Moving to RFV.
RFC discussion:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-264-Add-premiere-relationship-between-work-and-place-td4659317.html
RFV expiration 2013-11-09 22:00 (UTC)
ListMyCDs / Timo Martikainen
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
Musi
On 31.10.2013 19:18, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen wrote:
> "[unknown]" isn't wrong. It's a statement that we, well,
> don't know. It is unknown.
Seems that everything is unknown. Meaning of [unknown] is also unknown
for random visitors. There's no quick way to tell if [unknown] on
relationship me
On 31.10.2013 8:58, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen wrote:
> If we only were to use [unknown] for stuff which is unknown to
> *everyone*, we could not ever use it, as *someone* out there might know.
Nothing is certain. Still if printed 10-part music encyclopedia mentions
"unknown location" its usuall
On 30.10.2013 23:19, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen wrote:
> A. Random Artist has this on her website:
>> I performed my favourite song, The Song That is My Favourite on the
>> first Saturday of March 1999 for the first time. It was obvious the
> > audience loved it as much as I did and do.
> A dat
On 30.10.2013 14:33, Tom Crocker wrote:
> On 30 October 2013 11:35, ListMyCDs.com <mailto:musicbra...@listmycds.com>> wrote:
>
> Yes, this relationship
> could be used on similar cases like you described. Better name for this
> relationship might be "is
On 30.10.2013 8:14, David Gasaway wrote:
> 2) There is an obvious use for the dates here, so why do the two date
> attributes say "There is no guideline yet for how the [begin|end] date
> fields might be used."?
Like reosarevok already mentioned this is showen just because of the
template and it
On 21.10.2013 17:45, Alastair Porter wrote:
> Would you also expect this relationship to be used if a band has (had) a
> residency at a venue?
> Band A played at Venue B every Monday from 1980 - 1992
> This would be a good use for start/end dates, but I wonder if "Primary
> Concert Venue" is the co
On 30.10.2013 12:22, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
> only doubt is whether we'd also want an area version for when we know
> date and country or city or if that's not common enough to bother :)
I'm extending this RFC to also include areas. I guess it's possible to
use same relationship withou
On 30.10.2013 10:38, Tom Crocker wrote:
> I know it was me who +1ed this, but you don't seem to have discussed
> anyone's concerns. I thought we were meant to try and achieve consensus?
There was 2 comments related to current wording. Feedback has been
basicly "sounds wierd" without any alternati
Many Wikipedia pages about classical works (and often also imslp.org)
record information about first performances (data & place) of work. I'm
proposing us to start storing this information with new work-place
relationship. Naturally usage of it isn't limited only to classical music.
Wiki:
http
Thanks to +1 moving to RFV.
RFC discussion:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-261-Add-primary-concert-venue-relationship-between-artist-and-place-td4658830.html
This RFV will pass on November 1
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrain
I'm proposing us to have "primary concert venue"-relationship which
would be used between artists and places.
Artists often perform on the same venue frequently enough to call the
place primary concert venue. This is often based on some sort of
business-relationship. Especially symphony orchest
On 4.5.2013 0:55, Alex Mauer wrote:
> Thus I propose that these ARs be merged, and 'instrumentator' be dropped
> entirely. If the instrument is specified, it should be merged into
> 'arranged {instrument} on', otherwise it should be merged into 'arranged'.
+1 for this RFC
- ListMyCDs
_
No vetos, this has passed now.
- ListMyCDs
On 2.4.2013 18:18, ListMyCDs.com wrote:
> RFV expiration: April 4 2013
> Jira ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-202
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz
RFV expiration: April 4 2013
Jira ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-202
- ListMyCDs
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
RFC expiration: April 2 2013
Jira ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-202
- ListMyCDs / http://musicbrainz.org/user/ListMyCDs.com
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/ma
On 6.3.2013 17:11, Rachel Dwight wrote:
> If you'd like I can add "vocal" too.
