User:Rochusw/Recordings

Problems with Recordings

• Most casual editors don't know, which recording should be related to which track, because there is no obviously correct entity. So they choose either a new recording (best choise, when in doubt) or a recording with the same name and a similar length.
• It is hard to split recordings, which were incorrectly merged (or reused, see above), because the information which fingerprint was added originally for which track is lost (can't be stored, because a track has no identifier).

Fingerprints / Digests

• Tracks should have an identifier
• It should be difficult (require vote or at least confirmation) to relate more than one fingerprint of the same type to a track

Entities

Most levels should be optional. Entities, that could be useful, are:

• Work Group ("I don't know which variant of this work it is..." - some traditional works have this problem. Optional. Could be realized as an aggregate work with a proper "work level" marking)
• Work
• Arrangement (If we continue to use works for this, they should be marked at least as lower level. Search should display top level and show it has sublevels)
• Performance Group (Perfomances by this artist. Tree-structure possible, e.g. subgroup by band-members, subsubgroup by tour ...)
• Performance (Could be releated to Place/Time/Events. "Live" attribute should be on this level)
• Mix (Probably the best choice for the current recording level)
• Master (very optional, this level should be created if you know exactly what you are doing)
• Track

In most cases it should be possible, to relate a track at least to the correct performance group. The release editor should make good suggestions, a start would be

• Relate track to same mix, if the release is based on a release from the same release group.
• Create new performance, if it is a live release.
• Relate track to performance group with same "base" name of the same artist else.