nikki: How would that work with 3-part relationships though?
2011-12-27 36147, 2011
hawke_
[person] performed [instrument] as part of [group] on [work]?
2011-12-27 36149, 2011
nikki
hawke_: someperson performed someinstrument on sometrack as part of somegroup
2011-12-27 36101, 2011
flamingspinach
that sounds a little artificial actually
2011-12-27 36132, 2011
flamingspinach
what's the difference between A, B, and C performing their instruments on a track individually and them performing their instruments on the track as a group?
2011-12-27 36139, 2011
nikki
or something along those lines, so you can group all the quartet ones together while still indicating who played which instrument
2011-12-27 36115, 2011
nikki
flamingspinach: well if you don't care about the group, you wouldn't be asking whether to add the quartet, the individuals or both :P
2011-12-27 36132, 2011
warp
nikki: most dvds I own just have a single unskippable copyright warning. after that you're straight into the DVD menu.
2011-12-27 36149, 2011
nikki
warp: you've not been buying the wrong stuff then :P
2011-12-27 36158, 2011
flamingspinach
nikki: I care that the people are part of the group but I don't see what that fact has to do with the specifics of their performance on the track
2011-12-27 36158, 2011
hawke_
I should look into exactly what my DVDs have as far as that crap
2011-12-27 36105, 2011
flamingspinach
indicating what instrument they played, sure
2011-12-27 36122, 2011
flamingspinach
indicating what group they were representing while playing... ???
2011-12-27 36144, 2011
reosarevok
flamingspinach: if this is about CSG, easier would be to use the quartet as the artist :p
2011-12-27 36107, 2011
flamingspinach
nah, composer as artist sounds perfectly correct to me
2011-12-27 36121, 2011
hawke_
flamingspinach: Not on recordings…
2011-12-27 36145, 2011
flamingspinach
wha?
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
nikki
flamingspinach: so you would just link the quartet and its members all separately with no way of knowing that actually "performed by quartet" and "performed by a, b, c, d" are the same thing?
2011-12-27 36125, 2011
flamingspinach
nikki: I'd know that since a, b, c, and d are already related to the quartet by "member" ARs
2011-12-27 36139, 2011
hawke_
flamingspinach: crediting recordings to composers makes the works relationship list useless
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
flamingspinach
hawke_: yes, you're right
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
flamingspinach
I thought you were talking about the tracks though
2011-12-27 36106, 2011
flamingspinach
er
2011-12-27 36111, 2011
flamingspinach
I mean, I thought reosarevok was talking about the tracks
2011-12-27 36137, 2011
hawke_
nope, though I think tracks should be credited more closely to “as on release” than they are.
2011-12-27 36144, 2011
nikki
flamingspinach: that's like saying there's no need to link both because you can just link the individuals and you can tell because they're all part of the same quartet that it was performed by that quartet :P
2011-12-27 36118, 2011
hawke_
nikki: This is the one place where artist credits tend to be more clear. :-)
2011-12-27 36101, 2011
hawke_
(Well, without introducing redundancy anyway)
2011-12-27 36111, 2011
nikki
(and then you need dates on all the relationships so you can be sure that foo was a part of bar at the time it was performed :/)
2011-12-27 36143, 2011
flamingspinach
nikki: hmm, good point
2011-12-27 36102, 2011
flamingspinach
but what would it mean if, say, A and B performed on the track under the auspices of group G, but C did not, even though C is a mumber of G?
2011-12-27 36122, 2011
flamingspinach
*member
2011-12-27 36143, 2011
hawke_
…and even then you can’t tell, if A and B sometimes perform as group G and sometimes as group H
2011-12-27 36114, 2011
mchou joined the channel
2011-12-27 36109, 2011
nikki
I would link the members who did perform it, sometimes groups *are* incomplete (e.g. someone's ill)
2011-12-27 36146, 2011
nikki
but that doesn't mean they're not the group any more, it just means we can actually say "performed by some group but only these two members"
2011-12-27 36114, 2011
jesus2099
this is why I now don’t like to expand group credits to memebrs, and let the credits as they are officially specified
2011-12-27 36105, 2011
nikki
jesus2099: and if they're not credited at all?
2011-12-27 36119, 2011
hawke_
I like to expand group credits to members, if it’s known exactly who performed what instrument
2011-12-27 36125, 2011
hawke_
e.g. if there’s a video of the recording
2011-12-27 36130, 2011
jesus2099
nikki: I don’t do stuff
2011-12-27 36149, 2011
jesus2099
hawke_: for a video yes for instruments yes
2011-12-27 36102, 2011
jesus2099
I meant not doing this for lyrics/compo/arrange credits
2011-12-27 36126, 2011
nikki
the discussion was largely about performance relationships :P
2011-12-27 36129, 2011
hawke_
Oh, yes. :-)
2011-12-27 36141, 2011
nikki needs food
2011-12-27 36142, 2011
hawke_
Hard to say exactly who did it when it was composed by a group
2011-12-27 36151, 2011
hawke_
unless there’s a legal dispute later. :-D
2011-12-27 36129, 2011
flamingspinach
nikki: that's not what I meant
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
flamingspinach
*what would it mean if, say, A and B performed on the track under the auspices of group G, but, even though C is a member of G, C performed on the track but not under the auspices of group G?
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
flamingspinach
also, unrelated question, but why do recordings have names? Can a recording ever not be assigned to any tracks?
