Re: [mb-style] Vinyl: Single vs. EP
999 wrote: I added a lot of vinyl releases and often I don't know if it is an EP or a single. What do you think it should be, here are some examples: 1. 7'', TrackA / TrackB 2. 12'', TrackA / TrackB1, TrackB2 3. 12'', 2 tracks on each side I've come across 2 track releases that are labeled EPs and singles with 4 tracks. But want a general answer, because most releases don't have the word EP in their title. Sandor (Nine99/darkshyne) Since I'm collecting vinyls (1987) that's how I got it told from other DJ's and how it is used in common for electronic music: A Single release containes only one single track (and maybe with various mixes/versions of this track). A EP release containes at least two different tracks. A Remix release containes only remixed/reworked tracks. The format of a release (7, 10, 12, tape, CD, DAT, MD...) doesn't matter ! A clean/simple artist entry with examples for above mentioned release types - http://musicbrainz.org/artist/a77f6f2f-19a2-4648-9018-3ad3aa4c1b9b.html - Schika ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
Hi, any objections against http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/54 ? I will wait some days and then edit it. :) Simon (Shepard) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Simon Reinhardt wrote: Hi, any objections against http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/54 ? I will wait some days and then edit it. :) I think that would cause confusion. Frequently the phrase Recorded By is understood to refer to the artist that performed it. Steve (inhouseuk) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
Steve Wyles wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Simon Reinhardt wrote: Hi, any objections against http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/54 ? I will wait some days and then edit it. :) I think that would cause confusion. Frequently the phrase Recorded By is understood to refer to the artist that performed it. Well, some liner notes say something like additional drums recorded by ABC in XYZ studios where ABC is the drum player. But mostly the guy sitting behind the consoles when the musicians are performing is credited with recorded by. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Co-ProducerRelationshipType
Don Redman schreef:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:30:45 +0100, Chris Bransden wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Co-ProducerRelationshipType
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/1173
not sure what else i have to do, so let me know :) think it's a
relatively straightforward add.
Well, what about this one?
Wolfsong seemed to disagree on this one (see his comment on the wiki).
any comments anyone? Do we need this? Could this not be done with an
attribute like in:
artist {co-}produced album or track
DonRedman
I thought the same thing. I'd also like to add another possible
attribute: {executive-}
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Co-ProducerRelationshipType
Don Redman wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:30:45 +0100, Chris Bransden wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Co-ProducerRelationshipType
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/1173
not sure what else i have to do, so let me know :) think it's a
relatively straightforward add.
Well, what about this one?
Wolfsong seemed to disagree on this one (see his comment on the wiki).
any comments anyone? Do we need this? Could this not be done with an
attribute like in:
artist {co-}produced album or track
DonRedman
This could be done by checking the additional marker.
Example: Ralf Hildenbeutel[1] additionally produced Accident in
Paradise [2]
Schika
[1] http://musicbrainz.org/showartist.html?artistid=8062
[2] http://musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=436618
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Co-ProducerRelationshipType
azertus wrote:
Don Redman schreef:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:30:45 +0100, Chris Bransden wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Co-ProducerRelationshipType
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/1173
not sure what else i have to do, so let me know :) think it's a
relatively straightforward add.
Well, what about this one?
Wolfsong seemed to disagree on this one (see his comment on the wiki).
any comments anyone? Do we need this? Could this not be done with an
attribute like in:
artist {co-}produced album or track
DonRedman
I thought the same thing. I'd also like to add another possible
attribute: {executive-}
Yes, I would like to have executive, too.
Btw: I have seen liner notes listing both additional producers and co-producers.
Simon (Shepard)
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Co-ProducerRelationshipType
I thought the same thing. I'd also like to add another possible
attribute: {executive-}
Yes, I would like to have executive, too.
Btw: I have seen liner notes listing both additional producers and
co-producers.
Is an executive-something still an artist?
--Bogdan Butnaru — [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think I am a fallen star, I should wish on myself. – O.
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
RE: [mb-style] Co-ProducerRelationshipType
Don Redman wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 22:30:45 +0100, Chris Bransden wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Co-ProducerRelationshipType
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/1173
not sure what else i have to do, so let me know :) think it's a
relatively straightforward add.
Well, what about this one?
