RFC: Style for compilation recordings

The proposed RFC will modify the multiple titles style page[1] for
recordings/release groups and replace it with this one:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Multiple_titles

The paragraph added to the middle reccomends using the compilation
relationship where appropriate (making this very underused AR more
visible to editors), and also gives a better solution for tracks with
multiple artists.[2] (The previous messy solution to that was putting
artists in the track title.)

The change is important to me because it also provides a more-reliable
way to parse the different artists of each component recording.

The RFC will expire on July 8.

[1] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Recording_and_release_group_titles/Multiple_titles
[2] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Tracks_With_Multiple_Artists

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

2011/7/1, Michael Wiencek <mwtuea@...>:
> The proposed RFC will modify the multiple titles style page[1] for
> recordings/release groups and replace it with this one:
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Multiple_titles
>
> The paragraph added to the middle reccomends using the compilation
> relationship where appropriate (making this very underused AR more
> visible to editors), and also gives a better solution for tracks with
> multiple artists.[2] (The previous messy solution to that was putting
> artists in the track title.)
>
> The change is important to me because it also provides a more-reliable
> way to parse the different artists of each component recording.
>
> The RFC will expire on July 8.
>
> [1]
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Recording_and_release_group_titles/Multiple_titles
> [2] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Tracks_With_Multiple_Artists

Instead of "using the Compilation Relationship Type", I'd write "using
Compilation Relationships" (but of course I'd preserve the link).

The Compilation AR applies currently to tracks only. For your
suggestion to work, it would have to be extended to work for
Recordings too. But then, I wonder if the word "Compilation" is
appropriate. Maybe a more generic word, for example "join" would be
better suited, which means that instead of extending the Compilation
AR, we should create a new recording-recording AR.

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

2011/7/1, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...>:
> 2011/7/1, Michael Wiencek <mwtuea@...>:
>> The proposed RFC will modify the multiple titles style page[1] for
>> recordings/release groups and replace it with this one:
>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Multiple_titles
>>
>> The paragraph added to the middle reccomends using the compilation
>> relationship where appropriate (making this very underused AR more
>> visible to editors), and also gives a better solution for tracks with
>> multiple artists.[2] (The previous messy solution to that was putting
>> artists in the track title.)
>>
>> The change is important to me because it also provides a more-reliable
>> way to parse the different artists of each component recording.
>>
>> The RFC will expire on July 8.
>>
>> [1]
>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Recording_and_release_group_titles/Multiple_titles
>> [2] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Tracks_With_Multiple_Artists
>
> Instead of "using the Compilation Relationship Type", I'd write "using
> Compilation Relationships" (but of course I'd preserve the link).
>
> The Compilation AR applies currently to tracks only. For your
> suggestion to work, it would have to be extended to work for
> Recordings too. But then, I wonder if the word "Compilation" is
> appropriate. Maybe a more generic word, for example "join" would be
> better suited, which means that instead of extending the Compilation
> AR, we should create a new recording-recording AR.

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>> The Compilation AR applies currently to tracks only. For your
>> suggestion to work, it would have to be extended to work for
>> Recordings too.

Track relationships and recording relationships are the same thing.

Nikki

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

Hello Michael,

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 01:17:35AM -0500, Michael Wiencek wrote:
> The proposed RFC will modify the multiple titles style page[1] for
> recordings/release groups and replace it with this one:
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Multiple_titles

Maybe you could make it more clear that this applies to recordings?

"if two songs share the same track, the title should be split as
follows:"
--->
"if two songs share the same track, the title of the recording should be
split as follows:"

Because if one of the tracks is hidden, we copy the track list as on
cover in NGS and only use MultipleTitles style for the recording, don't
we?

Johannes

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

2011/7/1, Nikki <aeizyx@...>:
> Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>>> The Compilation AR applies currently to tracks only. For your
>>> suggestion to work, it would have to be extended to work for
>>> Recordings too.
>
> Track relationships and recording relationships are the same thing.

Was this done deliberately? Now that I think of it, I guess the real
meaning is that there aren't much ARs which would apply to tracks
anymore...

--

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
http://www.april.org

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

Hello Frederic,

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:19:30PM +0200, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> > Track relationships and recording relationships are the same thing.
> 
> Was this done deliberately? Now that I think of it, I guess the real
> meaning is that there aren't much ARs which would apply to tracks
> anymore...

If you understand "tracks" as members of a track list, they can't have
any ARs because they don't have a MBID in NGS anymore. All (or most?)
ARs have been moved from pre-NGS tracks to recordings.

Johannes

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Johannes Weißl <jargon@...> wrote:
> Hello Frederic,
>
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:19:30PM +0200, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>> > Track relationships and recording relationships are the same thing.
>>
>> Was this done deliberately? Now that I think of it, I guess the real
>> meaning is that there aren't much ARs which would apply to tracks
>> anymore...
>
> If you understand "tracks" as members of a track list, they can't have
> any ARs because they don't have a MBID in NGS anymore. All (or most?)
> ARs have been moved from pre-NGS tracks to recordings.

Most. Some moved to works instead! :)
>
>
> Johannes
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> MusicBrainz-style@...
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>

--

-- 
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

2011/7/1, Johannes Weißl <jargon@...>:
> Hello Frederic,
>
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:19:30PM +0200, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>> > Track relationships and recording relationships are the same thing.
>>
>> Was this done deliberately? Now that I think of it, I guess the real
>> meaning is that there aren't much ARs which would apply to tracks
>> anymore...
>
> If you understand "tracks" as members of a track list, they can't have
> any ARs because they don't have a MBID in NGS anymore. All (or most?)
> ARs have been moved from pre-NGS tracks to recordings.

Ok, now I understand. Then the Compilation AR documentation should be
changed to reflect this. But I guess this AR documentation isn't the
only one with this issue 

--

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
http://www.april.org

Re: RFC: Style for compilation recordings

On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 01:17 -0500, Michael Wiencek wrote:
> The proposed RFC will modify the multiple titles style page[1] for
> recordings/release groups and replace it with this one:
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Multiple_titles
> 
> The paragraph added to the middle reccomends using the compilation
> relationship where appropriate (making this very underused AR more
> visible to editors), and also gives a better solution for tracks with
> multiple artists.[2] (The previous messy solution to that was putting
> artists in the track title.)

From the paragraph:
        In the case where multiple recordings are joined on a single
        track, link to each component recording using the Compilation
        Relationship Type. If the recording artists vary, enter each one
        separated by " / " in the artist credit (in the order their
        songs appear).

Shouldn’t this also apply to releases as will as recordings?

E.g. if two releases by different artists are released on a single CD
(or just in a box together), the release should be marked as a
compilation of the original releases, and have the artist marked as
“Artist 1 / Artist 2”?

(Does a release compilation AR even exist? Is there a different one that
would be suitable?)

--

-- 
Calvin Walton <calvin.walton <at> kepstin.ca>