That would be nice. For example, yesterday I added this
http://musicbrainz.org/release/6c757b73-f64b-4ae0-9aab-7e9179f825a5 and
know hundreds of other soundtrack releases having separate conductors
for orchestra and
On 27.2.2013 17:50, symphonick wrote:
> Why wouldn't translator etc. at recording level suggest the same thing
> (that the translation was made specifically for that recording)?
I think everything on recording level should be related to recordings.
Sometimes translation might be for specific rec
On 27.2.2013 14:07, symphonick wrote:
> Can you try to dig up some real-world
> examples?
Some Sibelius pieces (these aren't all in MB yet):
---
A. Scaramouche, op. 71 (1913 for narrator and orchestra) (2 recordings?)
B. (partially based of A) Scaramouche, op. 71: Danse élégiaque (1914 for
pia
On 27.2.2013 16:15, symphonick wrote:
> 2013/2/27 ListMyCDs.com > I can't add lyricist and translator names to recordings.
>> I can't link imslp scores and wikipedia urls to recordings.
> If you feel that an AR is missing, why not make a RFC for a new AR?
I don&#
eating works for a complete catalogue of a certain composer, we can
> just make an exception in those cases.
That is better than nothing. My project with Jean Sibelius has already
taken 9 months and I'm slowly getting closer to full catalog (
here only about 10 months (85 000 edits) and during this time
I haven't been having major problems with arrangements. I remember
couple of cases but I wouldn't add major limits because of a minor problem.
- ListMyCDs.com
___
MusicBrainz-style m
On 27.2.2013 10:59, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> 2013/2/27 ListMyCDs.com <mailto:musicbra...@listmycds.com>>
> If three works would be connected together with relationships, middle
> one might be missing thanks to this rule. It might then be wrong to link
>
On 26.2.2013 16:45, symphonick wrote:
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/CSG_Works
> "or an arrangement to be valid as a unique work in MusicBrainz, it
> must be possible for other performers to record new versions. There
> must be at least two different recordings available"
This r
On 25.2.2013 20:53, Alex Mauer wrote:
> We’re saying that there should be a work type for the soundtrack to the
> film “Yellow Submarine” even though all(?) the works contained within
> are already-existing works (arrangements aside, possibly — but that’s a
> discussion for another thread).
I tota
On 25.2.2013 18:47, Alex Mauer wrote:
> On 02/24/2013 04:30 AM, ListMyCDs.com wrote:
>> Instead of "soundtrack" I might name this type "score". Soundtrack is a
>> type for an audio recording (including dialogue, sfx and music).
> There are two different thing
On 25.2.2013 1:20, symphonick wrote:
> 2013/2/24 ListMyCDs.com Instead of "soundtrack" I might name this type "score". Soundtrack is a
> type for an audio recording (including dialogue, sfx and music).
> I'm afraid "score" will get mixed u
On 24.2.2013 21:24, caller#6 wrote:
> I entered http://musicbrainz.org/edit/2112271 as test case.
Last number was missing from url: http://musicbrainz.org/edit/21122712
- ListMyCDs.com
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-st
On 24.2.2013 13:29, LordSputnik wrote:
> "Only use Revision to link surviving works. Do not enter works that cannot be
> performed just to be able to use this relationship."
>
> I agree with reo here - if a work is known to have existed at some point,
> then I don't see any reason to not allow addi
ist
anything else but music. Maybe we could have a suitable place for them
in BookBrainz (still in plans?). Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT using veto
for this, discussion about it is enough for me.
> ListMyCDs.com wrote
>> With the same logic we would need to add types or new e
if it's fine to keep adding more
similar types not related to music. We already got a proposal trying to
add "Film", "TV show", "Video game", "Board game" and "Score" as types.
Should we really
On 24.2.2013 12:26, LordSputnik wrote:
> Expected RFC End: 2013-3-3, 12:00 GMT
> http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-194
> This proposal would add a "Book" work type.
