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

From MusicBrainz Wiki
(Works and parts)
Line 89: Line 89:
==Works and parts==
==Works and parts==
''will be updated after the ongoing discussions. perhaps this should be under "multi-part works"''
==Recording names==
==Recording names==

Revision as of 11:57, 2 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 something?


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.

Generic Works

The term "generic work" is used many times in this document. What we mean is untitled works which has the same name as the form, mostly 17-18th century. Concertos, sonatas,

Titles & quotes

A vocal work can never be "generic", since there's a title or a quote from the libretto. Some examples of forms that are not generic: Songs, organ chorales

  • If you read the unofficial (now defunct) CSG Standard pages you will see examples of using the format "worktype key catalogue: title in quotes". ex Song i D minor, Op. X No. Y: "Title". Note that this practice was not in the old CSG, just something some of the editors that wrote those pages started doing.

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 elsewhere for the original language
  • 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)


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

Key (only 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 For generic works, it's part of what you would use to identify the work:

Prelude and Fugue in F-sharp major, BWV 858
Trio in A minor, Op. 50


Strictly speaking, the catalogue is not a part of the title. Pete happened to mention the comment field. Would it work for everything, or would we like to keep the standard catalogue for generic works as a part of the title? In the title:

In the comment field:

  • note that using the comment field is a workaround, the ultimate goal is that catalogues will have their own field(s).
  • if the work has more than one catalog, use only the "standard" (often opus) & put the others in the annotation

Multi-part works

A work that is intended as an entity in it's own would stop here.

Worktype (only for generic works)

Sonata in F minor, Symphony in G major but not for works with titles or quotes:
Carmen, Op. ?? not Opera: Carmen or something Nun komm der Heiden Heiland, BWV 599 not organ chorale, BWV 599 "Nun komm"
same for songs If it's part of a collection with a generic title "3 songs for SATB", don't use the name of the collection. If the collection is a title by the composer "Kinderszenen" it should be used: Kinderszenen: Movement, op. x no y ??

Movement numbers

I recommend using the comment field if a movement number is needed for work disambiguation. Ex. a concerto could contain 3 movements like this:


Add a disambiguation comment for the allegro movements:

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

Don't add anything to the titles. Sometimes opinion can differ about the boundary of a movement (ex. in Beethoven's sonatas). We will try to agree on a good urtext source for every composer and follow that score.

  • this is a workaround for an UI issue (you can't tell which of the allegro movements you are dealing with when relating works to recordings). we are hoping for a technical solution to the numbering problem.

Tempo for untitled movements

You are not supposed to add a tempo to every work. Tempo/character should only be used for works which are usually referred to by tempo. That is mostly for movements of generic multi-part works; concertos, symphonies, sonatas and so on. Works which would otherwise be untitled.

Concerto in D major, Op. 1: I. Allegro
Adagio & Allegro, Op. XX

but not in

Nocturne in E-flat major, Op. 55 No. 2
Prélude No. 2 A-moll, Op. 28

You wouldn't refer to this work by tempo, only catalogue and key. Put the tempo

  • the Prélude example was in the old CSG with tempo.

no tempo from composer

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

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

or not make any difference at all?

Multiple tempos

This is something that really needs limiting. Some editors started to add every tempo change that was inside the movement, there was even discussion about repeats.

Usually, the only thing that is needed for identifying the movement is the initial tempo. However, sometimes the work can change tempo after a short introduction, or it could contain...

Grande Sonate pathétique, Op. 13: Grave - Allegro di molto e con brio

Works and parts

will be updated after the ongoing discussions. perhaps this should be under "multi-part works"

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


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 separate the recording from another recording of the same work.


Not available, but there is an open ticket.

The recording-work performance AR

ongoing discussions