BrianFreud actually has to get off his ass and add one of them that's not in there yet :P
2007-06-18 16931, 2007
srotta
No it's not. It's a compilation that's marketed with movie names.
2007-06-18 16950, 2007
BrianFreud
right. It's advertised/listed as "such and such for such and such movie"
2007-06-18 16957, 2007
BrianFreud
*s/for/from
2007-06-18 16912, 2007
srotta
You won't find a movie that contains those tracks, so it's not a soundtrack. Not even "inspired by" soundtrack.
2007-06-18 16924, 2007
srotta
It's a compilation, plain and simple.
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
srotta
:P
2007-06-18 16931, 2007
BrianFreud
no, it's a soundtrack compilation
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
BrianFreud
unless you'd rather we set all soundtrack compilations to soundtrack... which I'd be happy with ;)
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
BrianFreud
just luks and most others wouldn't be... :P
2007-06-18 16912, 2007
srotta
Eh?
2007-06-18 16950, 2007
BrianFreud
the argument has been that, unless it's a single movie soundtrack, or a 2 or3 movie soundtrack where all 2 or 3 movies have no separate soundtrack,
2007-06-18 16958, 2007
BrianFreud
it's a compilation, not a soundtrack.
2007-06-18 16918, 2007
srotta
I agree.
2007-06-18 16935, 2007
BrianFreud
So if it's "Star Wars", it's soundtrack. If it's "The Birds / Monkey's Paw", it's soundtrack. If it's "The top 10 movie themes of 1980", it's compilation.
2007-06-18 16945, 2007
srotta
Exactly.
2007-06-18 16949, 2007
BrianFreud
but that's just because we can'
2007-06-18 16909, 2007
BrianFreud
can't set two types to a single release. The last example still is a compilation of tracks from soundtracks.
2007-06-18 16922, 2007
BrianFreud
and advertised/sold/liner listed as such.
2007-06-18 16947, 2007
BrianFreud
And, more so, it's on those that it's more important, not less, to list which movie each track on the comp is from.
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
BrianFreud
"Rachel's Song" is somewhat unhelpful in a comp listing... and we have no other field to store the info. "Blade Runner: Rachel's Song", on the other hand, useful++
2007-06-18 16929, 2007
srotta
So, to continue the previous discussion, it's ok to make the style more fitting for tagging, when it's just generally ok, and otherwise it makes more sense to enter correct data?
2007-06-18 16943, 2007
BrianFreud
huh?
2007-06-18 16901, 2007
srotta
Generally external information is entered as ARs, annotations etc.
2007-06-18 16913, 2007
srotta
The movie title is definitely extra information.
2007-06-18 16924, 2007
BrianFreud
Well, we don't list movies, so AR to a movie is rather difficult.
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
srotta
It's entered in annotations on numerous albums here.
2007-06-18 16939, 2007
BrianFreud
Annotations are useless for anything, in this context, save direct eyeballs on the listing.
2007-06-18 16945, 2007
srotta
Suddenly I see someone entering hundreds of edits to change the style?
2007-06-18 16958, 2007
BrianFreud
and, it's more true to the liner
2007-06-18 16919, 2007
BrianG
so is "Bob Marley & The Wailers" / Catch A Fire
2007-06-18 16925, 2007
srotta
Which we so religiously follow?-)
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
BrianFreud
"Rachel's Song (Blade Runner)" or "Rachel's Song from Blade Runner" or "Theme from Northern Exposure".
2007-06-18 16959, 2007
BrianFreud
srotta: by your same argument though, we ought not to list opera/opus names in classical works either
2007-06-18 16924, 2007
srotta
When the song is from a particular TV series or movie, ok. But that's not the case for "Born to Be Wild", or "Smoke on the Water".
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
srotta
And yeah, I agree, it's problematic when there are several different kinds of tracks on the same album.
2007-06-18 16907, 2007
srotta
But it doesn't make those hundreds of edits ok.
2007-06-18 16915, 2007
BrianFreud
If you have a compilation that specifically is designed to be a compilation of tracks from movies - what we would set to "soundtrack & compilation" if we could, then yes, it makes sense.
2007-06-18 16933, 2007
HairMetalAddict
By my argument, you get the hair metal bands to kill the opera freaks ... "death by hairspray" ... then you don't have to list them at all. Can spend more time back stage with the groupies instead. Party on!
2007-06-18 16945, 2007
BrianFreud
hehe
2007-06-18 16921, 2007
srotta
Has there been any discussion about those changes?
2007-06-18 16934, 2007
srotta
Anywhere?
2007-06-18 16949, 2007
BrianFreud
back in his initial edits, yes
2007-06-18 16918, 2007
srotta
So that's pretty much "nowhere", since various artists edits go pretty much unnoticed unless you're a serial voter.
2007-06-18 16956, 2007
BrianFreud
I picked up on him going through newbie add edits, then brought in the CSG hounds to help with his classical tracks on his VA ST comps
2007-06-18 16926, 2007
BrianG
but many of those are pop songs, not classical
2007-06-18 16932, 2007
srotta
Yeah.
