the last part is still a little hazy, but I'm sure I'll figure it out.
2011-11-04 30824, 2011
hawke__
Sounds right to me.
2011-11-04 30848, 2011
hawke__
Hmm, where a poem was set to music, and the music itself also has a title but was written specifically for the poem, what if any relations should there be between the music work, and the music+poem work?
2011-11-04 30845, 2011
hawke__
I’m inclined to say music+poem “is a later version of” music
2011-11-04 30846, 2011
derwin
hawke__: if a poet slams in the woods, and no one is there to clap politely
2011-11-04 30802, 2011
hawke__
but the music didn’t exist prior to the combination of the two.
2011-11-04 30802, 2011
derwin
hawke__: you mean "words of advice for young people" or um.. "into the void" covered by soundgarden
2011-11-04 30843, 2011
derwin
hawke__: " For its cover of Black Sabbath's "Into the Void", the original lyrics are replaced by words of protest by Chief Sealth, which fit the meter of the song.[15] At the 1993 Grammy Awards, "Into the Void (Sealth)" received a nomination for Best Metal Performance. "
2011-11-04 30842, 2011
hawke__
That’s kind of the other way round, isn’t it? same music, new lyrics?
2011-11-04 30842, 2011
hawke__
but yeah, similar situation.
2011-11-04 30814, 2011
hawke__
Though in that case the music and the lyrics both clearly existed before
2011-11-04 30809, 2011
hawke__
I think I’ll just continue to treat “later version of” as if it was a backwards “based on” since that makes more sense. :-)
hawke_: btw, I was thinking about how to link derived versions the other day
2011-11-04 30837, 2011
marvs_ joined the channel
2011-11-04 30848, 2011
nikki
hawke_: I eventually came to the conclusion that I'd need four options, to say that the lyrics are the same, the music is the same, the lyrics are based on the original or the music is based on the original (which of course could be combined :P)
2011-11-04 30812, 2011
nikki
and that was about as far as I got with the idea :P
2011-11-04 30827, 2011
hawke__
It’s usually pretty clear since the composer and lyricist would be the same as the previous version
You mean in that the composer could have composed something new based on the older one, and so the music is different even though the composer is the same?
2011-11-04 30831, 2011
nikki
yeah
2011-11-04 30841, 2011
nikki
or the same person could have written new lyrics
2011-11-04 30832, 2011
nikki
or the same person could have just modified the original lyrics
2011-11-04 30812, 2011
hawke__
True enough.
2011-11-04 30825, 2011
hawke__
But I think for most purposes you don’t need all that. :-)
2011-11-04 30853, 2011
hawke__
If it’s a new version, it doesn’t matter whether the lyrics or music are exactly the same or not
2011-11-04 30832, 2011
nikki
it just seems weird to me to lump everything together
2011-11-04 30824, 2011
nikki
and nobody's forced to link works together if they don't want to either
2011-11-04 30833, 2011
dukeleto
where would i find info about current musicbrainz api's ?
and I only know of people working on c and python stuff
2011-11-04 30836, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: interesting! i am looking to see if I can reuse something already written to interface with cashmusic, or if I need to write a mb library in PHP first :)
2011-11-04 30834, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: that lib looks like it still uses the old version of the mb api
2011-11-04 30804, 2011
ruaok
yeah.
2011-11-04 30816, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: are you planning on adding read/write to the xml api, or creating a different api for that?
2011-11-04 30816, 2011
ruaok
best to go with v2 if at all possible
2011-11-04 30826, 2011
ruaok
into the v2 api.
2011-11-04 30845, 2011
ruaok
we'll support PUT/POST operations on the same resources
2011-11-04 30827, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: awesome! resty deliciousness
2011-11-04 30827, 2011
dukeleto
ooh, i see there is some musicbrainz activity on github
2011-11-04 30846, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: how different are v1 and v2 of the api?
2011-11-04 30802, 2011
dukeleto
ruaok: would it be better to write from scratch, or modify code from v1 to v2 ?
2011-11-04 30849, 2011
ruaok
modify I would think.
2011-11-04 30808, 2011
ruaok
the data structures change quite a bit, but it might still be less effort than going from scratch
2011-11-04 30810, 2011
MJ
to translate or not to translate….
2011-11-04 30846, 2011
MJ
original Norwegian track listing "Crying (lang version)" or english "Crying (long version)
2011-11-04 30848, 2011
MJ
"
2011-11-04 30856, 2011
dukeleto
i assume there is already a cpan module for talking to v2 of the api?
2011-11-04 30809, 2011
MJ
the track titles are generally in English, except for these qualifiers.
