MusicBrainz user discussion

Grant | 2 Feb 17:36

[mb-users] How to enter this box set?

How should a CD box set like this be entered?

http://www.amazon.com/All-Time-Dave-Brubeck/dp/B0001FGB9I

It's a box around 5 albums each in their own jewel case which look
completely like individual albums, including unique barcodes.  The box
itself has a unique barcode.

- Grant

headers

Georg Kretschmer | 30 Jan 22:08

[mb-users] applicability of the CSG at adding a medium

With Edit #16407050 and Edit #16407052 two releases where entered that hold a selection of classical pieces. The release addresses Mothers and Children if I got it right from the cover of link <http://www.empik.com/muzyka-dla-ucha-mamy-i-malu…>.

The question for me is now: should the CSG be applied here too? If that's the case I would ask the editor to rework the track list (and the recordings) according to the standard.

What is the recommendation?

Georg Kretschmer

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Georg Kretschmer | 28 Jan 23:21

[mb-users] Beethoven, WoO 181 "Canons"

I'm confused about the different terminology used to describe the type of a canon and couldn't find any explanation for the differences.

In MB I found the following terms:
- Canon for 3
- Canon in 3 parts
- Canon for 3 voices
Wikipedia speaks of "Canon in 4".

Probably it's all the same. Can anybody enlighten me?
For Beethoven, WoO 181 I think the following is correct if it comes to the voices:

This is supported by <http://www.beethoven-haus-bonn.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=15256&template=werkseite_digitales_archiv_en&_eid=1510&_ug=Songs,%20canons%20and%20singings&_werkid=324&_mid=Works%20by%20Ludwig%20van%20Beethoven&suchparameter=&_seite=1> and the details that can be found on this site.

Now this contradicts to what I found in the MB works.

Canon for 3 "Gedenket heute an Baden", WoO 181 No. 1
Canon for 4 "Gehabt euch wohl", WoO 181 No. 2
Riddle Canon for 4 "Tugend ist keinleerer name", WoO 181 No. 3

If you look into the recordings than you find only these two above listed variations.

Which of this two version is the correct one and should be used? I prefer the one on the top, if we clean up the mix between parts and voices.

Can anybody give advice?

Georg Kretschmer

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Mike Sherman | 25 Jan 16:25

[mb-users] New user questions

Hello,

I'm a fairly new MusicBrainz user, at least as a registered user.

My early experience was entering data without an account. Not a good experience as it appears that all of my efforts went into the bit bucket.

I now have an account and data I have entered seems to have stuck. Much better.

Now my question.

I have a number of CDs from a small label that specializes in field recordings of old-time Appalachian music. The label is called "Field Recorder's Collective".

On MusicBrainz, other have created 2 "labels" for the same label. One is "Field Recorder's Collective" and the other is "Field Recorder's Collective LLC".

Field Recorder's Collective LLC is the company that owns the label "Field Recorder's Collective".

Each of these "labels" had one CD entered for it (I added another to the non-LLC label).

There is really only one label.

What is the right way to handle this? Change the "label" tag so all of the FRC CDs are the same, or somehow link the LLC and non-LLC labels? Or is there some other solution?

Thanks,

-Mike

--
Mike Sherman ---- wheelwrightmike(AT)gmail.com

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Grant | 24 Jan 19:34

[mb-users] Multiple labels & catalog numbers

I have the Deerhunter "Halycon Digest" CD from Japan.  The
corresponding release on MBz specified Beggars Japan and BGJ-10103 for
the label and catalog number.  Try as I might, I can not find
reference to this on the CD, case, or obi strip.  I do see the label
4AD and catalog number CAD3X38CDJ.  The barcodes match.  Should I
enter a separate release instead of the way it's entered now:

http://musicbrainz.org/release/925c6284-90cd-487d-87e5-d08de9ceccb0

- Grant

headers

Nicholas Humfrey | 23 Jan 10:40

[mb-users] Policy on last.fm links in MusicBrainz?

Hello,

Is it recommended that links to last.fm are added to MusicBrainz?

Last.fm had/have a policy to use MusicBrainz for the official naming of
artists, so the artist page should always be:
http://last.fm/music/{MusicBrainz_Artist_Name}

I'm not sure if this is still true?

Because last.fm have one page per artist name, not one page per artist (eg
all the bands called Mono share the same page), some people try making up
new pages, for example:
http://www.last.fm/music/Tom+Tyler+Music

And there is an edit to add it to MusicBrainz:
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16309566

I see there is a little 'as' icon on the MusicBrainz artist page, so is this
encouraged?

nick.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of
the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

headers

Georg Kretschmer | 21 Jan 21:22

[mb-users] Attribute "partial" with creation of a relationship of a recording to work

Just to be on the safe side I would like to get other opinions on how to handle the attribute "partial" if a relationship between a recording and a work is created.

I understood that if a recording doesn't include all the tempi (movements) that are named in the description of the work, the attribute partial has to be applied. At least that is how I handle such a case.

One example would be: The works name is "Sonata for Cello and Piano No. 3 in A major, Op. 69: III. Adagio cantabile - Allegro vivace" whereas the recording is named "Sonata for Cello and Piano No. 3 in A major, Op. 69: III. Adagio cantabile". In this case I would expect the attribute set to partial.

If this assumption is correct, than I fear that lots of entries like in

<http://musicbrainz.org/work/760a061e-0001-30a5-b14f-1d203428fd96>

have to be reworked.

How should it be done?

