I second this proposal. In my opinion, it makes more sense that the
performer's name is the artist and the composer in the composer field than
having the artist name in the album name.
Just my thought.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Setting-Classical-Release-Artists-to-Pe
On 18 Feb 2008 at 10:21, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> When I try to find rational reasons, I can't find any. But (as I often
> stated), I rationally always come to this conclusion: the problem is the
> ReleaseArtist. There is no such thing as a ReleaseArtist in classical.
> Even in other domains.
On Feb 12, 2008 9:34 PM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Composer pages will shrink (yay) and performer pages will grow, yes.
> > But that's the point. Performers put out CDs like regular pop
> > artists, they just don't write the material (in most cases).
> >
> > I think I've said it
On Feb 13, 2008 12:46 PM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 13-Feb-08, at 4:45 AM, Chris B wrote:
> > On 12/02/2008, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 12-Feb-08, at 11:28 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> >>> Nothing to do? If he hadn't composed it in the first place, the
>
On Feb 12, 2008 9:34 PM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This isn't a crazy idea–we do it for releases where the tracks have
> different composers (rather than filing under VA). I think this
> proposal is just an extension of our current guideline to designate
> performers as Release Ar
On Feb 12, 2008 9:34 PM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12-Feb-08, at 11:28 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> > I was foll of work these last weeks, do I am late commenting here,
> > sorry.
>
> Welcome to the discussion! :)
>
> > On Feb 4, 2008 4:53 AM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 13-Feb-08, at 4:45 AM, Chris B wrote:
On 12/02/2008, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12-Feb-08, at 11:28 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
Nothing to do? If he hadn't composed it in the first place, the
release would be full of silence. The inheritors of recent composers
(Stravinsky,
On 12/02/2008, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12-Feb-08, at 11:28 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> > I was foll of work these last weeks, do I am late commenting here,
> > sorry.
>
> Welcome to the discussion! :)
>
> > On Feb 4, 2008 4:53 AM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On 12-Feb-08, at 11:47 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
On Feb 6, 2008 10:18 PM, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Aaron Cooper wrote:
> We currently move classical
> releases to the performer when they perform works by multiple
> composers--I just want to extend this so we can move releases
On 12-Feb-08, at 11:28 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
I was foll of work these last weeks, do I am late commenting here,
sorry.
Welcome to the discussion! :)
On Feb 4, 2008 4:53 AM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this this is an independent issue. I'm relatively new here,
Frederic:
Welcome to the discussion!
Just to be clear, the words you are putting under my name are not my words
and do not reflect my opinion. They are the words of anonymous editor
dhcp130132249195, writing in the wiki page ClassicalStyleGuideDiscussion,
section "Consider listing performer as
On Feb 12, 2008 7:47 PM, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 2008 10:18 PM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
> >
> >
> > One good thing is that the MoveReleaseEdit has this checkbox for
> leaving
> > the current artist as track artist. This should make it
Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
On Feb 6, 2008 10:18 PM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
One good thing is that the MoveReleaseEdit has this checkbox for leaving
the current artist as track artist. This should make it easy to move
lots of releases fast. (Though if the composer is not the release
On Feb 6, 2008 10:18 PM, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aaron Cooper wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 2008 7:24 AM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
> >> Aaron Cooper wrote:
> >>> Here's the idea:
> >>> 1. Leave the TrackArtist as the composer, and
> >>> 2. Move the ReleaseArtist to the primary performer.
> >>>
On Feb 5, 2008 9:09 PM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4-Feb-08, at 12:54 AM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> > Aaron:
> >
> > Thank you for your reply. Let me focus on the issue of performer
> > discographies.
> >
> >
> > Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
> >>
> >> One of the points of the proposal is t
On Feb 12, 2008 5:28 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 4, 2008 4:53 AM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Bach had absolutely
> > *nothing* to do with releasing his music in 2006. There were a group
> > of performers who wanted to play them, so they released
I was foll of work these last weeks, do I am late commenting here, sorry.
