let's not forget that last.fm scrobbles by 'artist' not by 'composer' unless
you're lucky enough to be using software that scrobbles by MBID
2009/1/19 Dave Smey autod...@davesmey.com
On Mon, January 19, 2009 8:05 pm, Jason Longland wrote:
Hi Guys,
Just curious with the classical styling
Oops, i forgot to reply on list...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Adam Golding adamgold...@gmail.com
Date: 2009/1/8
Subject: Re: [mb-style] The return of [clean up CSG]??? (was: Re: CSG issues
(was: 'Piano Sonata / Concerto' vs. 'Sonata / Concerto for Piano))
To: Brian Schweitzer
Also forgot to post this one to the whole list
-- Forwarded message --
From: Adam Golding adamgold...@gmail.com
Date: 2009/1/8
Subject: Re: [mb-style] The return of [clean up CSG]??? (was: Re: CSG issues
(was: 'Piano Sonata / Concerto' vs. 'Sonata / Concerto for Piano
So what needs to be done to get works off the ground? I can't offer
programming skills at this point, but I'd love to help with any of the
(thorny) design issues..
2009/1/6 Paul C. Bryan em...@pbryan.net
+1
I'm convinced, especially if different track titles could be represented
with
movement
;-) ) It must be able to express all the different meanings we give to the
word work, including for example different versions.
2009/1/6 Adam Golding adamgold...@gmail.com
So what needs to be done to get works off the ground? I can't offer
programming skills at this point, but I'd
Can anyone point me to a classical release that is already particularly well
tagged, replete with ARs and such? I'd like to test my scripts on it.
___
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
perhaps the most recent number should be used? this is usually when the catalog is *changed*OR we can use the number that was current at the time of the recordingor, just whatever's printed on the disc sleeve
On 5/11/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny how things which never
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
in a lifespan for artist[anon.].Does Seikilos have any known compositions? If not then there isn't much need to make him anartist.I think both a name and composition would be needed
for a performance under that artist to exist.-Nate--- Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what about 'anonymous' composers
this all moot?Catalogue numbers are prettyessential for regular classical works, and thereseems to be some consensus that it should be stored
separately of the track.If we do that, who cares ifyou add it to an opera?-Nate--- Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/22/06, Marco Sola [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 4/22/06, Marco Sola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Adam Golding lol.
you were discussing leaving the opus number out for operas
Ah, sorry.
butif we leave it out, where does it go?
Nowhere, it's not needed nor useful: it's easy to find an
opera by its (often very strange) name.and
On 4/19/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/4/19, Marco Sola [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I wish to add the following statement at the end
of http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalStyleGuide *'''Common names''' *It's the way the composers
On 4/10/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hmm probably not, so yes, we could use the catalogue numbers as actual index values in the DB, i suppose, but then the even higher level-groups, (i.e. group of different versions of a fugue with
different catalogue numbers) would lack a catalogue
on
the release.I think in general for each new releaseof an opera you will have new works.I rarely see releases whose track names are entirescenes.Once or twice I've seen entire acts on one
track.-Nate--- Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/10/06, Nathan Noble
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:hmm probably
On 4/10/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why would we have new works?we'd just have tracks mapping onto existing works in different ways.
Terminology difference.I was considering tracks asworks which are part of higher-level works.I thinkyou view tracks as tracks that are part
On 4/8/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/4/8, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 4/7/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re-reading this post... 2006/4/2, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED]: note that we also need a way to handle multiple publications
On 4/7/06, Frederic Da Vitoria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re-reading this post...2006/4/2, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED]: note that we also need a way to handle multiple publications of a single
work (they might have different metronome markings, for instance.. or even be in different keys)Do you
On 4/3/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you think the scope should be so broad?Remembertoo that someone has to find and enter all this data
manually, which might be fine for Beethoven's fifth(though I sure wouldn't bother finding half of thatmetadata), but not so much fun or
On 4/4/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This would imply creating perhaps hundreds of sparselypopulated db columns, or a more sophisticated schemawith dynamic attributes.Performance has to beconsidered.
i agreee this issue must be addressed. we would need input templated
for various
On 4/4/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, is MB really supposed to be a music encyclopedia? what else would you call it?Hmm, a music metadata database?well, specifically music metadata. anyway, all the data i'm talking about is metadata...
Ultimately, MB haslittle more info on
what about things like The Rutles songs, which parody groups of songs at once.. for isntance Hold My Hand is a parody of BOTH She Loves You and I Wanna Hold Your Hand--they're sort of merged together...
should it be (X is a parody of Y) (X is a parody of Z)or X is a parody of (Y and Z)???On
the real problem here is that we need separate fields for things like Opus number, BWV number, etc.
On 3/22/06, Nathan Noble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would have no-voted this as well, were I to actuallyparticipate in votes...sigh.Here are my
counter-arguments:I wouldn't call this a
22 matches
Mail list logo
