Difference between revisions of "History:Classical Release Title Style"

From MusicBrainz Wiki
m (2 revision(s))
m
Line 86: Line 86:
 
* ''Symphony No. 41 "Jupiter" / Marriage of Figaro Overture (Royal Promenade Orchestra feat. Nigel Simpson)''  
 
* ''Symphony No. 41 "Jupiter" / Marriage of Figaro Overture (Royal Promenade Orchestra feat. Nigel Simpson)''  
  
==Discussion==
+
[[Needs Intertwingling|NeedsIntertwingling]] [[Category:To Be Reviewed]] [[Category:Proposed Style]] [[Category:Style]] [[Category:Proposed Style]]
 
 
# [http://musicbrainz.org/release/3261a468-953d-4dba-817e-a18e1d1e98b4.html http://musicbrainz.org/release/3261a468-953d-4dba-817e-a18e1d1e98b4.html]
 
#* Either this is actually a compilation, in which case the style doesn't apply, or this is just a weird album that brings up a good question: "What do we do when there is a complete work + other incomplete works?"  --cooperaa (Jan 31)
 
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">Let's say this is not a compilation. I would add the omitted works in the release title. But we would need a way to say the work is incomplete --[[User:davitof|davitof]] 2007-03-02
 
</ul>
 
 
 
# [http://musicbrainz.org/release/37c3923f-2e6a-4ae8-898e-8201e96fe24e.html http://musicbrainz.org/release/37c3923f-2e6a-4ae8-898e-8201e96fe24e.html]
 
#* Should releases that simply say "The 5 Piano Concertos" or "The 9 Symphonies" etc be changed to "Piano Concertos Nos. 5" or "Symphonies Nos. 1-9"?  --cooperaa (Jan 31)
 
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">I'd answer yes when the titles are so "common". When the title is more original, I don't really know what to choose :-/ --[[User:davitof|davitof]] 2007-03-02
 
</ul>
 
 
 
# [http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6379094 http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=6379094] "In a case like that, I would say go with what is on the release." I don't understand, isn't ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle's purpose precisely to edit what was printed, which supposes what was printed was incomplete or incorrect? Is this [[MusicBrainz]] or LabelBrainz? When there is a discrepancy, are we recording what the label printed or what is actually recorded in the release? What does matter most, what was printed on the sleeve (and which was correct when it was printed) or what the MB users understand? When I browse a list of releases, I want to have enough elements to pick the correct releases. Imagine that tomorrow someone discovers a new LvB symphony between 5th and 6th. suddenly symphonies 6, 7, 8, 9 become 7, 8, 9, 10. Don't tell me it wouldn't happen, you said so yourself, it is out of our control. What would MB do? Say "when you see these numbers, they can be read in two different ways"? Can you imagine the mess? This would seem ridiculous to me. I think ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle should accept catalogue numbers, without making them mandatory. --davitof (2007-02-02)
 
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">If this happened (and it has happened for other composers), I highly doubt they would renumber LvB's symphonies!!  Beethoven's Ninth will forever be known as his Ninth.  An earlier composed work will be tacked on to the end, like several of Mozart's (> No. 42) and Haydn's Symphony "A" and "B".  --cooperaa (2007-03-05)
 
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">I agree the numbers would probably be kept as they are, but in Dvorak's case, they were changed. Anyhow, let's forget about this argument, there are very few chances a new LvB symphony will be discovered now.  --davitof (2007-02-02)
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
 
 
I was bold and added in a strong reference to [[Release Title|ReleaseTitle]], and cross-references to [[Multi-Disc Release|MultiDiscRelease]] and [[Box Set Name Style|BoxSetNameStyle]]. I don't think I'm changing the essence of the instructions; what we had here follows those other guidelines pretty well.  I think the '''Work_TYPE''' and '''Work_ID''' explanation could benefit from the more worked-out text in [[Classical Track Title Style|ClassicalTrackTitleStyle]]. Adding this page totoo. --[[User:JimDeLaHunt|JimDeLaHunt]] 2007-12-29
 
 
 
----[[Needs Intertwingling|NeedsIntertwingling]]
 
[[Category:To Be Reviewed]] [[Category:Proposed Style]] [[Category:Style]] [[Category:Proposed Style]]
 

Revision as of 18:44, 15 March 2009

Style Guideline > Classical Style Guide > Classical Release Title Style

Style for Classical Release Titles

  • Alert.png This is work in progress and not official yet. The aim of this style guide is to impose some kind of order in the entries to achieve a consistent style, so as to have clean data for an eventual text sensitive tagging.


The ReleaseTitle should contain the names of the works on the release followed by the performer information. The instructions in the ReleaseTitle article apply to ClassicalMusic. This article elaborates them for this genre.