2011-11-04 30830, 2011
hawke__
MJ: “Crying”, with the disambiguation as “long version”?
2011-11-04 30807, 2011
MJ
yeah, except the track listing names it (Lang Versjon) (mistyped that earlier).
2011-11-04 30836, 2011
hawke__
Ah.
2011-11-04 30854, 2011
MJ
oh, fun, other qualifiers in that same listing:
2011-11-04 30827, 2011
hawke__
I’d put the tracklisting as “Crying (Lang Versjon)”, and then the recording as “Crying” with a disambiguation of “Long Version” (Assuming there’s also a short version ;-) )
2011-11-04 30828, 2011
MJ
"Bogus Bonus", "Interlude", "Introlude", "Prins Thomas Diskomiks" and "Rough Multitrack Edit"
2011-11-04 30840, 2011
MJ
there is a short version on disc 1.
2011-11-04 30840, 2011
ijabz joined the channel
2011-11-04 30846, 2011
MJ
btw, (Lang Versjon) and not (lang versjon)?
2011-11-04 30812, 2011
MJ
next fun detail
2011-11-04 30835, 2011
MJ
the original LP from 1979 had some tracks which were deemed one, but consisted of 2 or 3 parts.
2011-11-04 30856, 2011
MJ
so "Joy, Parts I & 2", and "Man of the Present Age, Parts I-III"
2011-11-04 30801, 2011
MJ
so those are one recording.
2011-11-04 30807, 2011
MJ
(each).
2011-11-04 30819, 2011
MJ
but now the CD remastering split those over separate tracks.
2011-11-04 30830, 2011
MJ
should I point to the original recording for these still?
2011-11-04 30837, 2011
MJ
or are these new recordings?
2011-11-04 30842, 2011
hawke__
new recordings.
2011-11-04 30822, 2011
MJ
thanks
2011-11-04 30829, 2011
MJ
ugh, along the way MB lost my DiscID that I was basing this on.
2011-11-04 30834, 2011
MJ
oh well, I'll reattach.
2011-11-04 30806, 2011
MJ
ugh, the Relate to… box is useless for recordings
2011-11-04 30820, 2011
MJ
unless you can add artist:"" and other qualifiers..
MJ: relate to is OK, but it requires that the search index be updated before it works properly. That happens every 3? 6? hours.
2011-11-04 30839, 2011
hawke__
Well, that’s what I would do, yes. My opinion is not gospel though
2011-11-04 30844, 2011
MJ
k
2011-11-04 30831, 2011
srotta joined the channel
2011-11-04 30807, 2011
MJ
I'm leaving the titles as is; all the bonus CD tracks are remixes.
2011-11-04 30824, 2011
nikki
hawke_: 3 hours
2011-11-04 30807, 2011
hawke__
Should a release which is credited differently in different countries be entered in separate release groups?
2011-11-04 30845, 2011
MJ
I recently merged all the Roger the Engineer releases into one group
2011-11-04 30805, 2011
MJ
There are at least 3 different titles that came out as.
2011-11-04 30813, 2011
nikki
I enter them in the same release group if they're the same release
2011-11-04 30826, 2011
MJ
depending on region and how much the "Roger the Engineer" nick-name was sticking.
2011-11-04 30831, 2011
hawke__
define “the same release”?
2011-11-04 30832, 2011
nikki
well, same criteria I would use if it hadn't had a different name :P
2011-11-04 30839, 2011
kepstin-laptop joined the channel
2011-11-04 30854, 2011
nikki
same basic set of tracks, perhaps reordered a bit, possibly bonus tracks/discs
2011-11-04 30841, 2011
hawke__
Same name of the release (It’s untitled, a single), same tracks. It’s the credits that are different
2011-11-04 30806, 2011
hawke__
making it problematic to put credits on the RG, you see.
2011-11-04 30810, 2011
nikki
how different?
2011-11-04 30813, 2011
hawke__
“Django Reinhardt et le Quintette du Hot-Club de France avec Arthur Briggs et Stéphane Grappelli” in some places, “Stéphane Grappelly and his Hot Four” in others, “Hot Club of France Quintet” in others.
2011-11-04 30852, 2011
hawke__
Along with several variants of “Quintet of the Hot Club of France” but those are fine since it’s at least the same artist.
2011-11-04 30842, 2011
hawke__
So “Stéphane Grappelly and his Hot Four” is the problematic one, really.
2011-11-04 30853, 2011
hawke__
Maybe I should merge that into the “QHCF” artist
2011-11-04 30839, 2011
hawke__
It seems to be used pretty much exclusively for releases by the group
