We found it is often useful to record a physical location related to tracks and releases in MusicBrainz. For example, we would like to record the studio where an album was recorded, or the venue where a concert was performed. The "location" object resulting from this proposal will be used similarly to the Label objects used in the "release" fields of a release.
Enter below a list of features such an object will need.
There are many kinds of possible "locations" we need to enter, so it is important that this field be well thought out.
- "Recoding Studio" -- this is probably going to be used often for the recording place of "normal" albums, singles and EPs.
- "Venue" -- this is for places usually specialized for "artistic events" like concerts. This includes concert halls, theatres & amphitheatres, stadiums, clubs. We may want a list of options or use an annotation to be more precise.
- "Festival" -- often many concerts are performed in a certain location that doesn't have any specific use outside the concert's duration. Since many concerts are performed in such places, it is necessary to be able to retain everything together.
- Sometimes a "festival" is performed in a location of the other kinds, for example on a stadium where other concerts were held independently of the festival. We should consider if we need location-to-location relationships, to say that "Festival X" happened at "Stadium X"; this could cause, for instance, the address to be copied/linked from one location to another.
- "TV Station" -- For live recordings in a TV show.
- "Radio Station" -- For live recordings in a Radio show.
- "Other" -- I've seen things recorded in hotel rooms (there's a Roxette album for instance), private homes, and other funny places like this. We'll need to use annotations to explain some of these.
Similar to creation date for Labels, birth/death date for [Artist]s, etc. It's less important for studios and venues -- though by no means completely irrelevant -- but it's very important for festivals and similar events.
Of course we're most interested in where a location is. I suggest a specialized country field that works exactly like the one for the Releases, and a free-form text field for the address (as the format can be different for different countries). We can also add an (automatically-generated) URL to the Google Maps location of the address.
- An edit note I saw someone make the point that individual elements for the address might be useful in separate search fields. The reason is that this would allow somewhat easier looking for venues, and thus concerts, in a certain area. However, I think that completely dividing the address would be overly complex (for the rewards) and confusing. (Consider that address elements are different in different countries.) We might consider, though, adding a third field between address and country; in most countries that would be the city, in the US it would be "City, ST[ate]" -- the point is that it's free-form enough to allow for each country's organization. Anyone who needs more should probably use a mash-up with Google Maps and the web services... -- Bogdanb 22:43, 02 May 2007 (UTC)
This is certainly going to be useful for many locations
Add any relationships here
- URL relationships:
- official home page -- Many locations will have an official home page; this includes studios, venues, and festivals.
- other -- Especially for festivals there will be both official and unofficial sites. Bootleg sites may also have pages with bootlegs organized by location.
- Recording events: of course we'll need to link the venues with many release events; perhaps we need a separate wiki page for discussing those.
First of all I think we should make a change in terminology. It's already becoming a bit confusing by calling it a VenueAndEventProposal since we have to deal with different things like 'studio', 'festival', etc. I should have been more careful in the initial ticket. I suggest to move this page to LocationProposal where a Location is a general name we can use for the lot and use this term for discussing the global concept. The location section on this page can than be changed to 'Address' which is a more accurate name for it. Except for the page move I already made the changes. -- Prodoc 13:14, 02 May 2007 (UTC)
- Prodoc, I would tend to agree with the LocationProposal idea, as VenueAndEventProposal seems over-limited from the start (excludes studio, tv, and radio station names, for example). I've just finished adding every known bootleg into Nirvana - you might want to take a look there to see what happens when you get really long location names, using LiveBootlegStyle. -- [[[User:BrianFreud|BrianFreud]]]
- I agree. I'll move this to a new page.
Personally I don't think the description in the Rationale section should be the way to do it but I might be misinterpreting the last line. At the moment it seems you want to link a location to a release event. A release event, however, doesn't have much to do with the location. Instead, what I mean in the initial ticket was to basically be able to specify a location with the different available AR's. This will provide much more flexibility than to link it to a release event and reduce the amount of duplicate data. When you enter e.g. a Recorded By AR, there can be a location section where you can specify where it was recorded. At the same place you can already give the date when it was recorded. The idea to add the locations as a new entity next to Artist and Label remains the same. -- Prodoc 13:14, 02 May 2007 (UTC)
- On second thought, it's not always as easy to determine the person who did the recording, mixing, etc. Adding locations to those existing ARs might not be the best idea. This will also cause duplicate location to be added when e.g. the mixing has been done by more than one person since you can add the location to each 'Mixed By' AR. We could introduce a series of new ARs just for the locations like 'Recorded At', 'Mixed At', 'Produced At', etc. with a date field again. Yes, people might add the dates to both the 'Recorded By' and 'Recorded At' AR but do note that the dates might differ (multiple recoding locations, multiple people recording). The question is is it acceptable to introduce a whole series of new ARs just to achieve this? -- Prodoc 08:44, 03 May 2007 (UTC) Your proposal was (in my head) related to something else I wanted to have, see the PerformancesAndRecordingsProposal (which I forgot to link the first time). However, once we have the Location object, it'll be relatively easy to link it to ARs, though I don't know if current ARs allow more than two objects to be linked.
The Address is a tricky but very valuable part of this concept but should not be limited to just being used for the locations. I'm almost tempted to say that the address part should be the first thing we should implement separately from this location concept. The location concept can also be implemented without the address part at first. The reason for this is that, as stated above, the address part is very tricky to do right and a lot of work to collect information from different resources (lists of states, provinces, municipalities, cities, towns, etc. for each country). I got the hint to contact Russ about this since he worked on this for last.fm as well. It could save a lot of time. When we have the address functionality figured out we can implement this as part of the Artist information. This would be a smaller step and allow us to test it on a smaller scale first. By including the address functionality in the artist information you can specify the 'birth' place of an artist or group. I am, however, reluctant to allow users to specify a very accurate address in this situation. It should only be until town/city level to prevent any privacy issues. In case of a location address it can and should be as accurate as possible down to the street name and number. -- Prodoc 13:14, 02 May 2007 (UTC)