On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Ross Tyler rossety...@gmail.com wrote:
**
On 06/09/2012 09:27 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Ross Tyler rossety...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/09/2012 12:57 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
Let me rephrase those then:
1) I am used to seeing
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Ross Tyler rossety...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/08/2012 05:17 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
Honestly, I think absolutely mimicking the release is unnecessary
here. The point of doing this seems to be simply to communicate side
breaks where they exist, which we
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Ross Tyler rossety...@gmail.com wrote:
**
On 06/09/2012 12:57 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
Let me rephrase those then:
1) I am used to seeing it that way = That seems to be a standard way of
presenting this information, and there isn't a compelling reason to break
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
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
Honestly, I think absolutely mimicking the release is unnecessary here.
The point of doing this seems to be simply to communicate side breaks where
they exist, which we don't do now. Standardizing that to A/B/C/D is
sufficient, and is consistent with how other sites label this information.
I can
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't that covered by soundtrack? If not, what would be the difference
between the two?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 06/07/2012 06:22 AM, ListMyCDs.com wrote:
I'm proposing
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
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
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 06/07/2012 05:24 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
I've generally understood Film Score to mean music composed
specifically for the film, and Soundtrack to mean songs used in the
film (either recorded separately, or recorded
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I'm not
sure I understand this line: For releases which already have their own
lettering, follow the release: R1, R2, R3, S1, S2, S3.
That if a vinyl explicitly names its sides R and S instead of
Worldwide is useful to indicate that the content isn't location-locked.
Sites like iTunes definitely can and do limit downloading to residents of
specific countries, so you'd lose some clarity by using the field to mean
either country of sale or country of origin.
I always think of country of
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I'm not
sure I understand
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
Proper use of data fields: The film/show title is not IMO strictly a
part of the title of the work, especially when the track has a proper
title (e.g. “Can You Read My Mind” (love theme from superman) or “Boss
of Me”
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:15 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 06/04/2012 06:55 AM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
This would also affect some of the titles. Should we go with:
1) Title Music From a Clockwork
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
I would like to see a lot more examples and some consideration of how
various cover artwork handles it before leaping to a “use quotation
marks” conclusion. Also it should be taken into account that quotation
marks don’t
Would there be any interest in formalizing the way we handle titles within
titles? I've run into this situation before once or twice, but it's going
to become a lot more common now that Soundtracks require the full album
title.
For example, compare these:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't follow you. As I understand it, a title like X: Original
Motion Picture Soundtrack would be added as simply X. This was in
a guideline as I remember, but I can't find it now.
This seems to be
Expected expiration: June 10th, 2012
Jira: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-119
Proposal: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Torc/Titles
Wiki: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Titles
Basically I'd like to see some clarification on when to use terms like EP,
7, etc. I don't think this
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
reosare...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Expected expiration: June 10th, 2012
Jira: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-119
Proposal: http
The consequences of not having one MB release per physical issue is more
about end user identifiably. A user shouldn't have to have the historical
background on a release they own in order to identify which MB Release it
represents. There must be some physically identifiable element, even
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:14 PM, caller#6
meatbyproduct-musicbra...@yahoo.com wrote:
**
On 10/05/2011 06:30 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
For both of these examples, I could cite performances of each. So, if Adam
Lambert
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
For both of these examples, I could cite performances of each. So, if Adam
Lambert performs the Gary Jules version, is he covering Jules who's covering
Tears for Fears? As has been pointed-out already on this thread,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Philipp Wolfer ph.wol...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca
wrote:
Well because of pretty wide support for removing the Cover attribute and
IMHO it shouldn't be implemented unless we can find a way to do
2011/10/3 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca wrote:
Hi all,
I've been thinking about the Cover relationship lately and have found a
pretty significant problem with it which should either be clarified or
fixed.
2011/9/26 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Calvin Walton calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 17:16 +0300, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Calvin Walton
calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca wrote:
On
2011/10/3 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
2011/9/26 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Calvin Walton
calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca
wrote:
On Mon
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:57 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.orgwrote:
Arrange on non classical works leads to systematic wrong inheritances for
several later performance recording links like covers, live versions,
alternate versions, medleys and any versions you might encounter — some
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Johannes Weißl jar...@molb.org wrote:
Hello Aurélien,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:02:54AM +0200, Aurélien Mino wrote:
-1
I don't see what the issue is. These artists are fairly well hidden.
You can hide them even more by explicitly excluding them in search
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Rupert Swarbrick rswarbr...@gmail.comwrote:
caller#6
meatbyproduct-musicbra...@yahoo.com
writes:
I've been thinking about a new set of Relationships for work-work and
recording-work.