Wolfsong seemed to disagree on this one (see his comment on
the wiki).
any comments anyone? Do we need this? Could this not be
done with an
attribute like in:
artist {co-}produced album or track
DonRedman
This could be done by checking the additional marker.
Example: Ralf Hildenbeutel[1] additionally produced
Accident in Paradise [2]
Schika
[1] http://musicbrainz.org/showartist.html?artistid=8062
[2] http://musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=436618
That I disagree with. Coproduction implies that people worked together while
additional production implies that someone added to but did not collaborate
with the original production. This happens frequently on remixes and
occasionally where a producer is fired but they use his original work
instead of starting over or they want to avoid a legal spat.
I think the (co-) and (executive) attributes would be better.
Cristov (wolfsong)
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] add instrument request: vacuum cleaner
We really need to get this implemented. I'd suggest to load it onto test after the next server update. Then we should test it and then move it over to the main server. The vacuum cleaner can be added to the test tree, be discussed to death, and then finally make it to the main server, too, OK :-) BTW what is it instrument/other or instrument/wind/other? DonRedman Don Redman wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 05:37:02 +0100, Brian Gurtler wrote: at least one album and a ton of live shows it's already been established that it will be added as per Redman i'm tired of requesting it. just add the vacuum like our minister said he would. Bulbb? Um, no I never said anything that would contradict a ruling of our Evil Overlord. [pleeze Master, i am your deevout servant ;-)]. No, seriously IIRC I just said that we should tackle mo's tree first and then the vac. If Robert has set up a rule then that's the rule to follow. And if the rule sais no, then it's no. So, I'd say: use annotations for obscure instruments. Once you have five albums with that annotation, send the links to mb-style and the instrument will get added. And finally, just to clarify the situation, I am not a minister I don't make rulings. I am supposed to act as a secretary who handles the noncontroversial stuff. Actually the Style Council worked so well while I was away, that I am reluctant to start anything remotely active again. The less I have to do, the better. DonRedman --Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation around! :-) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] Don's Musings on the Style Council, Volume 9 (Was: Call for StyleSecretary)
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 05:53:22 +0100, Brian Gurtler wrote: LOL yes, give the position to someone that has no spine and will back down at any argument presented to them. you know that i'm only confrontational when confronted.. and i believe most people that don't have thier head in the coulds on IRC realize that as well. Just to clarify things. I did not feel attacked at all. And sorry, but I just cannot take it serious if anyone would call me spineless. Regarding the Vacuum Cleaner: Robert has set up a rule. IIUC the vacuum cleaner does not fulfill the condition of five albums it is used on. Unless this is the case, it will not be added. I have nothing to do with this. It is Robert's decision which I respect. Regarding the currently accepted community decision making process: Imagine just for a second that I had accepted the role of the deciding Minister that the community has inadvertedly tried to push upon me a month ago. I have now finished my studies and I will have less and less time to spend on MB. That would have created another 'power vacuum' in the style council. That's not the way I do things. I am a sociologue and that means that I accept complexity when I see it. I do not try to simplify it to death (I know, this has its inconvenients, too). The Style Council needs a process that it will work by on its own. Not one that requires a lot of work from a single person. Such processes evolve slowly. We have a couple of fragments of the process, but it is not complete yet. I know that this is annoying to a lot of people. Well, it is not to me, I am used to such fuzzyness. And within such a fuzziness you have to revise your steps every once in a while. I do this and I am frank about it. So here is my latest change of course (just in case anyone is interested ;-P ): The issues that got fixed while I was away got fixed silently. No big official decision. Jut the guys that have been working on it that did it. I wonder whether this is a good concept. It might work very well when combined with the request for veto thingie. And it might answer Brian's question btw-- what exactly ARE the qualifications for the position? IMO (which might differ from Robert's) in projects like MB authority gets assigned by merrit. From a pure psychological assesment, one might say that Mo is not the ideal person to maintain the instrument tree (NO offence meant! read on!), but he did a lot of work and *good* work. And this makes him the guy who has the most knowledge and (obviously) the best qualification to do this. This qualification does not need to be formalized. For example I once was The Wiki Warden, knowing every page of the wiki. These times have long gone. The funny thing is that this system only works, when actual work gets done. If people do good work, you can judge their plans, comment on them, let them choose how much they will follow your comments, veto their concept if you think it is seriously broken (and/or you think you might do better), or let them go and implement it. But the style council is blocked at the point where nobody comes to do any work. I think we need some goodwill and let people do stuff. This will mean that we will break some things, but