#musicbrainz

hi

inhouseuk__ is now known as inhouseuk

is there a command-line tool to tag files using musicbrainz's database?

Perl!

*g* same thought here

http://search.cpan.org/~bfaist/WebService-Music... for example

I couldn't work out how to get the silly id3 library (yes, was just working with mp3s at the time) to write TXXX fields, though, which kind of made my life a little difficult.

ooohhh

nightgroove is now known as catgroove

uriah heep cover!

it's gonna be a crummy day....i hate going to weddings when there's a smog alert out

:( http://musicbrainz.org/show/release/?releaseid=...

mo: I would make that relationship to "Part Two" , then just note the cover is of the "King Kong" section

I don't like it :(

i'd rather just make a 'frank zappa composed' type ar

gah

i've done something similar before....can't remember the artist but the original track was a Track A / Track B format and the cover was only of Track A, yet i still made the relationship

morning :)

yes but this is more like 5-10 per 'track'

hmm..is there a clear second release (first release as only King Kong)?

only live afaik

:(

you could link to that version..then link that version as being part of the medley in "Part Two"

ja.. but only live exsists, afaik

look the lniks..

zappa doesn't like to make things easy does he

nope

YANATR: http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6974826

(yet another non album track removal)

Knio1 is now known as Knio

thanks brainfrø and drsound

:P

:)

catgroove, did you get my email?

hmm

sec, haven't chcked my mails yet

k

dug up some info on the original TW

might need to (ugh) split original TW into 3 groups

catgroove: hmm, a lot of remixes are attributed to the artists of the original track...

I voted "abstain" because I'm not sure of the correctness of it

then the release which it is on shoud have the track artistthance

♪

this is a NAT

I guess it comes down to "is it a remix or a cover?"

the title suggests it's a remix

I'd say cover sincethats whatthe page I linked to said it was. it was fully re-recorded,

he got the original singer to guest vocal on it

:)

heh

if it isn't though, the trak does appear on other erleases, so in anycase, a NAT (non album track) is wrong

yeah, that's true

mo: are you seriously suggesting that a fictitious person is not a valid concept?

if its Fitiously fitious, rather than a fittious real entety, ie 'gorillaz' or 'Spinal Tap'

yes

there is not fitious real entetty 'the simposns' performing 'as a band'

it's simply the catch-all released-under-entity for which music for mthat TV show is under

as people wouldn't know to look for the names of the composers, the recordreleases and oweners of the show don't bother

people don't know to look of 'richard o'brien' when they look for 'rovky horror picture show' either, but it doesn't make 'rhps' the artist

hawke: Catgroove has a point. He and I talked about this the other day a good bit. Yes, there's precident for ficticious artists. But right now, we're treating TV/Movie characters different than Musicals and some soundtracks.

We don't list "Original London Cast", we list the composer. For most movies, we don't list the characters, we list the composer, classical style.

we should have AR's with 'roles'

But for The Simpsons, etc, we list the character instead - it's not consistant...

IMO it should be whoever is credited with it

yes, but that's not usefull in a daabase like mb

how is that not useful?

Originally, I would have agreed. But if you think about it a bit, that then means we have "artists" for every single character who ever performs on a soundtrack

especially with the "performs as" AR

Which becomes unuseful.

BrianFreud: a lot of times they're not credited to the characters though

because you get artists like 'bob and Jane' 'Jane and bob' Jane foo & bob bar

..among many other issues

I think that if the album credits the character, put the character; if they credit the real names of the performer, put that; if they credit the writer, put that

and I think not

hawke: Just using the RHPS example, instead of Richard O'Brien, and being able to look at his works, you would have 10 or more different fictious artists linking back through 2 levels or ARs to the actual performers

catgroove: the B&J one -- clearly those are all the same artist.

yes, bad example

but take BrianFreud example

Plus then you have to handle all the RHPS tracks from various cast recordings, so add in anouther 40 versions of those same ficticious artists

it would make a MESS out of soundtracks

RHPS are credited to Richard O'Brien

Right

not to mention 2006 different 'cast' artists

I mean on the disc

no

they aree credited to 'rocky' 'that guy' and 'foobar'

on the disc, it credits "Rocky" "Jane" "Rocky & Jane" etc

exactly

and then you'd' have different 'rocky's and different 'janes'

who the fuck is jane?

You have the French, the movie, the Argentine, the San Francisco, the Toronto, the London, etc casts

for each new cast that records the musical

yes

not to mentino all the lanugage tones

(that's the version I mean catgroove :P )

there's a 4 disc set with all the various language casts + movie on it

eeep

there'd be maybe 4 tracks which credit to the same ficitious artists

and movies

'my fair lady' etc

yes

still, the vast majority of those credit the actors

that's why you convinced me catgroove

every single movie would become a disaster

yes ,and they shoud have AR's noit be added in fo & bar & jane & tom & dick& rovky 6 meat loaf & guy & etc super artist

So if I wanted every, say David Newman composed film,

no way to find it

exactly

catgroove: Now, right now, we're talking about artist / albumartist

Would you still be opposed to the fictious artists if created solely for use as "performed by" ARs?

on a track with everybody i n the cast sinigng , you'd get a track artist like that

BrianFreud: yes and no

"The Time Warp" by artist Richard O'Brien, performed by Morticia, Morticia a performance name for foobar?

wait a sec

I'm coming to that