Several people, although I can't say how many (I don't)
What kind of music?
(making music is not the focus of this channel, archiving information about music is)
FoolMoon joined the channel
Leftmost
We make the beautiful music of high quality data.
CallerNo6
... and a thousand TAB keys clicking furiously
DarkerAudit joined the channel
Mineo joined the channel
danoply
hi guys, i'm using the very cool "add cluster as release" plugin in picard and not having an issue with an album that is truly a "various artists" album but does have three tracks out of eight by the same artist.
When I add that cluster as a release it automatically puts in that artist with three songs as the release artist. I figured I should just change that to say Various Artists but then it changed all three track by that guy to be "Various Artists" too.
So I changed those back to be his name and thought I was good, but then in the summary page it still tied in the guy's name with "Various Artists". So I cancelled the add.
Am I stuck adding the release manually or is there some way I can change that so it treats the album as a true "Various Artists" album?
err remove the word "not" from my first sentence… terrible proofreading
brianfreud
ocharles: thanks, good to hear
voiceinsideyou joined the channel
zarlino joined the channel
EM3RY joined the channel
the_metalgamer joined the channel
CallerNo6 looks at all the different track splits that one live bootleg has, and despairs
danoply
any classical style folks here?
CallerNo6
danoply, I might be able to help
danoply
what do you put in the artist field for tracks that are "traditional" or "anonymous" songs?
Since it seems to fit the criteria of a "recital" I am using Dale Warland Singers as the Release Artist and filling in the composers as the Track Artists
but as you can see several of the songs are old traditionals that don't list a specific composer
I will be adding several albums like this so I want to make sure I do it correctly
reosarevok
We have [traditional] and [anonymous]
CallerNo6
I wouldn't apply "classical" style to that release.
danoply
oh really? it's a choral group, which usually appears in the classical section (allmusic, etc.)
CallerNo6
The purpose of the classical guidelines is to handle releases that either are...
...1. part of the "composer-centric" western tradition (e.g. baroque)
...2. have tracks by those composers which weren't given "titles" in the modern sense, but are simply known as "symphony no. 2" or whatever
reosarevok
"Woman uses pepper spray during Black Friday rush"? For buying videogames? People are completely mad
CallerNo6
that is, it's not so much about "genre"
reosarevok
CallerNo6, hmm, while that's why they were *created*, I'd argue we should try to apply them relatively consistently...
Having the same choir or orchestra have some recordings attributed to itself and some to composers is... weird
danoply
ok so this is another release by the same artist, that does appear to be in classical style… is it more appropriate for that style or should it be edited?
reosarevok, yeah, I agree. I meant compilations of tracks that are all or mostly from that "composer centric" tradition
reosarevok
I meant even in different releases
(in one release, it's just absurd IMO)
(in different releases, just weird)
jacobbrett joined the channel
CallerNo6
well, consider the "classical cover" rule... context is everything
anyway, danoply, we do have special purpose artists for [traditional] and [anon.] when needed, and when using the classical guidelines it would be correct to use those artists (with brackets) as the "composer" and "track artist"
danoply
in the track listing, some tracks show a composer of "American Traditional", "French Traditional", "Traditional Spiritual", "Anonymous", etc. Do I use those exact titles as artists or do I simplify them all to [traditional] and [anonymous]?
Not all the tracks are "classical" but the context is. It's mucis being presented in the traditon of compser-centric recitals.
CallerNo6 wonders how things like "mucis" come out of his keyboard :-(
danoply
lol
looks like the vast majority of those tracks are by composers I would consider classical
CallerNo6
Yes. My point is, I'd decide it based on the context more than on the ensemble or genre. Personally.
Your hypothetical symphonic folk recital is something I'll have to think about.
danoply
makes sense… so in this case when I'm looking through my music I generally don't think "oh man I'd really like to listen to some French Traditional, anonymous and Robert Lowry" but I rather would think "I'm in the mood to hear the Dale Warland Singers" sing some folk songs.
but in that case that's why I thought I would use "Dale Warland Singers" as the release artist with the composers going in the track artist fields
reosarevok
Yeah
The choir is for sure the release artist
danoply
btw I assume "release artist" = "album artist"
reosarevok
Yeah
CallerNo6
Agreed on release artist.
danoply
so is the main difference then that if I use classical style i would use the folk song composers as track artists and if I use popular music style I would use Dale Warland Singers as the track artist for everything?
reosarevok
Yes
That's mostly it
danoply
so it comes down to whether its worth noting who composed those songs
reosarevok
As I imagine nothing here has movements, acts or the like, the titles won't need touching
heh, it's not even that simple
danoply
yep that's right
reosarevok
We have our way of specifically indicating who composed those songs
(inside MB - and using the Composer tagging field)
The question is more of a "what would be expected as the artist field in a player"
danoply
ah I thought I read that since many apps don't honor or display the composer tag it wasn't used
reosarevok
Hmm, I expect us to use it
danoply
i think it was in the wiki somewhere
reosarevok
But as none of my players use it
danoply
let me see if i can find it
reosarevok
I am not sure myself :)
It might be more that we don't *depend* on it (as in, we put the composers as artists) because most players will ignore it?
danoply
it was in the classical faq
Putting the composer in the artist field means that the tagger uses that for ID3 artist! This is against the ID3v2 spec. Why do it?
Although the ID3v2 spec does say that artist is for 'Lead artist/Lead performer/Soloist/Performing group' most pieces of software will only use this field and ignore the composer ID3 field.
With classical you are usually more interested in the composer of a work than the performer. Until there is enough software that allows you to use the composer field in any way it seemed least damaging to do it this way round as otherwise it becomes very hard to use the composer info at all.
reosarevok
Yeah
So that's it I guess
Picard stores it in the tags
danoply
maybe that means composer is used but artist is used too… I dunno
reosarevok
But most software don't care
MBChatLogger
Honey badger don't care!!
reosarevok
Like honey badger
danoply
lol
CallerNo6
\0/
danoply
can you explain the artist credit thing? Is there something I need to do there? I am leaning towards using the classical style for this release since this group usually performs that type of music and the existing release in MB by them is in classical style. Do I need to do something with artist credits if I use [traditional] and [anonymous] as track artists?
reosarevok
You don't *have* to
[traditional] would be good enough
danoply
i just dont even understand what it is or means :)