Here are the basic rules:

  • Follow the ReleaseTitle structure: MainTitle [[[Subtitle|SubTitle]](s)] [[[Volume Number|VolumeNumber]] [[[Volume Title|VolumeTitle]]]] [ [[[Box Number|BoxNumber]] [[[Box Title|BoxTitle]]]] DiscNumber [[[Disc Title|DiscTitle]]]] [[[Featuring Artist|FeaturingArtist]]]
  • If there are works of different types, separate the works by slashes, according to the MultipleTitleStyle.
  • If there are multiple works of the same type, write the work types in plural with a piece of identification for each of the individual works separated by commas.
  • Write performer information in parentheses, according to the ExtraTitleInformationStyle.
  • If there are multiple discs, follow MultiDiscRelease. If this is a BoxSet, follow BoxSetNameStyle.

Examples

  • Requiem in D minor (Wiener Philharmoniker feat. conductor: Herbert von Karajan)
  • Symphonies Nos. 5, 6 "Pastoral" (The London Classical Players feat. conductor: Roger Norrington)
  • Symphony No. 3 "Eroica" / Egmont Overture (Berliner Philharmoniker feat. conductor: Herbert von Karajan)

See below for more examples.

Details

Alert.png Please clarify: What does this apply to? E.g. what about 'named' releases, should they be reworded as this guideline says? This Info should also be contained in the first paragraph of the guideline (above) in a short form.

Structure

ReleaseTitle uses this structure: MainTitle [[[Subtitle|SubTitle]](s)] [[[Volume Number|VolumeNumber]] [[[Volume Title|VolumeTitle]]]] [ [[[Box Number|BoxNumber]] [[[Box Title|BoxTitle]]]] DiscNumber [[[Disc Title|DiscTitle]]]] [[[Featuring Artist|FeaturingArtist]]] .

MainTitle

For ClassicalMusic, the MainTitle is typically the name of the MusicalWork or works on the Relase. The basic structure is as follows: Work_TYPE "No./Nos." Work_ID, Work_ID, ... , Work_ID / Work_TYPE Work_ID, Work_ID, ... , Work_ID / ... / Work_TYPE Work_ID, Work_ID, ... , Work_ID

Work_TYPE:

  • The Work_TYPE is pluralized if more than one Work_ID is used. Examples:
    • Symphony --> Symphonies
    • String Quartet --> String Quartets
    • Piano Sonata --> Piano Sonatas
    • ...

Work_ID:

  • "No." is pluralized to "Nos." if more than one Work_ID is used. Examples:
    • No. 1
    • No. 41 "Common Name"
    • Nos. 1, 2
    • Nos. 1, 2 "Common Name", 4
    • Nos. 1-3
    • Nos. 1-3, 5, 7-12
    • ...
  • If more than three consecutive Work_IDs are used, use a hyphen between the first and last number in the series (i.e. "1-3" or "7-12")
  • If there are no work numbers with which to identify the work, keys or catalog numbers can be used (i.e. "Requiem in D minor" or "String Quartets, Op. 12")
  • The works should be listed in the order in which they appear on the disc
  • Only one Work_ID is necessary per work (ie. "Symphony No. 1" as opposed to "Symphony No. 1 in D major, Op. 12")
  • Common names should be an exception (ie. Symphony No. 1 "Common Name" is fine)

Further Examples

Releases with only one work:

  • Die Zauberflöte (Berliner Philharmoniker feat. conductor: Karl Bohm) (disc 1)
  • Symphony No. 9 "Choral" (Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra and Chorus feat. conductor: Zdeněk Mácal)
  • Symphony No. 9 "Choral" (Cleveland Orchestra feat. conductor: Christoph von Dohnanyi)

Releases with multiple works of the same type:

  • Symphonies Nos. 4, 5 (The London Classical Players feat. conductor: Roger Norrington)
  • Symphonies Nos. 38 "Prague", 39 (Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra feat. conductor: Herbert von Karajan)
  • Piano Concertos Nos. 1, 3 (Cleveland Orchestra feat. conductor: George Szell, piano: Leon Fleisher)
  • Piano Concertos Nos. 1-5 (New Philharmonia Orchestra feat. conductor: Otto Klemperer, piano: Daniel Barenboim) (disc 1)
  • Piano Sonatas Nos. 12-14, 19 (feat. piano: Alfred Brendel)
  • Violin Concertos Nos. 1, 3, 4 (feat. violin: Viktoria Mullova)
  • Violin Concertos Nos. 2, 3, 5 (feat. violin: Zino Francescatti)

Releases with multiple works of different types:

  • Requiem in D minor / Ave verum corpus / Missa Brevis in D minor (Kölner Kammerchor & Collegium Cartusianum feat. conductor: Peter Neumann) (disc 1)
  • Eine Kleine Nachtmusik / Posthorn Serenade (Cleveland Orchestra feat. conductor: George Szell)
  • Requiem in D minor / Kyrie in D minor (La Chapelle Royale, Collegium Vocale Gent, Orchestre des Champs-Elysées feat. conductor: Philippe Herreweghe)
  • Symphonies Nos. 6, 8 / King Stephen Overture (feat. conductor: Leonard Bernstein)
  • Symphony No. 41 "Jupiter" / Marriage of Figaro Overture (Royal Promenade Orchestra feat. Nigel Simpson)

NeedsIntertwingling