On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Leiv Hellebo wrote: > > I agree with Paul; and, for once, I disagree with Leiv. Although I > > understand the redundancy is annoying, I feel that we must accept some > > limitations of mp3 players... > > Sorry for not having an mp3 player ;) > > I have one player which also plays ogg, and when I last used it two > years ago I think it allowed me to show the album name (possibly by > keeping albums in separate and named folders). > > What limitations do I break? I could answer that you don't break anything either by repeating the work name in the track title :-) Anyhow, as I said, I think the mp3 issue is minor, at least for me. > ...and more importantly of the MB web site! If I was looking for one > > part of the Matthew Passion, I'd probably enter "BWV 244" in the track > > search box, and I'd completely miss your release! > > You'd miss a lot more than mine: Half of the SMPs do not have BWV 244 in > the track titles. > > And: My two SMPs have together 103 + 101 = 204 tracks, so you probably > want to start with searching for releases, not tracks :) Please don't use poor quality data as a proof! CSG asks for the work name, so clearly omitting it is against CSG. I agree my query would miss those other tracks. I regret it too. I wish the quality of MB data was good enough so that I could retrieve almost all the relevant tracks. Currently I can't. And since I am much too lazy to try to find other ways, I will go on doing as if the tracks which I can't retrieve (because they were poorly entered) don't exist in MB :-( But don't ask me to feel happy about it or to approve removing the work name. > There is nothing indicating in your current release what work each track > > belongs to. Of course, any classical editor with a little knowledge > > would guess all the tracks actually belong to BWV 244, but imagine the > > same procedure applied to some completely unknown work from some obscure > > composer. Impossible to guess if the release title is the name of the > > work or the commercial name of a compilation, or if each track actually > > belongs to a single work or is an entirely separate work. > > If some label spent a fortune to have professional scholars and > performers dig out and record unknown stuff from obscure composers, then > most likely it would also result in online references that would be > helpful. Maybe, but so what? Each time I see a release in MB which I don't know, I will have to google it's title to check if it is a fancy commercial name or if it is the actual name chosen by the composer? Not very user-friendly! > At MB, we can use the annotations. But can we search them? What good is an information you can only see once you have brought up the relevant page? If I want the list of all the tracks from the SMP, the only way I can get it is to have some common data. In the future, it will be an AR to the work. Currently, the best way IMO is something like the work name or it's catalogue number. > > If you generalized this procedure, how would you enter (in the current > > state of the MB database) > > http://musicbrainz.org/release/86a78b3d-08d6-4b42-990b-30463b66fc98.html? > > My mail concerned Bach passions. It is not so common to mention the BWVs > for them (and I know I have Händel oratorios which do not mention the > HWVs - I recently checked some - yet this is *never* a problem). Well, you know that this is contrary to the CSG? I can very well see myself adding those Händel cantatas exactly as they > are on that release. > > For Bach cantatas it is perhaps possible to shorten it more, as the > religious ones are titled after the first text line: > > BWV 172, I. Coro: Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! > II. Recitativo: Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten > III. Aria: Heiligste Dreieinigkeit > > or something... Ah, so it would apply only to the SMP? I hate exceptions. > But there is an official cantata style guide (*guide*, not rule) which I > used to be satisfied with, so I am not suggesting anything else here now. > > Personally I have until recently added voice indications to recitatives > and arias, but this is better done with ARs IMO. I prefer ARs to title indications too. -- Frederic Da Vitoria
_______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
