Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 20 Oct 21:00 2014

Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 19 Oct 19:42 2014
Picon

Changes to our style process (Important)

Hi! So, this has already been posted to the blog, but for those here who don't read the blog, I'll repost:

At the MusicBrainz Summit last month in Copenhagen, one of the topics to
be discussed was the state of the style guidelines and style process.
One thing those present agreed on was that the process was in need of
reform, for several reasons: the complexity of the process,
inconsistency with other processes in the project, the high level of
individual commitment required to make changes, long-running discussions
without conclusion or followthrough, and ultimately the state of the
final product, the style guidelines themselves. The inaccessibility of
our existing process meant that many users, both new and old, avoided
the style process, and this hurts the project: style is part of what
makes MusicBrainz what it is, and low participation means our guidelines
have grown both internally inconsistent and out of sync with community
practice. Nor is the style process a new problem for MusicBrainz:
historically, it’s changed several times and some past style leaders
have vanished into thin air.  After all, it is a hard job, for a
volunteer, to convince many voices to come to a consensus.

To improve upon these issues, we’ve decided to make two major changes.

First: to designate our JIRA issue tracker at tickets.musicbrainz.org as
the central coordination point for style issues. This way, any issue, be
it style-related or code-related, is reported and discussed in the same
place (and should an issue be misfiled, it’s easily corrected). The
issue tracker can also collect links to other discussions, in edit
notes, the forums, IRC, etc., and store links to related issues such as
features in need of implementation.

Second: to promote our current Style Leader to Style Benevolent Dictator
For Life (Style BDFL). Nicolás Tamargo (reosarevok) will then be in
charge of considering tickets and implementing changes in the style
guidelines. This change shifts the burden of evaluating style issues
from the community to our newly appointed BDFL. For simple changes and
for simple improvements to consistency and writing style, the BDFL can
change things directly, without need for lengthy discussion. Of course,
his work won’t happen in a vacuum: for changes that are complex or
contentious, the role of the BDFL will be to gather feedback and
determine the next steps before making changes. To this end, he may
occasionally call for a non-binding vote on a particular topic, to
collect a snapshot of community opinion to augment existing discussion,
all in order to make a better informed decision.

We hope that this new process will make contribution to the creation of
style guidelines easier and less onerous a commitment for everyone, and
that the resulting style guidelines will be more up-to-date, more
consistent, and more clearly written and organized. To test it out,
we’re going to try this process for 6 months, and then review how things
have progressed and if the process needs further tweaking or even
complete replacement.

tl;dr: Style system has changed, new info at http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Proposals
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
LordSputnik | 14 Sep 14:00 2014
Picon

Master and Performance entities

Just over a year ago now, we redefined the MusicBrainz recording entity.
Previously, it had mainly been seen as one of two different things,
depending on which editor you asked - either a "mix" or a "master".

This resulted in a lot of subjective decision making when merging or
splitting recordings, with arguments over whether the practically identical
recordings contained "unique audio". A lot of the time, decisions had to be
made based on listening to the track (not always possible) or looking at
AcoustID data (not always accurate).

So, recording was redefined to represent "distinct audio" prior to final
mastering (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/recording). In most cases (for songs,
anyway), this corresponds to the "mix".

This means that we're left with a gap in the MusicBrainz model, since there
is no entity to represent audio at the "master" level. Back when recordings
were redefined, it was agreed that masters should be implemented in some
form in the future, so I've made this thread to get some ideas on what form
they should take.

Additionally, it would be nice to hear thoughts on a Performance entity,
which was also discussed last year.

My own thoughts:
Master audio could be represented in one of two ways:
- 1. as an entity which groups releases with identical mastering.
- 2. as an entity which seamlessly fits between recordings and tracks, and
allows the grouping of tracks with shared mastering.

#1 seems the least complicated way of doing things, but #2 would allow for
cases where mastered audio from different sources has been copied to some
other release (eg. some compilations)

I also think that we might be able to use the new Event entity for storing
Performances - we could introduce a new "recording session for" or "recorded
at" relationship to link Events to Recordings.

Anyway, let me know your thoughts, and we can try to come up with some sort
of plan!

Ben / LordSputnik

--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Master-and-Performance-entities-tp4668141.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
caller#6 | 10 Sep 17:47 2014
Picon

RFV: STYLE-331"add 'composite reissue' relationship" (aka 'includes')

Hi all,

This proposal adds a relationship indicating that a release-group 
includes another release-group. For example, a box set might 'include' 
previous albums, EPs, or singles.

Changes based on discussion:
The original term 'composite reissue' was meant to be a placeholder, and 
was dropped.

Expected passage date is Saturday, 13 Sept, 2014, 00:00:00 UTC

Links:
     RFC:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-331-add-composite-reissue-relationship-tp4667196.html
     TIcket:
http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-331
     Wiki:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Caller_number_six/proposal/Relationship_Types/Release_Group-Release_Group/Includes
Tom Crocker | 5 Sep 10:23 2014
Picon

RFC-2: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

Same as before. Tell us what you think!