A quotes B
A borrows [melody|lyrics] from B
Would either of
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:19 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.orgwrote:
Arrangements are not always credited.
In these cases we couldn't link recordings to anything, that's not good.
And you'll probably end up with almost as many Arrangement A/B/C works as
recordings.
That means that
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 1:23 PM, caller#6
meatbyproduct-musicbra...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 08/19/2011 09:50 AM, Alex Mauer wrote:
As the ticket I entered[1] was changed to request it, here is the RFC to
allow a release to appear in multiple release groups.
The ticket says:
There are
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
Given the fact we have recordings separated from releases, and we have the
case where there are already multiple releases associated with a Disc ID
(basically the same pressing, released on more than one occasion), I'm
2011/8/25 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
Somewhat related: what about attacca (and similar indications)? On
one hand they're indications for the performer, not parts of the
title, but on the other hand, isn't Allegro for example also an
indication, not the title of a movement,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 08/14/2011 03:49 AM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
I guess this could be a pre-RFC type thing. How should these be
classified for release type? There doesn't seem to be any clear
direction and thus no consistency with how
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
I wrote:
Here's a performance collaboration worthy of review: Daryl Hall John
Oates, at least judging by their album covers:
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 21:44 -0700, Ryan Torchia responded:
How does that put them
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:06 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/8/22 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca
wrote:
Well
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 01:26 +0200, SwissChris wrote:
So it's about composer - lyricist collaborations ;-)
Currently for me yes, but there are plenty of performance collaboration
artists that are disappearing in light
2011/8/22 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca
wrote:
Well this is more of a case of incorrect wording on discogs (checked the
edits).
This credit should be arranger and not orchestrator (as per the booklet),
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 08/17/2011 11:44 PM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Alex Mauerha...@hawkesnest.net
wrote:
So that there’s one place to look for all magtape formats, instead of
the current 2 (1 top-level, 2
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Christopher Key cj...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
On 10/08/2011 21:55, Alex Mauer wrote:
According to the docs[1], a release containing two previously-released
albums should not be considered a compilation.
I do not understand why this exception exists. To me, a
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 7:49 AM, lorenz pressler l...@gmx.at wrote:
what to include?
the artist credit field is the main field music will get sorted by. VA
releases are dodging this most vital ability to search and browse your
music collection and therfor have to be avoided if possible. most
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 08/13/2011 04:42 PM, Nikki wrote:
Why would the formats which use magnetic tape be better off grouped
together? It seems even more arbitrary to me than making an optical
disc type to group all optical discs.
So
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Pete Marsh pete.ma...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
again, this seems a bit fuzzy to me, particularly at composer level (how
would you classify Schnittke?) maybe it would work at work level, but
it's still contentious i think)..
Postmodern. I think most composers since
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:51 AM, caller#6
meatbyproduct-musicbra...@yahoo.com wrote:
**
On 08/12/2011 01:54 AM, Ryan Torchia wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/8/12, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011
I guess this could be a pre-RFC type thing. How should these be classified
for release type? There doesn't seem to be any clear direction and thus no
consistency with how these are classified. (Well, I guess you could say
they're consistently all over the place.) I can understand the logic
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca wrote:
Second point is regarding the Featured Artist for classical releases.
According to the proposed CSG Style:
The *ReleaseTitle http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Release_Title* should
include the title of the release followed
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 21:32 +0100, Rupert Swarbrick wrote:
Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca writes:
I don't think we're contemplating putting genres in the work type, are
we? Aren't we merely trying to classify work
I agree that these look odd when they appear in standard album lists years
after their original release. Since we can't (currently) add an album to
two Release Groups, how about including it the earlier listed (or first
listed) of the two albums, perhaps with an annotation in the Release Group
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca wrote:
I've brought this up on a few occasions in other threads but I think this
merits it's own specific discussion and I hope to bring this to RFC/RFV
status.
