Difference between revisions of "User:Symphonick/unofficial csg work recordings"

From MusicBrainz Wiki
(Applicability)
(Work names)
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
==Work names==
 
==Work names==
We're discussing what should be the source right now.
+
Should default to the "original" name. Seems like there's consensus about using an urtext score as source, if possible. Some composers have all works in one collection, ex. "Neue Mozart Ausgabe".
 +
*Note that it's possible that parts of the title in an urtext edition can be translated, and we will have to look elswhere for the original
 +
*original meaning I think I expect Stravinsky's "L'oiseau de feu" to have the French title (premiered in Paris by Ballets Russes), and not the composer's language (Жар-птица)
  
 
===Language===
 
===Language===

Revision as of 10:49, 1 July 2011

Status: Notes, questions & comments from the discussions about CSG for works & recordings & mb-style. This is NOT a guideline.

The docs for works & recordings should probably contain a disclaimer "for experienced editors" or somehting?

Applicability

There was a tendency to over-apply the former CSG, so we should start with a list of things where CSG is not used. Holst's "The Planet" suite, songs... Brian wrote something.

Work names

Should default to the "original" name. Seems like there's consensus about using an urtext score as source, if possible. Some composers have all works in one collection, ex. "Neue Mozart Ausgabe".

  • Note that it's possible that parts of the title in an urtext edition can be translated, and we will have to look elswhere for the original
  • original meaning I think I expect Stravinsky's "L'oiseau de feu" to have the French title (premiered in Paris by Ballets Russes), and not the composer's language (Жар-птица)

Language

Aliases

should be standardized local versions of the workname (+ if the work really has another name; maybe 2 different common names in one langugage)

Key for generic works

"if there is a well defined and non-ambiguous title given by the author, additional information is extra." well said by caramel31

Catalog

Pete happened to mention the comment field. Would it work for everything, or would we like to keep the standard catalog for generic works as a part of the title? Examples:

  • note that the comment field is a workaround, the ultimate goal is that catalogs will have their own field(s).

Movement numbers

I believe it's built in as a part of a bigger work, but do we have part of work AR yet? I recommend using the comment field if a movement number is needed for work disambiguation. Ex. a concerto could contain 3 movements like this:

Allegro
Largo
Allegro

Add a disambiguation comment for the allegro movements:

Allegro (1st movement)
Largo
Allegro (3rd movement)

Don't add anything to the titles. Sometimes opinion can differ about the boundarys of a movement, we will try to agree on a good urtext source for every composer.

Tempo for untitled movements

You are not supposed to add a tempo to every work. Tempo/character should only be used for works which would be untitled otherwise. Movements in concertos, symphonies, sonatas and so on.

Concerto in D major, Op. 1: I. Allegro

but not in

Nocturne in D-major, Op. 1

no tempo from composer

can be in italics in the score. we could use brackets?

Concerto in C major, Op. 2: [Allegro]

Works and parts

Recording names

Probably the least discussed. I think we have a consensus about using the default worktitle.


Keys & instrumentation

This will not be a copy from the work name, instead it will actually follow what's recorded. A flute piece played on the violin, a violin solo sonata transposed to viola. Sometimes a work can even be published with variants for more than one instrument by the composer.

  • if by the editor...?

Also the specific voice for a song could be different from the original.

  • what to to w. high/low voice versions? very common for piano + voice. Have heard berlioz nuits... in different keys.
  • don't add artificial keys?
  • A=415Hz belongs in the annotation

Disambiguation

It looks like we can finally get rid of the old UI-workaround, which meant that we had to add performers to the title of the release and releasegroup. However, we still need a way to distinguish between different recordings of the same work, so we ask that you add the primary performer(s) to the comment field for the recording. Try to keep it to a minimum, only what's needed to sepearate the recording from another recording of the same work.

Aliases

Not available, but there is an open ticket.

The recording-work performance AR

ongoing discussions