History:Live Track Style: Difference between revisions

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
((Imported from MoinMoin))
 
((Imported from MoinMoin))
Line 11: Line 11:
* "Song Name (live, 2004)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004: The Netherlands)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004: The Netherlands)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004-11)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004-05-23: Effenaar, Eindhoven, The Netherlands)"
* "Song Name (live, 2004-05-23: Effenaar, Eindhoven, The Netherlands)"
* "Song Name (live for Radio 3FM)"
* "Song Name (live for Radio 3FM)"

Revision as of 09:55, 21 November 2005

Style for Live Non-Album Tracks

This page describes the style to be used for naming live tracks. That is, for live tracks on a release that's not marked as 'Live'. This style will probably mostly be used for NonAlbumTrack's.

Status: This is a ProposedStyleGuideline.

There are a number of possible PartsOfATitle: the track title, the featuring artists, the track 'version' and the live information. This guide only deals with the live information, i.e. the part that describes whether the track is a live recording and possibly the date and venue for the recording.

This would be the style of correct titles of live non-album tracks:

  • "Song Name (live)"
  • "Song Name (live, 2004)"
  • "Song Name (live, 2004: The Netherlands)"
  • "Song Name (live, 2004-11)"
  • "Song Name (live, 2004-05-23: Effenaar, Eindhoven, The Netherlands)"
  • "Song Name (live for Radio 3FM)"
  • "Song Name (live for Radio 3FM, 2004-05-23: Effenaar, Eindhoven, The Netherlands)"

Track 'version' information should be in a different pair of parantheses ('acoustic' is considered a version, like a remix name):

  • "Song Name (live) (acoustic)"

Examples for live non-album tracks

If a track is live with a known date/location, and is not on an album categorised as live, the track should be titled in the format:

  • Track: Candyman (live, 1970-04-15: Winterland, San Francisco, CA, USA)

If a live album consists of more than one live session, the tracks of different sessions should be titled in the format:

  • Track: Autosuggestion (1980-01-18: Eindhoven, The Netherlands)

Discussion

Ordering of live attributes: if a track is acoustic and live, I think it should have (live, acoustic, date: location) or similar appended to it, although this looks a bit clumsy. I am certain, though, that live should be before acoustic. Any nicer-looking suggestions? --MichelleW

This is a lot of text to burden the title with. I could see the usefulness on a bootleg, where it may be difficult to establish the information from liner notes/discographies (if any) but it seems like overkill for official albums where the information is more readily available through other means.

Perhaps a better way to handle this would be to extend the release data to individual tracks as well as albums? (Although that only gives you country-level resolution on the location) --Dupuy

This proposal is partly to counteract the problem of having different live versions of a track on the same album. Often the tracknames get amended to "Trackname 1", "Trackname 2" or random variations thereof ("(1)", ", 1" etc.) I agree it's rather bulky though. --MichelleW

For jazz recordings it is quite usual to label them "(take 1)", "(take 2)" etc. so I would not mind that. Following the general idea of the StyleGuide such information should be in brackets and lower case. Isn't that enough? --DonRedman

I think separation of the venue and location is needed rather than commas delimiting both venue, city and country. I would also omit the state for the US, the city and country are suffice, the state is seldom included. Sometimes the day is not available, in those instances I would use 1970-04. --Dave

  • I thought the state was quite useful for the US, since there's so many cities with the same name (Springfield, for example) --ZeroGravitas

For live tracks on a live release, I feel that putting the location, date, etc information in the album annotation is enough. Putting it in the track title would make it really bulky. Maybe something could be made as an add-on for album annotations for live albums, kind of what Dupuy was suggesting, for a release attribute per track, but in a (fixed) annotation form? --Sambalbij

  • Release date != performance date. Sometimes if tracks on normal albums where released before the liner notes say something like "all tracks released under blah instead of track X released under foo in (some date)". For this a release date would be correct but normally this is better done by linking this track to the original release via AR. So what we whould need if ever was a performance date/venue field. But I think this would be a little overkill. Annotations/comments are enough for this. And as we don't have this yet for tracks I agree that album annotations or this style guideline are the way to do it (with a small preference for the guideline but mostly I'd follow ArtistIntent on the covers). --Shepard

I agree with Sambalbij, location, date, etc information in the album annotation is EXACTLY where such information should go. In the case of a non-album track, than the information should be as simple (such as something simple as mm/dd/yy) as possible to prevent long file names. Dates and cities are NOT part of the name of the track. Its a note and should be treated as such. --GURT

  • I agree. It would be even better to create a track annotation to keep the track names as clean as possible. I also don't like such notes being part of mp3/ogg/etc. title tags. They should go to the comment field. A tagger could take care of this if there is an extra field for track annotations. --Fuchs
    • Also since there is a comment field in ID3. But as ID3v2 has 3 fields for track titles (grouping, title, subtitle) I'd like to see this integrated in MB some day :) --Shepard
      • I agree that in the long run, the title field is not the best place, and there's been disagreements about where this "best place" might be. However, (in the opinion of one not that experienced in programming) I think converting from a set style in the title field to any other (individually user-chosen? with next few generations of taggers) field would be far easier and painless than converting from an arbitrary style in the annotations field, thanks to people who can write automated scripts. --MichelleW

A thought: Windows Media Player says there's a "Recording Date" field. Not sure where venue would go, though. --MichelleW


Authors: Zout, MichelleW