what music players are really well integrated with musicbrainz? (is there any?)
2010-11-01 30519, 2010
nikki
what sort of things are you looking for?
2010-11-01 30557, 2010
xlotlu
something that makes good use of mb data
2010-11-01 30523, 2010
xlotlu
e.g. it can recommend me live performances of the current track
2010-11-01 30539, 2010
xlotlu
or it's a covered of / was covered by..
2010-11-01 30502, 2010
xlotlu
actually, i don't quite expect to find a player that goes this far, but looking for something that's already integrated and hackable
2010-11-01 30541, 2010
hawke_
I’m reading the discussion on the style mailing list about the Writer AR, and I’m thinking: The AR will apply entirely to Works rather than tracks in the NGS, correct?
2010-11-01 30552, 2010
nikki
yes
2010-11-01 30522, 2010
nikki
it'd be release and work rather than release and track like it would at the moment
2010-11-01 30554, 2010
hawke_
So that means there’s a lot less potential for incorrect ARs…
2010-11-01 30527, 2010
hawke_
since there’ll be a lot more cross-checking between releases, and presumably a lot of merging of works
2010-11-01 30549, 2010
nikki
and you'd be able to just link a work to the recording to get the composer/etc relationships
2010-11-01 30555, 2010
hawke_
Right.
2010-11-01 30502, 2010
hawke_
Seems like annotations for ARs would be nice (basically as a list of references) but probably a bit over the top.
2010-11-01 30535, 2010
ianmcorvidae
text fields for everything!
2010-11-01 30546, 2010
hawke_
:-)
2010-11-01 30533, 2010
hawke_
Is it bad form to have duplicate “performed” and “performed [xxx] on” ARs? I’ve been doing that sometimes for things described as an “accordion solo” since just having “performed [accordion] on” would suggest that there might be additional performers.
2010-11-01 30526, 2010
xlotlu
arrays of text fields for everything!
2010-11-01 30554, 2010
ianmcorvidae
arbitrary subject/object/predicate triple fields for everything!
2010-11-01 30503, 2010
hawke_
:-p
2010-11-01 30519, 2010
xlotlu
yes! and let's put those that share information in a separate table!
2010-11-01 30534, 2010
xlotlu
hawke_: i doubt there's a style guide for that, but it doesn't seem pretty
2010-11-01 30542, 2010
xlotlu
that should probably go into an annotation that says performed solo accordion. at least until there's a database field for that too! :)
2010-11-01 30518, 2010
ianmcorvidae
a "solo" attribute on the performed AR would not be unreasonable
2010-11-01 30531, 2010
ianmcorvidae
not that I'm gonna write it up for mb-style, but XD
2010-11-01 30549, 2010
xlotlu
umh. but it's only justifying the other tracks' lack of completeness
2010-11-01 30502, 2010
ianmcorvidae
oh
2010-11-01 30520, 2010
ianmcorvidae
well, credited as 'solo' doesn't necessarily mean that was the only instrument playing at the time
2010-11-01 30527, 2010
ianmcorvidae
which is complicated, of course
2010-11-01 30528, 2010
ianmcorvidae
but yeah
2010-11-01 30537, 2010
xlotlu
this could warrant a more fine-grained control of data quality status
2010-11-01 30549, 2010
ianmcorvidae
heh
2010-11-01 30500, 2010
ianmcorvidae
not that there's *that* much use of the data quality stuff as it stands
2010-11-01 30515, 2010
ianmcorvidae
or maybe I just listen to obscure music where it isn't used, lol, but
2010-11-01 30521, 2010
xlotlu
e.g. lock performed ARs, because it's certain that i listed all of them
2010-11-01 30507, 2010
ianmcorvidae
yeah
2010-11-01 30520, 2010
xlotlu
beaurocracy ftw
2010-11-01 30528, 2010
hawke_
I have some that are described as “[instrument] solo with orchestra” and some that are simply “[xxx] solo”.
