#musicbrainz

huh, i actually own an album which is not in the database in any form

this is a weird release: https://musicbrainz.org/release/cc20cf06-94b2-4...

anyone using reddit and annoyed by it's idiotic image preview thing can install https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/reddit... it works!

[17:44] lw such discrimination. when i make AnarchyBrainz, anyone will be able to vote, and it will only take -2 votes to approve a change

lol unfortunately, the newbie limitations had to be put in place because *some* people just can't play nice. eg creating sockpuppets/spamming etc

[19:22] lw shouldn't "banjo" (https://musicbrainz.org/instrument/6bf88fc7-a23...) be a family, not an instrument? "banjo" by itself is not a specific instrument

ypu are not wrong. this banjo is a generic instrument for credits like "banjo" and no information is there. in general i'm weary of making more "previously known as an spesificinstrument" into "families" becasue of the heavy drama attached... butthe type could probably be set asfamily, i agree. i'll think about it (also feel free to create a ticket with "modify instrument" as component. that way I will not forget)

ah

this will never not be funny to me https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/2DoyH...

Family seems sensible here, but what's the "usual" banjo? Because there's only tenor banjo as a sub-instrument

It would make sense to have the specific option available for when we're sure?

hmm afaik the usual option *is* the five string. ie that's the one that's usually used when "banjo" is credited

reosarevok[m], MonkeyPython: it depends on the context. in Irish music, "banjo" by itself means the tenor, since the 5-string is almost unheard of there. in American music it's the other way around... but we already have both "4-string" (tenor) and "5-string" banjos as subtypes

huh actually MB considers "tenor banjo" to be a subtype of "4-string banjo"... but in any case there are already subtypes of banjos for all the banjos

Ah, ok, good

Then I guess banjo as family makes sense

omg this album cover: https://yt.artemislena.eu/watch?v=lW5FVlNwflw - it's like someone asked an AI to combine every stereotype of Irish compilations albums into a single image

neat, yesterday i added a new work from a release and today i linked a recording from another artist to the same work... all this effort adding works is actually useful!

lw: but there's no Guinness, and no harps, and no Leprechaun in the image ;-)

https://musicbrainz.org/artist/55e2c294-2606-47... - this artist won't be removed before the votable edit i made to add a relationship goes through, right...?

(https://musicbrainz.org/edit/114474052)

... there really should be a way to add annotations to works

reosarevok[m]: i can file a bug for this if it's easier but i found a trivial formatting error on this release, track 12: https://musicbrainz.org/release/eb3141ad-7d63-4... - "medley including a instrumental recording of" - should be "an"

so, that's tricky to fix. the link phrase is built from a template that combines multiple words, and there's no context-sensitive substitutions :( https://musicbrainz.org/relationship/a3005666-a...

ah, hm

specifically, it needs to be "an" when it's an instrumental cover, but not when it's a partial instrumental cover

lw: this is a weird release: https://musicbrainz.org/release/cc20cf06-94b2-4... — yes it is. Is that an anonymous rip you have, or something else?

if it was only a single case (like you can see with acapella/live in the long link phrase) that could be done

Is it all the same performer, do you think?

crism: not mine, i just found it randomly. the history suggests someone imported it from badly tagged tracks in their collection

Actually, looks like you'd also get "a instrumental recording" (rather than "an …") if that selection of attributes is set

feels like it should be possible to identify the release based on the track titles though

although the tagging is pretty... weird... like "Carolyn" is apparently supposed to be Carolan who obviously isn't the recording artist!

I'm kinda curious now whether relationship link phrases are translated base on site language :)

Yeah, that is a hot mess. The original (now deleted) editor didn’t have the CDs, so Atheia only knows what that is. Could even have been a mix.

Looks like someone applied classical style, partly; Michael Smith for “The Dutchman,” as well.

i picked a few pairs of track titles and searches don't return any matches for both... could be some generic "celtic complication" that was released and immediately forgotton

s/complication/compilation/

ah, the recordings *do* have AcoustID fingerprints

apparently this release also spawned some dubious works https://musicbrainz.org/work/9fc4f934-f466-4c72...

oh, postie delivered some more CDs... great, more things to tag :-d

kepstinbrainz: i think "including a" could perhaps be removed entirely, because "medley including a recording of" doesn't make sense - it's not a medley of recordings. that would render as "medley instrumental recording of"

or "recording of {medley:a medley including}"

then again "instrument recording of a medley including" would be odd if part of the medley has lyrics

new CD, in shrink wrap, with marketing stickers on... and the jewel case hinge is broken

can we not come up with a packaging format for CDs that isn't absolutely terrible?

crism: the number of tunes i'm finding entered as 'song' really convinces me we should have a new type for this

lw: +1

someone actually added a 'lyricist' credit for this one, which is slightly bizarre, i did check all the listed recordings and none of them have lyrics

i wonder if that's a result of some old database change

crism: do you think it's reasonable to remove the 'cover' attribute from trad recordings? that doesn't really make any sense to me

Yeah, I never use cover for trad. Even trad-ish things (like Stan Rogers compositions) I don’t really think of them as covers; to me, a cover is really a pop music concept.

i am getting ear fatigue from listening to John Doherty all day, he does do interesting versions of tune but he's not my favourite fiddler to actually listen to

https://musicbrainz.org/work/276fd8d4-26db-4961... do we actually need separate works for 'arrangement of'? can't recordings have that relationship?

i added the original work and the arrangement-of relationship but i wonder if they should be merged and the arrangement-of moved to the recording

i feel like a documentation page on 'guidelines for traditional music' might be helpful here

<04elomatreb> lw: Separate works for arrangements are very useful for classical music, where there are often multiple well-known arrangements of popular pieces with some orchestras/performers preferring certain ones

<04elomatreb> for less notable arrangements, you can always just link the recording to the original work and credit an arranger on the recording, not the work

yeah, that's what i usually do, but in this case someone already added the arranged work. i suppose it doesn't do any harm to have it though

<04elomatreb> right

although (as i said the other day) i am pretty dubious about these 'arranged by' credits on trad releases because they're mostly just a way for the label to claim copyright, not actual arrangements in a musical sense

put them on the recordings, sure, but are they actually works...

Strictly, yes, they are works, but no one cares. I carefully arranged all the songs for my album (since I was multi-tracking, I had to plan), but unless someone decides to record exactly one of my arrangements some day, there is no reason to reify them in MusicBrainz.

crism: do you know if Taisce Cheol Dúchais Éireann is another name for ITMA?

internet seems to suggest yes but their website doesn't say so

oh wait, it does in the tiny print at the bottom of the page

okay, 7.5 hours later... one release entered into the database! + two errors on thesession.org fixed, ~20 new works entered, and one merge

Irish Traditional Music Association seems like a close translation.

!m lw

You're doing good work, lw!

yeah, i added it as a new place with that as an alias

It does, very slowly, pay off as the intersections grow…

it does seem a bit silly to me that MB, Alan Ng and Jeremy all have their own, separate tune databases for an extremely niche style of music

i feel like if people had fewer philosophical differences we could save a lot of effort

If we cross-reference the hell out of everything, then coalescence becomes possible… (I worry about one-person shows, e.g. if Alan Ng dies, what happens then?)

yeah, that's part of what rubs me the wrong way about both of those sites... clearly Ng put a huge amount of work into that database, so why doesn't he make it publicly available?

People sometimes struggle to make something available because they put a huge amount of work into it 🤷‍♂️

i suppose. i literally cannot understand that logic though

(i'm not disagreeing with you though... i definitely see that attitude a lot, i just don't understand it :-)