On Feb 4, 2008 4:53 AM, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think this this is an independent issue. I'm relatively new here,
> > but my
> > understanding is that the (Orchestra feat. conductor: X, piano: Y)
> > n
On Feb 4, 2008 3:28 AM, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would
> prefer to see the performer's name in the "artist" tag, and to see the
> composer's name as part of the "title" tag. My reasoning is that since
> classical recordings differ immensely depending on the performers, when
> lo
Aaron,
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
>
> I am not at all suggesting we change our behaviour and replace performance
> ARs I, like you, also set composer ARs for tracks that are attributed
> to the composer already.
>
> The point of this proposal is to attribute releases to primary performers
> b
On 6-Feb-08, at 4:18 PM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
Aaron Cooper wrote:
On Feb 6, 2008 7:24 AM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
Aaron Cooper wrote:
Here's the idea:
1. Leave the TrackArtist as the composer, and
2. Move the ReleaseArtist to the primary performer.
So, IMO we should rather wish for more and bett
Aaron Cooper wrote:
On Feb 6, 2008 7:24 AM, Leiv Hellebo wrote:
Aaron Cooper wrote:
Here's the idea:
1. Leave the TrackArtist as the composer, and
2. Move the ReleaseArtist to the primary performer.
So, IMO we should rather wish for more and better ways of dealing with
the ARs than for more
On Feb 6, 2008 7:24 AM, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aaron Cooper wrote:
> > Here's the idea:
> > 1. Leave the TrackArtist as the composer, and
> > 2. Move the ReleaseArtist to the primary performer.
> >
>
> Sorry, there's too many posts here for me to find the best entry point,
> so I
Aaron Cooper wrote:
Here's the idea:
1. Leave the TrackArtist as the composer, and
2. Move the ReleaseArtist to the primary performer.
Sorry, there's too many posts here for me to find the best entry point,
so I'll just add a thought here at top level. (Please go easy on me if
this has been
On 6-Feb-08, at 6:40 AM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
Based on http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/StyleIssue, I've created
http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/3557 Ticket #3557 (new enhancement)
"Setting Classical Release Artists to Performers" to track Aaron's
proposal
and the earlier variant below.
You can
Based on http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/StyleIssue, I've created
http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/3557 Ticket #3557 (new enhancement)
"Setting Classical Release Artists to Performers" to track Aaron's proposal
and the earlier variant below.
You can see the list of open Style Issues at
http://bug
On 4-Feb-08, at 12:54 AM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
Aaron:
Thank you for your reply. Let me focus on the issue of performer
discographies.
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
One of the points of the proposal is to build performer discographies
(something we don't have with just ARs).
I think I've said i
On 04/02/2008, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this this is an independent issue. I'm relatively new here, but my
> understanding is that the (Orchestra feat. conductor: X, piano: Y) notation
> arose out of time when there was no AR capability in the database, the
> taggers were l
Aaron:
Thank you for your reply. Let me focus on the issue of performer
discographies.
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
>
> One of the points of the proposal is to build performer discographies
> (something we don't have with just ARs).
>
> I think I've said it before, but it will be a lot more m
On 3-Feb-08, at 10:19 PM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
Let me just clarify:
I am *not* proposing we change the current practice of setting the
Track Artists as composer. What I'm saying is setting Release
Artists
as the primary performer.
On 2-Feb-08, at 11:23 AM, Aaron Cooper
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
>
> Let me just clarify:
>
> I am *not* proposing we change the current practice of setting the
> Track Artists as composer. What I'm saying is setting Release Artists
> as the primary performer.
>
> On 2-Feb-08, at 11:23 AM, Aaron Cooper wrote:
>
>> Hey everyone,
>
Aaron Cooper-3 wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> Hopefully the classical editors in the crowd are aware of
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseArtistStyle . If not, please
> take a quick read-through. Basically it says "don't put performers as
> release artists". I think this is an awf
Hey everyone,
Hopefully the classical editors in the crowd are aware of http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseArtistStyle
. If not, please take a quick read-through. Basically it says "don't
put performers as release artists". I think this is an awful idea and
want to propose we do
32 matches
Mail list logo