On 24 August 2014 22:15, Tom Crocker <tomcrockermail-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

Thanks :)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Tom Crocker | 1 Sep 23:36 2014
Picon

RFV: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

RFC: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-335-Add-Box-set-as-a-primary-type-of-Release-Group-tp4667641.html

The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

The proposal got +1. The only discussion was whether box set would be better as a secondary type, but that doesn't fit as well.

Thanks :)
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Rachel Dwight | 27 Aug 02:34 2014
Picon

Artist collectives/Japanese soundtrack style

This is a continuation of Staffan’s discussion on Various Artists credits.
In Japan, it is extremely common for composers to form loose groups with other composers. These groups are commonly called “collectives” among English-speaking J-Pop fans.  Usually these collectives consist of freelance composers, but many major video game developers (e.g. Nintendo, SEGA and Namco Bandai) will employ a group of composers and sound designers and organize them like a freelance collective.

The reason I bring this up is because there is currently some controversy over the legitimacy of collectives as artists, more specifically if a collective can be used as a release artist on a video game soundtrack. 
Firstly, http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Specific_types_of_releases/Soundtrack says to credit the artist listed on the cover. This is inapplicable as Japanese soundtrack releases almost never list the names of composers or performers on their cover art. The only place to find the composers is to look in the booklet, which our current guideline expressly prohibits.
Secondly, there’s http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Unknown_and_untitled/Special_purpose_artist, which states to use Various Artists if the release contains tracks by more than one artist. This is an extremely broad instruction and it ignores releases by collectives and other temporary groups (e.g. doujin circles).

It’s time we fix the style guidelines (either by appending Style/Language/Japanese or narrowing some definitions on the main style pages) to address this issue. It seems every time one of us attempts to add a Japanese soundtrack it becomes an uphill battle.

Here are the changes I propose:
- If a soundtrack does not list an artist on the cover, it may be acceptable to check the booklet.
- If the composers are listed as being part of a collective, use the collective as the release artist. If none exists or there are tracks contributed by outside artists, use Various Artists.

You can tell if an artist belongs to a collective if his or her name is accompanied by the name of the collective, with either half in parentheses. Here is an example of the presentation of such a relationship: https://ia801501.us.archive.org/14/items/mbid-1089e82f-24a3-4642-8694-ddbb44365e82/mbid-1089e82f-24a3-4642-8694-ddbb44365e82-2227409943.jpg

I’m unsure about making a ticket, so I’ll leave this open to input for a while.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Staffan | 25 Aug 20:33 2014
Picon

When various artists releases aren't various artists releases

A series of my edits where I changed some releases to various artists releases since, well, they were various artists releases have been downvoted with no comment
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997572
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997569
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997567
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997568

According to http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Unknown_and_untitled/Special_purpose_artist "

  • Various Artists - Used only for compilation-type releases or release groups containing tracks by multiple different artists."

So what's the deal here?

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Tom Crocker | 24 Aug 23:15 2014
Picon

RFC: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

Thanks :)
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Daniel Sobey | 24 Aug 06:30 2014
Picon

Re: RFC: STYLE-331 "add 'composite reissue' relationship" -- compilation?

Would it make sense to include the medium?
Medium 1 is available as part of release group.


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Rachel Dwight | 18 Aug 17:53 2014
Picon

RFC STYLE-332: Even more new packaging types

As we are all aware, there are a plethora of packaging types that we have yet to account for in MB. Here are two big ones:

SnapPack - The classic 8cm CD packaging. A plastic frame with a cardboard outer cover (sometimes with an additional plastic outer shell), designed so it can fold ("snap") in half. Sometimes mistakenly called "snap case."
Image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_CD_single#mediaviewer/File:Japanese_CD_Single_6-by-3-in_cover,_opened.JPG

Library case - A box designed to hold a VHS tape. Usually made of hard plastic but some (usually tapes containing feature films) were made of vinyl with padding inside. May or may not have hubs inside to hold the tape spools in place. While this packaging was mainly used for VHS, smaller versions were sometimes used for audio cassettes. 
Image without hubs: http://ep.yimg.com/ay/ldb-cdpackaging/clear-vhs-library-case-video-case-full-sleeve-no-hub-psv14-100-pcs-9.gif 
Image with hubs: http://ep.yimg.com/ay/ldb-cdpackaging/100-pcs-vhs-library-case-with-hub-clear-full-sleeve-psv14hub-3.gif
Image of compact cassette-size case: http://auctions.c.yimg.jp/img339.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/users/0/4/8/5/teruakiteru_60-img553x600-1376211776swzxs741319.jpg


Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-332
Expected expiration date: 2014-8-24
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Gmane