First regarding the Artist Credit for Classical music
This
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/8/12, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Lemire, Sebastien m...@benji99.ca
wrote:
Option A gives me dry heaves, gout, black lung disease, stigmata and
herpes
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 08/10/2011 03:23 PM, Calvin Walton wrote:
Makes sense to me, but I’m not completely sold on having a generic
“Cartridge” type – is it likely that someone might have a release on a
cartridge without knowing whether
2011/8/9 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:19 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
+ 1 for spoken word
For instrumental I see that we are missing something, but I don't think
that
the generic term is a good term to use. It is opposed to vocal,
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:34 PM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 23:15, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
I think some of the assumptions upon which the guideline is based aren't
consistently true -- not that they're false, but that they're not
reliably
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:43 PM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 04:28, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
So the cases where feat. is used in an actual equal collaboration, or
where a band is named Band feat. Leader aren't allowed to use feat.
because
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:10 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
We should clearly keep classical out of this debate, since arrangement in
classical also stands for everything we'd call cover performance in other
music styles. In Classical the ongoing discussion whether a specific
Don't have much time to respond to all these now, but just quickly...
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 05:34 -0700, Ryan Torchia wrote:
Nobody tried to improve the proposal or actually provide the user
guideline I was asking
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:05 PM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 16:53, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
I listed the most egregious off the top of my head, but they're hardly
edge
cases. All I'm asking is that before this change gets approved, I want
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
On 4 August 2011 02:45, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Torchia wrote:
OK then, how about this: it's feature regression
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
On 4 August 2011 07:15, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
You seem to be under the assumption that you have to use every piece
of data provided. If you don't particularly like artist credits,
no-one
Currently in queue are these three Add Release edits...
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/14922828
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/14922796
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/14922852
...which appear to differ only in what size T-shirt is included. Is that
enough to warrant separate releases for each?
--Torc
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
style leader hat on
Using my power to override vetoes, I'm now declaring this passed. Of the
two vetoes I've seen, one was unclear and appeared to be for the wrong
thing and I still haven't seen any good reasons in the
2011/7/26 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
I've seen that many editors are unhappy about the differences between
track and recording style guidelines. As far as I understand, the main
goal of the relaxed track style guidelines was to simplify editing for
new users. This is not what is
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Torchia wrote:
Sorry, I'm voting against this until I hear a good reason why this isn't
better handled through ARs
I don't think this is a good reason to veto it. Right now we're deciding
between putting featured artists
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
On 3 August 2011 05:36, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:51 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
2011/8/3 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
1) The term Feat. isn't always used to indicate this kind of
relationship
(and likewise, isn't the only term used that does). If we make the
assumption that feat. means
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
On 3 August 2011 10:27, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/8/3 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
1) The term Feat. isn't
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Torchia wrote:
OK then, how about this: it's feature regression. If this happens, I
have
no way of excluding guest performances from an MB artist's list of
recordings.
Why is this so critical?
Because it's a measure
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:51 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.comwrote:
(On the back cover doesn't cut it.)
Why?
Ask the question in context: *...and until there's a functional set of
criteria for determining which
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:01 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:24 AM, MeinDummy meindu...@nurfuerspam.dewrote:
Your statements contradict each other.
In the first one you say
2011/8/1 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:42 AM, jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org
wrote:
-1
IMO we should follow actual release style.
Sometimes the guest artist is part of the artist → we already use artist
credit for that.
Sometimes the guest artist
2011/8/1 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, I'm saying the reason that the feat. credit appears the way it does
is irrelevant. Everybody knows that on an album, a feat. Guest
credit is
going
2011/8/1 Lukáš Lalinský lalin...@gmail.com
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com
wrote:
Even the long-term solution wasn't seeking to find a way to include
featured
guests into the artist field; the intent was always to express everything
through ARs. I
Sorry, I'm voting against this until I hear a good reason why this isn't
better handled through ARs, a plan for omitting guest feat. credits from an
artist's list of recordings, and until there's a functional set of criteria
for determining which credit goes where. (On the back cover doesn't cut
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Calvin Walton calvin.wal...@kepstin.cawrote:
“instrumental”
This indicates that the lyrics are not relevant for this
performance of the work, such that the lyricist would not be
credited. Examples include instrumental arrangements, or
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Calvin Walton calvin.wal...@kepstin.cawrote:
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 13:14 -0700, Ryan Torchia wrote:
“instrumental”
This indicates that the lyrics are not relevant for this
performance of the work
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 1:24 AM, MeinDummy meindu...@nurfuerspam.de wrote:
Your statements contradict each other.
In the first one you say that (on covers) the placement of the credit is
irrelevant and only the join phrase matters.
In the 2nd one and basically in all your other postings to
2011/7/27 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
Normally, the intention is either to show the abilities of the
beatmaker, or to allow other people to rap their own lyrics over them
I'd say the first part -- that it's so people cab hear the beatmaker's track
-- is enough to qualify
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:13 PM, David Gasaway d...@gasaway.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 18:13, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
No, I'm saying that a feat. alone doesn't imply anything more
substantial
than a cameo appearance. I'm saying if that's the only credit given
Should this guideline be mothballed? --
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Collaboration_Relationship_Type
It was focused on one-off and short term collaborations, which we now cover
with Artist Credits, so I don't see much reason for it.
