie in E-moll, Op. 95 Aus der Neuen Welt: II.
Largo'
just statet two points above this
Rupert Welch wrote:
In this case, CRAS is quite clear and unambiguous - single artist or
performer. If people choose to add an interpretation that is not
written in the guideline, or go back through the edit history of each
guideline to find one they prefer, this makes the voting
proposed change:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Mixed_recitals_by_a_performer_or_group
reason why:
i have same serious trouble with
http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Classical_Release_Artist_Style#Mixed_recitals_by_a_performer_or_group
CRAS#Mixed_recitals_by_a_performer_or_group since the guideline and
symphonick wrote:
I wouldn't want to be too specific about performers in big fonts on
cover-sleeves, so I'd remove name is printed big on the sleeve from
the RFC [...]
The reasons for this are: everything doesn't come with sleeves nowadays
+ I want to avoid any kind of indication of a
i edited and added quite some classical stuff over the last months and rawfuk
pointed out a mistake i made quite often during this time (see edit
#11778002). but since now nobody noticed or at least there where different
ways of interpreting the rules.
subject: Mixed recitals by a performer or
Pavan Chander wrote:
So then why not include the story/bookname only in the cases where that
kind
of disambiguation is necessary?
fine with me, i just wanted to keep it simple.
lorenz.
--
View this message in context:
95 matches
Mail list logo