This information isn't directly related to music and we call the service
MusicBrainz. For me it makes no sense to start l
;s fine
to have Partita for 28 works but not a type covering tens of thousands
of works. Maybe type for all scores will pass. Good luck and thanks for
making the proposal!
Instead of "soundtrack" I might name this type "score". Soundtrack is a
type for an audio recording (i
+1 for the RFC. I'm always happy to see more data related to film scores
or any type of soundtracks in MusicBrainz. I'm planning to make an RFC
about adding soundtrackcollector.com to our whitelist but will wait
until some open proposals are closed.
I agree with reosarevok and recommend not to
On 22.2.2013 18:01, Rachel Dwight wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2013, at 4:47 AM, "ListMyCDs.com"
> wrote:
>> For choir we already have "choir master" which is usually the same than
>> "choir conductor". Sometimes smaller vocalist groups (like 8 singers)
On 22.2.2013 11:44, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
> Hmm. {instrument}? I would have expected more something like two
> attributes, orchestra/choir - how often does a conductor conduct just
> one kind of instrument, except in weird things like the Ukulele
> Orchestra of Great Britain?
For exampl
On 12.2.2013 18:58, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>> 2013/2/12 ListMyCDs.com > Some possible solutions: - Special work-work relationship:
>> "non classical work" based on "classical-work".
> Do you mean creating as many works as arrangements?
Yes. I wouldn
he solution. These relationships aren't only used with
classical material and this might be the best place to mention something
about it. People editing other styles won't know about the rule if we
only mention about it on the classical guideline.
Thanks to symphonick for creating this
On 29.6.2012 21:15, Alex Mauer wrote:
> I would like to propose the addition of the following new work types to
> the work types list:
> * Film
> * TV show
> * Video game
> * Board game
> * Score
> In addition, corresponding AR for the above:
> [work (score)] score for [work (film, TV show, video
On 29.6.2012 17:27, Alex Mauer wrote:
>> If composer composed only one work and it was composed for the game,
>> work would be having a type "video game score". In case of TV soundtrack
>> release, it would still be a recording of video game score.
> Doesn’t this contradict current usage (e.g. wh
On 29.6.2012 14:20, Calvin Walton wrote:
> I've seen several cases where a TV
> show based on a video game simply uses the musical cues *directly* from
> the game unmodified, so there is a single soundtrack release that
> applies to both.
If composer composed only one work and it was composed for
On 28.6.2012 15:19, Wieland Hoffmann wrote:
> There's a "comment" search field when using advanced query syntax. If
> you think it's useful to consider the disambiguation comment on all
> searches, file a bug.
When the naming of these types isn't standardized, it's pretty complex
to find them. Sh
On 29.6.2012 1:18, caller#6 wrote:
> I'd want to see a guideline explaining that this is meant to describe a
> "parent" work, not a composition.
I agree this should be mentioned on guidelines (classical + soundtrack).
It's the same type of situation with many classical works. Movement of a
symp
On 27.6.2012 20:05, Alex Mauer wrote:
>> More detailed and accurate naming of types helps identifying
>> and finding the right work.
> That’s why we have disambiguation comments.
Why should we need to use disambiguations when the same information
could be included in a work type? Searches based
On 27.6.2012 3:46, SwissChris wrote:
> I would object to adding these (sub-)types of sonata and I can't see
> good enough reasons so far why we would need "film score" separate from
> other scores and why the generic "score" would not be sufficient.
Need to add one more reason I forgot to mention
>> I would object to adding these (sub-)types of sonata and I can't see
>> good enough reasons so far why we would need "film score" separate from
>> other scores and why the generic "score" would not be sufficient.
On 27.6.2012 17:24, Alex Mauer wrote:
> +1 to this.
Why you feel it's better to h
On 27.6.2012 3:46, SwissChris wrote:
> I still dislike the idea of multiplying the types in the work type list
> unnecessarily. Using just "score" is in no way "unaccurate", it's just
> "generic".