Georg Kretschmer

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Georg Kretschmer | 21 Jan 17:06

[mb-users] merge of works for Beethoven, Cello Sonata No. 1

I was relating recordings to works for Beethoven, Cello Sonata No. 1 and felt that there are some works that are unnecessary and should be merged so that a minimal necessary set of works remain.

Now I'm unsure of what establishes the minimal set of works for Beethoven, Cello Sonata No. 1. I was unable to find the ultimate source that defines this set of works.

A look into the score <http://www.beethoven-haus-bonn.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=15246&template=dokseite_digitales_archiv_en&_eid=1510&_ug=Piano%20and%20another%20instrument&_werkid=5&_dokid=T00051354&_opus=op.%205&_mid=Works%20by%20Ludwig%20van%20Beethoven&suchparameter=&_sucheinstieg=&_seite=1> doesn't define a partitioning just names the (6) tempi.

A search of the works in MB shows me that there are basically two kind of approaches. The first establishes two works. Work I includes 5 tempi and the work II holds the last tempi and the second approach that counts the works up to Id. (why only Id.? doesn't make sense for me).

So the question is can anybody tell me how the "correct" partitioning of the works should/has to be and what establishes the basis for that definition.

Georg Kretschmer

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Bill Purosky | 20 Jan 03:41

Re: [mb-users] Is VGMDB reliable for artist info?


On 1/19/2012 4:39 PM, musicbrainz-users-request <at> lists.musicbrainz.org 
wrote:
> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:45:59 +0100
> From: "Staffan Vilcans"<liftarn <at> interface1.net>
> Subject: Re: [mb-users] Is VGMDB reliable for artist info?
> To: "MusicBrainz User Discussion"
> 	<musicbrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<0859db6f787078dcbfb39e18615641fe.squirrel <at> webmail1.one.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
>
>
> Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren skrev:
>
>> In any case, I'd argue this composer information should be used for
>> adding works and composers to works, not to substitute the printed
>> credits - even if the printed credits credit a company, as it was
>> customary.
> The publisher should not be used as an artist. Especially when composer
> information can be found.
>
The problem in the case that started this conversation is that we don't 
know if the composer information has been found.  The only source we 
have is what some user posted to VGMDB.  No-one has found confirmation 
from an official source, and Jesus2099 found some contradictory 
information on other websites.

--

-- 
Bill Purosky

"My signature below is completely voluntary, without coercion or duress of any kind, and I am signing this
release and consent solely as a condition for consideration of employment or continued employment."
   - excerpt from company drug&  alcohol policy

headers

Rupert Swarbrick | 19 Jan 12:27

[mb-users] Artists for recordings

Hi,

I'd be grateful if people could spare a second to look at the following edit:

  http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16171519

Hawke and I are disagreeing on who should be the artist for a classical
recording. At the moment, there's a vote either way. It would be nice to
get more input from the rest of the community.

Rupert (rswarbrick)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users <at> lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

headers

Staffan Vilcans | 17 Jan 12:27

[mb-users] Is VGMDB reliable for artist info?


Ok, this was brought up at http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16210672

Is VGMDB a reliable enough source for artist information? I think so, but
I was asked to ask on for a wider opinion.

--

-- 
http://www.interface1.net

2	February 2012
106	January 2012
102	December 2011
69	November 2011
45	October 2011
29	September 2011
58	August 2011
75	July 2011
262	June 2011
132	May 2011
36	April 2011
70	March 2011
40	February 2011
34	January 2011
11	December 2010
8	November 2010
14	October 2010
64	September 2010
80	August 2010
47	July 2010
54	June 2010
40	May 2010
69	April 2010
120	March 2010
45	February 2010
37	January 2010
118	December 2009
66	November 2009
25	October 2009
54	September 2009
83	August 2009
53	July 2009
39	June 2009
19	May 2009
110	April 2009
80	March 2009
147	February 2009
86	January 2009
81	December 2008
59	November 2008
140	October 2008
87	September 2008
89	August 2008
165	July 2008
163	June 2008
187	May 2008
254	April 2008
54	March 2008
93	February 2008
64	January 2008
154	December 2007
96	November 2007
117	October 2007
182	September 2007
128	August 2007
185	July 2007
200	June 2007
255	May 2007
101	April 2007
75	March 2007
144	February 2007
152	January 2007
424	December 2006
464	November 2006
427	October 2006
490	September 2006
372	August 2006
579	July 2006
242	June 2006
294	May 2006
575	April 2006
290	March 2006
184	February 2006
446	January 2006
264	December 2005
204	November 2005
206	October 2005
110	September 2005
78	August 2005
140	July 2005
241	June 2005
296	May 2005
510	April 2005
233	March 2005
301	February 2005
400	January 2005
248	December 2004
220	November 2004
400	October 2004
200	September 2004
382	August 2004
226	July 2004
301	June 2004
426	May 2004
148	April 2004
64	March 2004
215	February 2004
459	January 2004
315	December 2003
82	November 2003
181	October 2003
70	September 2003
93	August 2003
139	July 2003
470	June 2003
115	May 2003
48	April 2003
92	March 2003
141	February 2003
113	January 2003
96	December 2002
52	November 2002
115	October 2002
116	September 2002
17	August 2002
49	July 2002
88	June 2002
92	May 2002
188	April 2002
188	March 2002
100	February 2002
110	January 2002
283	December 2001
75	November 2001
90	October 2001
50	September 2001
98	August 2001
22	July 2001
65	June 2001
106	May 2001
72	April 2001
49	March 2001
23	February 2001
44	January 2001
102	December 2000
36	November 2000

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun

		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29