hey, at least we will get some stuff done. So (if you have read this far ;-) ) if you want to get a style issue fixed, (that is, you want to do the work). Propose your plans here, read the comments (if someone bugs you too much ask her/him if they want to do it instead), get your proposal running on test, ask for a veto, and 24 hours later, get over and done with it. This will mean that you have to stay committed for about two weeks. I also suggest you stay in close contact with Robert and maybe me (if I am around :-)). Oh, and don't everybody start at the same time now. DonRedman -- Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation around! :-) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:41:20 +0100, Steve Wyles wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Don Redman wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:59:21 +0100, Steve Wyles wrote: Using just Recorded By is ambiguous. It would not just be recorded by but there is a description of the AR type that can be very specific about what is meant and what not. The description is only shown when creating the AR, not when it is displayed. But in the context of display, there are loads of performed by relationships which make it pretty obvious that recoreded by means something different. In the context of album booklets there does not seem to be a problem either. Otherwise it would not get used there. Simplifying is good, but not when it could be misinterpreted. To a native English speaker Recorded By has various meanings in the context of musical works. The situation is far worse for non-native speakers, where they might need to refer to a dictionary. On the contrary the non-native speakers do not seem to have a problem with this :-) What phrase would you use? meta-coment from-perspective=sociological Somon: I'd suggest you wait until this discussion has either resolved in a consensus or faded out. Then you make your own decision and request a veto. If you get one, let Robert decide. /meta-comment DonRedman -- Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation around! :-) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
Don Redman wrote: meta-coment from-perspective=sociological Somon: I'd suggest you wait until this discussion has either resolved in a consensus or faded out. Then you make your own decision and request a veto. If you get one, let Robert decide. /meta-comment Somon? Solomon? Am I so wise? ;) Of course I did not intend to edit anything unless there were consensus or no objections. Actually this was the request for vetos, I thought this had been discussed before. But well, there seems to be need for more of it, so here we go... ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
On 25/03/06, Steve Wyles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006, Don Redman wrote: On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:59:21 +0100, Steve Wyles wrote: Using just Recorded By is ambiguous. It would not just be recorded by but there is a description of the AR type that can be very specific about what is meant and what not. The description is only shown when creating the AR, not when it is displayed. Simplifying the link phrases in the general display is a good thing IMO. Simplifying is good, but not when it could be misinterpreted. To a native English speaker Recorded By has various meanings in the context of musical works. The situation is far worse for non-native speakers, where they might need to refer to a dictionary. thing is, my suggestion of this change was entirely because of interpretation - 'recorded by' is rarely (read: almost never) referred to as 'recording engineered by' - i wanted to enter credits from my album sleeves and i couldn't find 'recorded by', which is IMO very unintuitive. IMO recorded by would be understood better than 'recording engineered by' in almost all cases. it's simply what's written on sleeves. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
On 26/03/06, Steve Wyles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simplifying is good, but not when it could be misinterpreted. To a native English speaker Recorded By has various meanings in the context of musical works. The situation is far worse for non-native speakers, where they might need to refer to a dictionary. On the contrary the non-native speakers do not seem to have a problem with this :-) What phrase would you use? I would either leave it as it is, or use 'Engineered' engineered by could be an entirely different role. 'recorded by' does not neccesarily mean any engineering involvement. it is sometimes synonymous with 'producer', with all that that entails. we definitley need engineer, recorded by, and producer to be seperate roles. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
RE: [mb-style] change 'Recording Engineer' to 'Recorded By'
On 26/03/06, Steve Wyles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simplifying is good, but not when it could be misinterpreted. To a native English speaker Recorded By has various meanings in the context of musical works. The situation is far worse for non-native speakers, where they might need to refer to a dictionary. On the contrary the non-native speakers do not seem to have a problem with this :-) What phrase would you use? I would either leave it as it is, or use 'Engineered' engineered by could be an entirely different role. 'recorded by' does not neccesarily mean any engineering involvement. it is sometimes synonymous with 'producer', with all that that entails. we definitley need engineer, recorded by, and producer to be seperate roles. I disagree. The person who handles the sound board is the engineer recording the tracks. They are the same thing. While a producer might well be manning the board there isn't someone recording and someone else engineering. Cristov (wolfsong) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