With a generic type I would need to use the same type for "Jurassic
Park" musical, film and video g
On 26.6.2012 15:29, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
> Hmm. Is there any reason why you picked such a long duration for the
> RFV? (normal is 2 days!). Anyway, since it's announced like that I
> guess we can wait until then :)
Wanted to give it more time. Some people would like to have a work typ
On 25.6.2012 20:25, Alex Mauer wrote:
> This is the RFV for the proposed Soundtrack style.
> Since the most recent RFC I added a description of what releases it
> applies to.
+1
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
On 25.6.2012 1:02, Rachel Dwight wrote:
> Oh, I meant on the ticket page. I mentioned that you might want to rename it
> as just "Score," because I know of other media (plays, TV shows, etc.) that
> the work type could be applied to.
On earlier RFC discussion something like this was mentioned.
On 25.6.2012 0:50, Rachel Dwight wrote:
> Did you get my comment?
Haven't gotten comments related to this RFV post or RFC from you.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo
I'm proposing to add "Film score" to the work type list.
Earlier RFC discussion:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-120-New-work-type-quot-Film-score-quot-td4635446.html
On Jira: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-120
RFV expiration: June 29th, 2012
(sorry for the spam,
I'm proposing to add "Film score" to the work type list.
Earlier RFC discussion:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-120-New-work-type-quot-Film-score-quot-td4635446.html
On Jira: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-120
RFV expiration: June 29th, 2012
___
> There are many situations in which it would be useful to label different
> sections of a medium. Ideally, there should be some comment or title that
> could be writable by tagger script.
+1
Don't know how easy this would be to implement to current system, but
the idea sounds good for me.
I
On 12.6.2012 6:26, Alex Mauer wrote:
> IMO it covers anything of type 'soundtrack' — so it would cover
> everything mentioned above and possibly more. I know I would count
> re-recordings and alternate soundtracks.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should list there all possible
cases and it's
On 11.6.2012 19:41, Alex Mauer wrote:
> This is the second RFC for the new soundtrack style.
It's currently a style for soundtracks but not including definition what
type of releases/recordings/works it actually covers. There's no
definition for soundtrack. Maybe there should be couple of words
On 8.6.2012 17:05, Alex Mauer wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 05:48 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
>> Ah, OK, but would "Film Cue" or "Film Score Cue" be more appropriate?
>> Score vs. cue is analogous to album vs. song.
>
> Other discussion answered this question, but I would support a “score
> cue” work type (I’
Exactly. Parts of the film score wouldn't have type selected, only the
parent work linking them together.
It's the same idea like now with classical works. For example symphony
is having a work type "symphony" but movements don't have a type at all.
One movement isn't a "symphony" so this work
If there's a work with a type "Film score" and having a composer
credited for it, it won't be having songs or works written by other
composers as part of this work. Song will be having a work type "song".
There's no need for special types like "song for the film" or "song for
the play", it's st
I don't think soundtrack would be suitable for work type. Film composer
is composing for the film, not for the soundtrack. Soundtrack is an
audio recording including also dialogue and sound effects.
There's big difference with a process for composing music for different
mediums. I see there hug
> This is the RFC for a guideline for the use of the track numbering
> feature of Musicbrainz.
>
> It covers:
> * unordered tracklists
> * Unnumbered tracks
> * Normalization of media side numbering
> * Sub-tracks (DVD titles/chapters, CD index numbers, 8-track programs)
> * Alternate audio tracks
I'm proposing to add "Film score" to the work type list.
Film score as a term doesn't only cover orchestral scores for symphony
orchestra, it covers any type of music composed for a film. Wikipedia
page about film scores: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_score
Some example film score works in
ould share the same way. When listing some recordings by a
performer, some of them might be with comma (if classical works) and
some with &. For example London Symphony Orchestra is frequently
performing on film score releases but is even more active in classical
world. Same thing goes wi
63 matches
Mail list logo