2010-11-01 30544, 2010
hawke_
Of course, putting the “with orchestra” in there is impossible
2010-11-01 30536, 2010
ianmcorvidae
well, ostensibly you could have a performed-solo AR plus an orchestra AR
2010-11-01 30540, 2010
ianmcorvidae
but yes :)
2010-11-01 30548, 2010
hawke_
ianmcorvidae: sure, if I knew what orchestra…
2010-11-01 30559, 2010
ianmcorvidae
oh, hah
2010-11-01 30503, 2010
ianmcorvidae
well, that's problematic
2010-11-01 30508, 2010
ianmcorvidae
[unknown] :P
2010-11-01 30512, 2010
hawke_
:-D
2010-11-01 30522, 2010
hawke_
Not a bad idea, actually.
2010-11-01 30505, 2010
ianmcorvidae
heh
2010-11-01 30553, 2010
hawke_
Not terribly useful, but it least it gives some completion without being inaccurate.
2010-11-01 30509, 2010
ianmcorvidae
yeah :/
2010-11-01 30559, 2010
hawke_
I would expect it’s some sort of session musician, but obviously no way to know that…
2010-11-01 30512, 2010
hawke_
or who, even if it were
2010-11-01 30534, 2010
ianmcorvidae
that seems to fit the definition of [unknown] -- Unknown and Unknowable
2010-11-01 30543, 2010
nikki still wonders how to enter "all instruments" :/
2010-11-01 30543, 2010
hawke_
True, though some things are more “unknowable” than others.
2010-11-01 30552, 2010
nikki
I'm not sure how two performed relationships makes it clear that there's not other performers though...
2010-11-01 30500, 2010
nikki is going back home now
2010-11-01 30522, 2010
hawke_
nikki: It really doesn’t.
2010-11-01 30534, 2010
nikki
so why do it? :P
2010-11-01 30544, 2010
ianmcorvidae
yeah, there's really no "all the possible information is here" AR
2010-11-01 30547, 2010
hawke_
Just having “performed accordion on” sounds more like there’s other stuff.
2010-11-01 30553, 2010
nikki
does it?
2010-11-01 30557, 2010
hawke_
Does to me.
2010-11-01 30509, 2010
nikki
btw hawke, do you read language log or was that someone else I saw commenting?
2010-11-01 30557, 2010
hawke_
“Well, we know who played the sax on that track, but we don’t know who may or may not have performed other instruments”
2010-11-01 30512, 2010
hawke_
vs. “We know that track was performed by this person”
2010-11-01 30520, 2010
nikki
really going... back in a couple of hours
2010-11-01 30521, 2010
hawke_
nikki: that was me, most likely.
2010-11-01 30550, 2010
gioele joined the channel
2010-11-01 30550, 2010
praest76 joined the channel
2010-11-01 30545, 2010
ruaok joined the channel
2010-11-01 30550, 2010
ruaok joined the channel
2010-11-01 30508, 2010
nikki joined the channel
2010-11-01 30523, 2010
nikki
hawke_: ah, I saw a comment and was like "hmm... wonder if that's him or not..."
2010-11-01 30555, 2010
hawke_
nikki: Yup…on the translations thing, presumably.
2010-11-01 30559, 2010
nikki
yeah
2010-11-01 30515, 2010
nikki
you're popping up everywhere I read it seems :P
2010-11-01 30501, 2010
hawke_
Indeed. :-D
2010-11-01 30506, 2010
hawke_
common interests ftw
2010-11-01 30509, 2010
nikki
:D
2010-11-01 30525, 2010
ijabz joined the channel
2010-11-01 30507, 2010
Yllona joined the channel
2010-11-01 30546, 2010
_Tsk_ joined the channel
2010-11-01 30537, 2010
DarkAudit joined the channel
2010-11-01 30501, 2010
Milosz joined the channel
2010-11-01 30502, 2010
Milosz joined the channel
2010-11-01 30542, 2010
zazi_
which ID3 tag editor writes customized frames with MusicBrainz information, e.g. MusicBrainz album id etc.
2010-11-01 30519, 2010
ianmcorvidae
zazi_: Picard is a reasonable reference
2010-11-01 30531, 2010
ianmcorvidae
there's also a table of how it maps things to tags on the wiki, if you're interested
2010-11-01 30521, 2010
ianmcorvidae
(since of course mp3/ogg/flac/aac have different tag mechanisms and conventions, it has different things for each)