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
srotta
Of course, we might as well introduce CSG to the database as a whole.
2007-06-18 16910, 2007
BrianFreud
well, it's CSG-extreme-lite
2007-06-18 16911, 2007
srotta
Or change everything to SoapOperaStyle, since that's where we're heading.
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
BrianFreud
I'd disagree, but whatever... :P
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
srotta
No thought of going through style mailing list or anything before making huge amounts of controversial edits?
2007-06-18 16909, 2007
HairMetalAddict
Like sands through the hourglass, so are the Day of Our Lives. (me does SoapOpera)
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
BrianFreud
srotta: Do you see *me* making hundreds of soundtrack edits?
2007-06-18 16939, 2007
BrianFreud
it's a vague area in the guidelines - I've looked, trust me.
2007-06-18 16956, 2007
BrianFreud
And, a great deal of the soundtrack compilations in the database already use that style.
2007-06-18 16957, 2007
srotta
No, but I do see you defending them, and I think you should know better.
2007-06-18 16918, 2007
BrianFreud
Because I think they're correct.
2007-06-18 16920, 2007
srotta
And a great deal don't. As a matter of fact, I haven't seen any before those edits.
2007-06-18 16943, 2007
BrianFreud
Well, what would you prefer?
2007-06-18 16900, 2007
BrianFreud
Most soundtrack compilations include at least one classical track.
2007-06-18 16910, 2007
BrianFreud
So either we get 1) CSG and non-CSG mixed track names
2007-06-18 16919, 2007
BrianFreud
2) We ignore CSG for those classical tracks
2007-06-18 16901, 2007
BrianFreud
or 3) We use Movie title: track name for the non-classical, and the listings look clean, make sense, and convery all the info for the track in it's reason for being on that compilation
2007-06-18 16912, 2007
BrianG
BrianFreud would put all information about a track in the title field if he could
2007-06-18 16913, 2007
BrianG
:)
2007-06-18 16939, 2007
BrianFreud
otherwise, considering soundtrackstyle itself is still only a proposal, as is soundtracktitlestyle, and we have no soundtracktracktitlestyle, we have zero guideance for naming anything on these compilations.
2007-06-18 16907, 2007
srotta
Well, I quickly looked at a few of those albums (which, by the way, didn't have movie titles before those edits) and none of them had classical tracks.
2007-06-18 16915, 2007
BrianG
we don't ever put data in a track field unless it's part of the track tilt
2007-06-18 16949, 2007
srotta
I came across some edits for classical tracks, but they were all on a single release that had only classical tracks that appear in moview.
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
BrianFreud
so we apply one style to a soundtrack compilation if it happens to include any classical, but a different style if it doesn't?
2007-06-18 16958, 2007
srotta
Well, we apply one style to a release if it's classical, and a different one if it's classical.
2007-06-18 16906, 2007
BrianFreud
huh?
2007-06-18 16908, 2007
srotta
Grhm, non-classical...
2007-06-18 16909, 2007
srotta
8)
2007-06-18 16911, 2007
BrianFreud
lol
2007-06-18 16926, 2007
srotta
Although that first statement seems to be true as well :P
2007-06-18 16930, 2007
BrianFreud
;p
2007-06-18 16939, 2007
BrianFreud
well, let's step back a sec
2007-06-18 16942, 2007
BrianFreud
would you agree, there's a basic distinction between general compilations and soundtrack (either songs from, songs inspired by, or songs written for) compilations, just as there's a distinction between general compilations and classical compilations?
2007-06-18 16950, 2007
srotta
No.
2007-06-18 16952, 2007
srotta
8)
2007-06-18 16916, 2007
BrianFreud
So if I have "The Top 20 hits of 1980" and "The top 20 hits from the movies", they're the same?
2007-06-18 16918, 2007
srotta
Well, they'll probably contain different tracks... :P From the track-naming view, yes.
2007-06-18 16926, 2007
BrianFreud
ok...
2007-06-18 16935, 2007
BrianFreud
now, let's say I have "The top 20 movie hits of 1977" which includes "Also sprach Zarasthura" (sp?) and the 9th symphony among its tracks, and "The top 20 movie hits of 1978" which contains no classical.
2007-06-18 16912, 2007
BrianFreud
if we name soundtrack comps based on the presence of a classical track or not, then one year will have one style, the other year a different style.
2007-06-18 16949, 2007
srotta
Well, as I said, I know there are problems. Making controversial edits without any discussion about it isn't the way to solve them.
2007-06-18 16920, 2007
BrianFreud
well, until now, there's been no controversy... cooperaa, liff, myself, noone who's seen his edits has raised any flahs
2007-06-18 16923, 2007
BrianFreud
*/flags
2007-06-18 16952, 2007
BrianFreud
If you think it needs an official style, and needs to go to the style mailing list, though, we can do that.
2007-06-18 16901, 2007
srotta
I'd definitely suggest that.