--Torc.
___
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:10 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Torchia wrote:
And because I can't think of anywhere graceful to point this out: if you
move the featured credit from the track to the an artist credit field, you
lose the ability to enclose it in parentheses. (Eh
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote:
Not to be a complete pain, but would anybody else prefer just changing paper
sleeve to something like cardboard/paper sleeve. I'm just thinking about
a bunch of releases I have in cardstock.
--Torc.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:43 AM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:10 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan Torchia wrote:
And because I can't think of anywhere graceful
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 16:08 -0700, Ryan Torchia wrote:
I would be extremely hesitant to dismiss original releases in favor of VA
comps in determining credits, let alone to establish guidelines. That's
dismissing
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Nikki aei...@gmail.com wrote:
jacobbrett wrote:
I don't mean to set the discussion back, but perhaps an additional field
for
featured artists (and other, non-equal/non-collab. artist credits) could
be
introduced to the schema? I _do_ love semantics. :P
2011/7/23 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
I would like this. But! The easiest way for a transition into this
would be to have feat. in the artist credit for now, so the link to
the entity is there and can be auto-transformed into a relationship if
we decide to ;)
Actually, I
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl wrote:
However, our guidelines are very focused on the english language market
in my opinion, and I would like to see the guidelines be made a bit more
general -- or just make it clear they don't apply to releases which
are not intended
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
That's a rather large except though, isn't it? That essentially
narrows
down the scope of your sample to title tracks of singles.
No, I was primarily thinking of compilations, mainly various artists
ones. I
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
Attempt 2. The proposal:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:Featured_Artists
updates the
http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Recording_and_release_group_titles/Featured_artists
guideline for recordings and
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:17 AM, symphonick symphon...@gmail.com
My main point is that we should not make mb-specific movements/parts.
There will be issues regarding interpretation, but hopefully a modern
score will be reasonably clear. We must look more into details on opera,
I'd like to
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
Please be advised that vetoing this proposal will retain the current
recording guideline of including 'feat.' crediting in the track title
for recordings and release groups.
I have seen no-one in favour of this
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
On 21 July 2011 00:53, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Andii Hughes gnu_and...@member.fsf.org
wrote:
Please be advised that vetoing this proposal will retain
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 07/18/2011 05:30 AM, Andii Hughes wrote:
1. If the cover says 'X (feat. Y)' by Z, then artist credit is Z,
title is 'X (feat. Y)'
2. If the cover says 'X' by Z feat. Y then artist credit is Z +
join-phrase '
2011/7/16 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
That still a common scenario, and the position that the featured artist
might not deserve equal credit is absolutely correct in many cases.
One would think that if they thought they didn't deserve any special
credit, they wouldn't
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:21 AM, lorenz pressler l...@gmx.at wrote:
feat. (or whatever synonym is used) stands for a collaboration between
artists, not between a title and an artist. (It's the artist that
*features*another artist, not the title)
exactly my thoughts, on compilations
-- http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Release_Type#Compilation
The section doesn't directly say it, but is compilation basically stuff
that's been released before? (In other words, not stuff being released
for the first time?) That's the gist I get from the examples stating
anthologies are comps,
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:45 PM, SwissChris swissch...@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't disagree on the fact that feat. has a specific meaning
different from other link phrases. A said before I wouldn't thus oppose
keeping it as link phrase *between artists* even on recording level.
But fact is:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Paul C. Bryan pbr...@anode.ca wrote:
**
Fodder to get us started:
- remixes: there is controversy over what makes a remix a distinct work
from another
- opera: track boundaries often appear at arbitrary positions of the
libretto; should each
2011/7/12 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Simon Reinhardt
simon.reinha...@koeln.de wrote:
Shouldn't artist credits completely follow the release, including
capitalisation, just like track titles?
Should track titles completely follow the
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote:
From my non-English's point of view, I prefer with to With,
precisely because it is different. I always find disturbing that there
is no way to distinguish what we add to titles / names from what was
actually in
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:42 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/7/13, Ryan Torchia anarchyr...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.comwrote:
From my non-English's point of view, I prefer with to With,
precisely because
The capitalization standard for English requires the word with be
capitalized since it's more than three letters. There are a lot of
corrections where with is being used in lowercase as a connector in artist
credits. Should we have a policy one way or the other for this?
--Torc.
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
