Frederic Da Vitoria wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:28 AM, Leiv Hellebo wrote: > > Having the double/upright bass under violins, one could use "has Violins > performed by" for music which is for "String orchestra" > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_orchestra). > > > What's wrong with "has strings performed by"?. I mean, wouldn't it be > better to alter the instrument three (probably only change the name of > "String instruments" to "Strings")? >
I don't quite get your second sentence, so I'm gonna assume it should read something like "wouldn't it be better to just change the name, not alter the instrument tree". My reply: Nothing is wrong with "has strings performed by". Now the only thing I know to be outright wrong about the instrument tree, is the two entries for the one instrument double bass / acoustic upright. This will be solved easily, at least I guess so from reading the ticket. But I thought it worth the while to throw in an "and guys, while you're improving on the bass handling, please consider doing a little more". I get by well with how things are, so if I'm the only one who ever felt the need for this, it can safely be postponed indefinitely :) In short my reasons for wanting the moving of bass: Originally written for viols only: http://musicbrainz.org/release/13d020f4-b6a9-4ecd-9a7d-723186996afd.html And this is arranged for viols http://musicbrainz.org/release/abb5deba-30f3-4947-8cde-c2465f1d0f50.html None contain double bass however, but still "has viola da gambas performed by" seems proper. Contrast this with this release http://musicbrainz.org/release/76609221-16a2-419d-8d68-3b5710ac62bf.html This is all violins there, but I couldn't choose "violins", without adding also "has double bass performed by", which would have looked weird... In other words: I think moving the bass subtree would fit better with the way ensembles are put together, and with how composers have written for these instruments. Leiv PS. I am not of the opinion one should always descend as far down in the instrument tree as possible when adding ARs. I do them inconsistently, and occasionally even use "XX is performed by YY" without specifying instruments further: http://musicbrainz.org/release/2bed95e5-cf84-409e-9d1e-303c8588c687.html It should be clear enough from the context what is going on, and only the description on PerformerRelationshipType ("If you know that a certain artist performed on a track/release, but you do not know what they performed, then [only specify PerformedBy]") makes me inclined to think something more specific is needed. Other times, though, it makes very much sense to add them, and I should have done so for track number eight here: http://musicbrainz.org/release/8176ea03-9616-4e40-bc5e-18c96e466f4d.html (And I will add them, when I get the time.) _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