2007-06-18 16933, 2007
BrianG
i would think it's pretty much common sense that you don't apply "classical" styles to "popular" songs
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
BrianFreud
main problem with soundtracks is, they're the mishmosh of the music world more than anythinng else - even remixes, dj mixes, general comps, what have you
2007-06-18 16916, 2007
BrianFreud
basically, every single style can be mixed together on the same release.
2007-06-18 16910, 2007
BrianFreud
So the style he's using, at least to me, makes the most sense - it allows for CSG, where needed, presents all the info in a similar enough fashion where CSG doesn't apply, and generally makes sense :)
2007-06-18 16919, 2007
srotta
I agree. That sort of should imply that there should be a documented way of handling them, instead of just going ahead and applying some randomly invented style.
2007-06-18 16949, 2007
BrianFreud
Sure. I'll draft up a proposal for the style list this afternoon.
2007-06-18 16900, 2007
BrianFreud
which reminds me, since I have to draft the other one too...
2007-06-18 16920, 2007
BrianFreud
I've been looking for prior proposals, and haven't really seen any clean ones in the stylelist archives...
2007-06-18 16932, 2007
BrianFreud
is there some format we're supposed to follow for RFCs?
2007-06-18 16944, 2007
srotta
I don't know. I guess not :P
2007-06-18 16945, 2007
BrianFreud
the wiki just says how, not what
2007-06-18 16946, 2007
BrianFreud
lol
2007-06-18 16900, 2007
catgroove
hmn I don't know aboutthe style forthat release
2007-06-18 16902, 2007
catgroove
I don't know
2007-06-18 16906, 2007
BrianFreud
everyone's always saying "ok, I'll write up an RFC"... but noone ever seems to do one :P
2007-06-18 16914, 2007
catgroove
I both agree to have the movies in, but also I agree to not havethme in
2007-06-18 16935, 2007
BrianFreud
It's basically CSG where classical, MovieTitle: TracktitleInOriginalMovieScore/Soundtrack where not
2007-06-18 16945, 2007
warp
if they're on the cover, i probably prefer them in. otherwise, not.
2007-06-18 16947, 2007
catgroove
the rfc thing is: say you're doing it, but never do it and hope it magically fixes itself by way f implementation of more server code next year
2007-06-18 16948, 2007
catgroove
'
2007-06-18 16910, 2007
catgroove
i'd agree with arp on this
2007-06-18 16911, 2007
BrianFreud
catgroove: that's exactly what I've found trying to actually *find* a RFC in the archives... :P
2007-06-18 16916, 2007
warp back to work and not following all of this on
2007-06-18 16919, 2007
warp
s/on//
2007-06-18 16928, 2007
catgroove
warp!
2007-06-18 16931, 2007
catgroove hugswarp
2007-06-18 16939, 2007
catgroove dances around warp
2007-06-18 16942, 2007
BrianFreud
hey warp, by the way, you forgot to vote on that one edit after you researched/fixed it :P
2007-06-18 16953, 2007
warp
BrianFreud: i did? :S
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
warp
ok, quick check.. then back to work. deadline today.
2007-06-18 16907, 2007
BrianFreud
I set the language/script there too :p hehe
2007-06-18 16919, 2007
BrianFreud
ok, well, does anyone know how formal a RFC has to be?
2007-06-18 16927, 2007
catgroove
no idea
2007-06-18 16943, 2007
catgroove
I still say thatthe forum wqoudlhave been better
2007-06-18 16944, 2007
BrianFreud can write proposalese... he just doesn't like to :D
2007-06-18 16955, 2007
catgroove
noone listens to me
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
BrianFreud
why the forum?
2007-06-18 16908, 2007
catgroove
even when down the line it happenstance that i'm *right*
2007-06-18 16909, 2007
BrianFreud never goes in there...
2007-06-18 16921, 2007
catgroove
I was right about track annotations
2007-06-18 16926, 2007
BrianFreud
?
2007-06-18 16938, 2007
BrianFreud
showing in release view you mean?
2007-06-18 16903, 2007
catgroove
no, when annotationswhere being added
2007-06-18 16911, 2007
catgroove
I said' mifht need track annotations too'
2007-06-18 16917, 2007
catgroove
they said 'nah, no need'
2007-06-18 16918, 2007
catgroove
:P
2007-06-18 16922, 2007
BrianFreud
:P
2007-06-18 16938, 2007
catgroove
I mentioned adding urls/annotations as apart of the add-release routine way back in the day when the add routine was bor..erh fixed by keskte rewritten
2007-06-18 16943, 2007
BrianFreud
I see em as useful... but the info so hidden and inaccessible, kinda unuseful as implimented atm
2007-06-18 16952, 2007
catgroove
heh
2007-06-18 16957, 2007
catgroove
it's like track ar's all over again
2007-06-18 16910, 2007
BrianFreud
?
2007-06-18 16911, 2007
BrianFreud
lol
2007-06-18 16928, 2007
catgroove
tracka ars wheren't always visible from the albumview
2007-06-18 16941, 2007
catgroove
so noone added them, because they where 'hidden'
2007-06-18 16942, 2007
BrianFreud
ah
2007-06-18 16922, 2007
catgroove
well people did add them, (atleast I did) but most people whined and complained about it :D
