Hello
Here is a tricky one: This album
http://musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=507178 is a jazz version
of a classical work. Should the CSG be applied (artist=composer, work
full title for each track,...)?
--
Frederic Da Vitoria
___
Ok, so putting it under Jacques Loussier is fine. But what about the
track names?
2006/5/2, Stefan Kestenholz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yes, this is one of the cases for which the new releaseartist feature was
introduced. Tracks to the composers with as much detail as you deem
necessary, and release
Ok, so putting it under Jacques Loussier is fine. But what about the
track names?
... Tracks to the composers with as much detail as you deem
necessary
And I thought I wrote a short, and precise e-mail before ;) Enter the track
names such that it is clear which work was performed? If
Well, the problem here is what one would mean by necessary.
Variation 1 seems to me a little too terse, but I wanted other users
opinions before posting a note to the original modder. Thanks.
2006/5/2, Stefan Kestenholz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, so putting it under Jacques Loussier is fine. But
New AR time!
artist {additionally} {guest} wrote {lyrics:lyrics for}OR{music:
music for} album or track
technical question: how to handle lyrics and music attributes? i've
pseudocoded it up there but i'm not sure how it would all work.
perhaps there needs to be 2 seperate subtypes to this
Chris Bransden wrote:
New AR time!
artist {additionally} {guest} wrote {lyrics:lyrics for}OR{music:
music for} album or track
To me the writer of the music was always the composer.
Simon (Shepard)
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
the fact that they are very often credited seperately ie 'written and
composed by X' on liners should be reason enough. i tried to explain
the differences in more detail on the wiki page - hope that helps.
On 02/05/06, Simon Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Bransden wrote:
New AR time!
the fact that they are very often credited seperately ie 'written and
composed by X' on liners should be reason enough. i tried to explain
the differences in more detail on the wiki page - hope that helps.
Would that not mean that the lyrics (written) and music (composed) was written
by X?
Hi,
I have some questions about linking philosophy which I think need to be
generally clearified because if every moderator follows their own concepts then
we don't have consistent data.
1. Link performers to releases:
a) always, including members of bands
b) only if they are guest performers
no. as shown on the wiki, writing is just a less involved subset of composing.
composition is like a midway point between writing and arranging.
not my words, but:
Writing is creating the most basic form - anything from the melody
idea, to the tune as a whole. Composing is like building the
Chris Bransden wrote:
On 28/04/06, Simon Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
derGraph wrote:
I would still favour
artist {additionally} {co-}{executive }produced album or track,
but I'm not sure whether the space after executive is valid, or if it
can be replaced with {executive:executive }.
Chris Bransden wrote:
i prefer artist {additionally} {co-}{executive:executive }produced
album or track but like i said, i'm not particularly bothered about
their being a potential impossible combination (additional
co-executive producer), and i think it's better to have that 'risk'
and keep all
On 02/05/06, Simon Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have some questions about linking philosophy which I think need to be
generally clearified because if every moderator follows their own concepts then
we don't have consistent data.
1. Link performers to releases:
a) always,
I understand, but there will be times when the user will not be able
to choose (because he will not have the info). What do you suggest,
then?
2006/5/2, Chris Bransden [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To show what I mean, take a look at:
http://musicbrainz.org/showrel.html?id=815type=artist
- the composed by
From: Simon Reinhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: MusicBrainz style
discussionmusicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
To: MusicBrainz style discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [mb-style] AR philosophy
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 12:32:36 +0200
Hi,
I have some questions about linking
mud crow wrote:
2. Link artists to releases when they performed on / wrote /
engineered / otherwise worked on:
a) all tracks / the whole release
b) the majority of tracks
c) one track and more.
d) only the tracks they are credited as having worked on. Which can be
very time consuming and
On 02/05/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand, but there will be times when the user will not be able
to choose (because he will not have the info). What do you suggest,
then?
IMO people shouldn't be adding ARs if they don't have the sleeve or
some kind of factual info
As I said before, I understand, but what about sleeves where all you
get is a name or a couple of names, with no mention of what they
precisely did. Usually, you can guess who wrote the lyrics and who did
something with the music, but that is about all. Or sometimes, you get
something like music:
in contemporary music, the name in brackets is the 'written by' credit
- you should give all names in brackets that credit, and not specifiy
who wrote the lyrics/music/etc, if it is not given.
if it's music: xxx, lyrics: yyy, they would be music written by xxx,
lyrics written by yyy. for
We are digging much too deelply here. A composer writes music. A lyricist
writes words. If a person does both they should be credited with each AR. Since
we already have both, there is no need to add yet another AR.
Cristov (wolfsong)
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Chris Bransden [EMAIL
Precisely what I was getting at. Chris, I fear that we will enter
falsely precise data in the database this way. When it is not written
on the sleeve, nothing proves that the writer didn't actually
compose. And when it is written, we are not sure the guy who wrote the
sleeve made the same
On 02/05/06, Cristov Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are digging much too deelply here. A composer writes music. A lyricist
writes words. If a person does both they should be credited with each AR. Since
we already have both, there is no need to add yet another AR.
but how can you
On 02/05/06, Cristov Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes composing is a specific roll as I described but how it get's credited as a
whole other matter and crediting in no way changes the role. Since All You Need
Is Love was written by both McCartney and Lennon, they each should have a
On 02/05/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you misunderstood. What I meant, is this:
you said:
if it's music: xxx, lyrics: yyy, they would be music written by xxx
But here, you are supposing something. I can understand when you ask
for being able to record what is on the
It makes no difference. Think of the arguement the other way. Numerous
classical works are later arranged with different instrumentation. That doesn't
change anything about the role the composer played in the creation of the
piece, it only changes the arrangement. The composition is unchanged,
those closer we reflect liners, those more factual and useful the
database becomes. i'm tired of discogs shitting on us in this regard
:(
I agree that we should be entering the credits as they are listed on the
liner notes, not what we interpret the credit to be. If its says music
My point is if it says writer and no seperate credit is given for lyrics,
enter a composer and lyricist AR. There's no need to add a new relationship
that means exactly the same thing as existing ones. You acheive the same thing.
Cristov (wolfsong)
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Chris
Why should we create different ARs that say exactly the same thing because
different credits are used across different releases. That's not scalable and
AFAIK isn't the point of AR or MB in general. The wiki docs that correspond to
the relationship should detail the circumstances and the
I thought the point was to create an accurate music database. Guessing that
a credit for written means the same as composed, or a credit for recorded
means the same as engineered is not collecting accurate data.
If someone is credited as being an assistant co-producer, I want to see them
The same thing can be achieved by clarifying what the AR relationships mean. We
already consolidate instruments for instance that have multiple common names
(i.e English Horn and Cor Angelis). Why do we need multiple relationships to
describe the same role? Accuracy is achieved by clarity not
Simon Reinhardt wrote:
Hi,
I have some questions about linking philosophy which I think need to be
generally clearified because if every moderator follows their own
concepts then we don't have consistent data.
1. Link performers to releases:
a) always, including members of bands
it'd
On 4/29/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/4/22, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 4/12/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long are the scenes compared to the acts?(i've been to many operas,
but never really looked at the act/scene structure etc.) we could
Very interesting links - cool.
Could we add Contains samples from as Album - Album Album - Track / Track - Album relationships?Example: My Kingdom by The Future Sound of London
http://musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=86339
http://www.discogs.com/release/2516 (see the notes there)
On
33 matches
Mail list logo
