#musicbrainz

cool :)

cooperaa_: both bugs fixed, new version up :)

:)

I just think of it as the most complicated set of ARs you can imagine, where the ARs themselves determine the generic work/movement’s title

then it’s all Legos :)

uh oh

cooperaa_ is now known as cooperaa

mb seems to be having issues...

working fine here...

maybe it's just the release I was trying to add...

Mmm pancakes

cooperaa: Have to admit, I think it’s a pretty bad idea :P

really?

:P

You’re assuming that performer = 1, maybe 2

I’ve seen tons of releases that are performer = 4 or 5 different groups. It’d become near impossible to find all releases where, say, JS Bach composed the works, and you’d have the same group now split into bunchs of & combos

plus, where you have featured soloists, you’d easily have “Foo Orchestra & Bar Choir” on some tracks, “Foo Orchestra & Bar Choir & John Doe”, “Foo Orchestra & Bar Choir & John Doe & Jim Smith & Donna Summers & Lee Atwater” , etc - messy

example: “Boston Symphony Orchestra & New England Conservatory of Music Chorus pro Musica & Harvard Glee Club & Radcliff Glee Club” + variations thereof: http://musicbrainz.org/release/9eb97d86-9c86-4d...

I said don't use orchestra as artist

I said use conductor

primary performer on all tracks (eg. Gould), or conductor on all tracks (eg. Karajan), if we have a collaborative effort between two performers (like in pop music) set them as the release artist, if there are multiple performers all over - use composer

I (and I'm sure there are others) would like to be able to check out Gould's discography, for example

isn’

isn’t that available through the ARs though?

People buy a CD of Bach or Mozart because, primarily, it is Bach or Mozart, not because Karajan conducted or Smith played it or the Foo choir sang it

no true

I don't care what Gould plays, I just want to hear him

;)

"Complete" sets with various performers spread over multiple discs would still remain there because they are obviously for the composer

but I mean, we already have the tracks set to the composer, let's give the performers some credit ;)

but we do... ARs

Your suggestion, though, would leave the entries for JS Bach, Mozart, etc, epmty, save for ARs lists, but AR lists so immense that noone could ever be sensibly expected to look at them

no one could ever be expected to browse through the current lists either!

at least this way we're focusing a bit more on performs, people will have to add performers with their classical adds

we can easily go to gould and browse through a *reasonable* amount of releases to find the one we have

one man can only do so much work in his life

a history of men performing the works of one man is an entirely different story, and this is what we're browsing through at the moment

It would be interesting to find the "original" recording for some particular Mozart piece.

Because that's where the ARs would point to, right? Not that huge list, after all.

:P

Even if we’d be willing to live with almost every classical CD essentially becoming a VA mess of “a&B&C” etc, you’re also assuming we always have good knowledge of the performers.

yes I am

and all the VA composer classical releases which don’t give that info?

right now performers are a requirement

RA = Composer

if performers aren't mentioned, they're not important so just keep it with the composer

You are ignoring that half the RA’s would be VA, thus the composers would lose any listing at all for the release

Or, a better example, where we do have *some* performer info: The BC Mozart box lists some, but I will guarantee it is not fully inclusive - Concertos for Piano with just pianist, not orchestra... Concertos for Piano and violin with only the pianist listed, etc.

I don't think we should move them to VA, I think we should keep the VA ones in the composer's list

Right now, composer as artist is both easy and useful. You’re suggesting a multi-level “who is the artist” scheme, where we then have some tracks unknown performers = composer, those with known performers = performer list &s, and of course, then, those we only have partial performer info end up moving around.

partial performer info = keep with composer

Seems totally complicated, vs composer as artist, when the exact same thing is already possible, without moving artists around, and without having losing the ability to see all releases for a composer, with the AR system.

what I'm saying is when there's a clear primary performer (such as a single pianist or violinist, let's put them as the RA)

I totally disagree

It may be Glenn Gould performing Mozart’s Concerto No. 3 for Piano

and not just “random recording of” Mozart’s Concerto No. 3 for Piano

but in the scheme of which part is more important, Mozart is the primary reason you buy the CD, not Glenn Gould

that's not always true, like I said I don't care what Gould plays, I want to hear Gould

you go to a store, classical is separated and sorted by composer. You go to an online store - Amazon for example - the same is true. At my central library, they have thousands of CDs... and all classical is by composer. I think it’s well recognized that people look for classical based first on the composer, not the performer.

and throughout his life, Gould doesn't care who he played either - he plays works by varying composers

sigh

Well, ignoring all that, composer we either know or don’t know. Performers we maybe know, maybe partially know, maybe don’t know.

Why would we go from a system that lets us at least classify the artist yes or no, to one that very well could have tracks being moved around all the time as we fill in missing performer info?

we rarely have missing performer info

not true

on incoming edits, we always ask for it

on existing releases - yes, we're missing performers

I can point, like I said, to a 170 CD set that clearly has some, but also clearly is incomplete.

a 170 CD set would not feature one performer

I added every AR possible. But when I have a work scored for piano, violin, and full orchestra, and the liner only lists piano, there’s clearly performer info missing.

so that would belong under the composer anyways

So really you’re suggesting only moving out if there’s a single identified soloist or group or conductor

yes, pretty much

which makes even less sense to me, to split the discography under varying confusing and conflicting rules.

that’s the exact problem we have now in soundtrack style. Why would you want to open that chaos up on classical?

in classical, we don’t have the “pop” problem of soundtrack style, so “all classical = composer” is a quite simple rule. Your suggestion takes that rule and makes it very, very messy.

but I think we do have "pop" classical situations

Theoretical example: 10 track Glenn Gould CD. You would put it under Gould. Now that same CD, with 1, 2, 3 bonus tracks, performed by Hann. Now that’s VA, so it’s under composer, not performer.

for example... people who like good piano music may only care about specific performers, whether they perform only classical music, or a mix

that seems like a ridiculous thing to do

and why would it be so difficult, then, to search for either “Gould” in the release titles, or to look at the release list in ARs under Gould,

rather than borking up all the classical composer listings, just to get those specific special CDs moved over to Gould?

break it up into chunks to make it more manageable

having a list of every recording of Bach music ever would be insane

I don’t agree... it’s a large page, yes, but that’s no reason to arbitrarily break it up

breaking it up into works that Solti or Perlmann has worked is a much easier task

Knio1 is now known as Knio

but again, then you’re distinguishing between “one single person plays this CD” and everything else

and from a standpoint of “for a classical composer, what does the artist field mean”, that then makes no database-wise sense

While I agree, we do need a way to search ARs, and while I agree, moving the performer info out of the titles would be a good thing, I think this is absolutely the wrong way to do either, because of the cost - what ability we then lose and the needless complexity it brings to the rules for artist field

I’d much rather be able to advanced search AR:performer=”Gould” and leave the listings as they are

the release artist field is the artist who released the material

Bach didn't release any of these recordings