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
reosarevok_ joined the channel
2011-12-27 36143, 2011
hawke_
Yes
2011-12-27 36153, 2011
hawke_
“standalone recording”
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
hawke_
formerly “non-album track”
2011-12-27 36127, 2011
reosarevok_
The entity formerly known as NAT
2011-12-27 36118, 2011
hawke_
flamingspinach: Also, it gives a good way to have a standard name when it’s released under slightly different names in different contexts.
2011-12-27 36140, 2011
jesus2099
NAT→SR
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
jesus2099
Dremora: are you still with us ?
2011-12-27 36135, 2011
hawke_
Speaking of groups and memberships, it’d be neat to have a report showing an artist “family” — i.e. everyone who ever performed with someone, was a member of the same group, etc.
2011-12-27 36128, 2011
hawke_
presumably sorted by the number of times they performed together
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
derwin
does anyone know of plans to upgrade python-musicbrainz for ngs?
CallerNo6 shuffles off to disambiguate http://musicbrainz.org/artist/47cd459b-06c1-462f-8fdd-27721a03ef68 and is ashamed that he knows so much about 80s buttrock
gioele: I suppose the workaround would be to open the release editor for both, copy the tracklist from one and add a disc in the other and only submit that one
2011-12-27 36156, 2011
reosarevok
gioele: isn't Add cluster as release an external plugin?
2011-12-27 36103, 2011
CallerNo6
well, third, after surname and family name.
2011-12-27 36158, 2011
gioele
nikki: yeah, nice idea, it would have worked fine... I'll do it next time (instead of creating two release and then merging them)
2011-12-27 36145, 2011
gioele
reosarevok: yep
2011-12-27 36112, 2011
reosarevok
I don't know if there's any place for plugin-related tickets
2011-12-27 36119, 2011
reosarevok
Although I guess that's as good as any...
2011-12-27 36123, 2011
hawke_
nikki: Is there a good way to copy a tracklist from one RE to another?
2011-12-27 36104, 2011
STalKer-X joined the channel
2011-12-27 36125, 2011
nikki
hawke_: copy it from the track parser?
2011-12-27 36108, 2011
hawke_
nikki: Oh, I thought the track parser was only for input…didn’t realize it displayed the existing tracklist too.
2011-12-27 36149, 2011
nikki
:)
2011-12-27 36126, 2011
Tecfan joined the channel
2011-12-27 36103, 2011
hawke_
I wonder if “Session supervised by” is the same as “producer”
2011-12-27 36125, 2011
CallerNo6
sound like somebody likes to hand out titles rather than raises
2011-12-27 36103, 2011
hawke_
Well, in this case it’s a note on a session in a discography
2011-12-27 36111, 2011
hawke_
but already in MB as “producer”
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
CallerNo6
I just mean, it sounds like an invented job title to make somebody happy
Though I think you might be better doing RFC-342 first, since technically that edit violates the style guide as is, and that may be part of why it was voted down
2011-12-27 36103, 2011
reosarevok
I still think a substantial amount of people disagree with adding stuff like that in general though
2011-12-27 36114, 2011
hawke_
I don’t see why.
2011-12-27 36134, 2011
hawke_
I can see the disagreement with adding it as a new medium, I guess.
2011-12-27 36141, 2011
hawke_
But not with not adding it at all
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
reosarevok
Yeah
2011-12-27 36115, 2011
reosarevok
I *want* to add it
2011-12-27 36119, 2011
hawke_
And adding it as a new medium feels like a less-bad solution that adding it as a standalone recording
2011-12-27 36123, 2011
reosarevok
I just don't know which is a good way
2011-12-27 36151, 2011
nikki
hawke_: and I feel the opposite :P
2011-12-27 36130, 2011
hawke_
nikki: Well, you’re wrong, because I say so. ;-)
2011-12-27 36143, 2011
nikki
and you're wrong 'cause I'm always right ;D
2011-12-27 36150, 2011
hawke_
:-D
2011-12-27 36151, 2011
nikki
(apparently)
2011-12-27 36123, 2011
nikki
although really both options aren't right, we just can't do it right :(
2011-12-27 36139, 2011
jesus2099 joined the channel
2011-12-27 36154, 2011
hawke_
Right, exactly.
2011-12-27 36158, 2011
hawke_
hence less-bad.
2011-12-27 36120, 2011
jesus2099
reosarevok, hawke, nikki : as far as I’m concerned, after reading this edit comments, I have no opinion for the CD Extra any more.
2011-12-27 36128, 2011
jesus2099
how to handle them I mean
2011-12-27 36134, 2011
hawke_
nikki: the only problem I see with adding it as a new medium is that it screws up the display of “3×CD” and such. Is there anything more to it?
2011-12-27 36159, 2011
gioele
new release, single artist, 13 tracks. Now at the summary page just before submitting the new edit. Is it normal that there are 13 separate artist credits, one for each track, instead of just one?
2011-12-27 36106, 2011
nikki
gioele: yes
2011-12-27 36115, 2011
jesus2099
new medium was less bad, but was maybe still bad… no idea any more (hawke→3CD+Digital is not that bad looking)
2011-12-27 36124, 2011
gioele
so the concept of single artist release is basically gone
2011-12-27 36152, 2011
nikki
gioele: not exactly, it's the same as before, except we're more verbose when displaying edits
2011-12-27 36110, 2011
jesus2099
nikki: it’s so difficult now if you want to change the release artist without changing the track artists
