View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000522 | MMW v4 | Other | public | 2003-06-26 04:11 | 2010-10-19 15:09 |
| Reporter | rusty | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | low | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | assigned | Resolution | open | ||
| Summary | 0000522: Advanced Classical Music support | ||||
| Description | In the attached table, I tried to figure out what id3 and ogg designers intended in terms of classification of classical music. To sum it up, the following fields, which seem to be needed for classical music, are universally supported (for MP3 and OGG tags): Composition: this is already supported (though we call it 'title') Composition detail: used for Opus Composer: Ensemble: Conductor: Individual Performers: Album Title: Disc#: Track#: Album Artist: Year: Genre: Rating: Issues that aren't universally supported and that are not clear to me are: 1) How to support a work that contains multiple CDs. Although we can support disc#'s for multiple CD collections, this would require some functional changes in the tree that may not be worthwhile (i.e. I don't think that this fits the 80:20 rule). 2) The requirement for Part/Act support doesn't seem to have an associated MP3 tag definition. How strong a requirement is this? 3) No standard is defined for 'Starting Key' for OGG. How strong a requirement is this? Assuming that the above aren't required, the changes to Songs-DB would need to include: 1) we could defined a 'classical' mode of operation in which: -the default tracklist contains a modified set of headings/tree nodes (based on classical terminology) -the basic tag editor contained all of the fields defined above 2) Support for multiple libraries would be even better. If the user had multiple libraries and used Genre as a means of funelling music to the appropriate Library, then SDB could be used to track both types of music. 3) In order to deliver on 1, it might make sense to first resolve bug 0000041 (i.e. to support customized property grids), so that the larger volume of information could be seen at onec, and so that the user could easily customize the fields that they want to use. 4) The Property editor UI would need modifications to support input of multiple performers (e.g. an 'Add' button would probably be needed, and it would need to be clear how to enter Role: Name combinations). 5) The tree would probably need a new 'Composer' node 6) Ideally (but unlikely) the user should be able to define what nodes/subnodes will appear in the tree (since it's difficult to know in advance which fields the user will be using most). Note: ID3 tags are based on: http://www.id3.org/id3v2.4.0-frames.txt OGG tags are based on: http://reactor-core.org/ogg-tag-recommendations.html | ||||
| Additional Information | http://www.scene24.net/1203.html http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/itunes.htm From User: Rusty, Thanks for your interest. 1) I have an opera divided in three acts. Act 1 exists of 14 tracks on CD1 and another 4 on CD2, act2 starts on track5 on CD2 and ends with track 6 on CD3, act 3 is the last 14 tracks on CD3. I would like to be able to select the opera between all the compositions and then view all tracks that belong to the opera and not the ones that fit on one CD. 2) With the example above a track in act 1 can have the same name as a track in act 2. When searching for a specific track the act it belongs to can then be of importance. I’m not familiar with MP3 tag definitions. In my opinion the name of the act doesn’t have to be an extra table but just a property of a track that can be blank if there are no parts or acts. 3) I don’t know what you mean by 'Starting Key' for OGG tags I have an Access database myself with a tracks table that has independent relations with a composition table as well as with a CD table. A track has a title, a length, a track number on the CD and an order number within the composition. A composition has a title, a number, a tonality, a year of recording and year of composing. A separate table for recordings to cope with multiple recordings of the same composition would introduce more difficulties than it would solve. Composer, Director, Ensemble, Choir and Soloists are related to the composition, Label and CD number of the producer and Location of storage are properties of the album. I didn’t quite solve when two soloists play in a composition. I thought some time about the tree structure. For a large collection of CD’s subcategories for every root branch make the list probably more ordered. In the list of tracks I would like to see at least: Order (within composition), Song/Track title, Length, Composition title, Composer, Conductor, Ensemble, Path 1) Album ---- Location (like top drawer, left shelf, the Bach box etc) 2) Composer (I have split first and last name in order to sort by last name but still distinguish between the several Bach’s) ----- Genre (to separate for example symphonies from quintets) ----- Composition 3) Conductor (They also occasionally have the same last name) ----- Alphabet (like you have for songs now) 4) Ensemble ----- Alphabet (like you have for songs now) 5) Genre It can be useful in searching for a specific composition. There are many genres to divide in like: Symphony, Opera, Sonata, Cantate, Concerto, Divertimento, Dance, Serenade, Chamber Music like quartet, quintet etc. You can go even further with: piano sonata, violin sonata, oboe sonata etc 6) Year Usually the year of birth and year of decease of the composer are mentioned. That gives some idea of the period of composing.The year of the composition is nice as background information. More important is the year of recording which gives some impression of the quality. 7) Rating 8) Soloist ----- instrument 9) Choir ----- Alphabet (like you have for songs now) I think the composition is most important and should be the lowest child in expansion sometimes even expanding into parts/acts. Only when browsing Albums I would like to see all the tracks on the CD. Hope this helps you Regards, Jaap -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Russell Samuels [mailto:rs@songs-db.com] Verzonden: donderdag 26 juni 2003 7:42 Aan: dpt@ja-both.demon.nl Onderwerp: Support for classical music in Songs-DB Jaap, I've done a bit of research on this subject, and would like to ask you a couple of quick questions: 1) How important is support for multiple CDs? This requirement exists with popular music as well, however, most people simply indicate 'Album Title: Disc x' for a multiple CD collection. Is the need greater for classical music? 2) The requirement for Part/Act support doesn't seem to have an associated standard MP3 tag definition. How strong a requirement is this? 3) No standard is defined for 'Starting Key' for OGG tags. How strong a requirement is this? thx. Rusty -----Original Message----- From: Jiri Hajek [mailto:jh@songs-db.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 4:00 AM To: Russell Samuels Subject: FW: Evaluation -----Original Message----- From: Jaap & Dorien Both-Siemers [mailto:dpt@ja-both.demon.nl] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 9:05 PM To: support@songs-db.com Subject: Evaluation Dear songs-db creator, I have tried your free version and the functionality is pretty much that what I was looking for. My problem though is that my music collection is mainly classical. Then: 1. Composer is more interesting than Artist 2. in stead of the Artist I would rather see the Director 3. and an extra field for the performers: Orchestra or Ensemble 4. and an extra field for a soloist, sometimes even two 5. in stead of a Song speak about Musical Work or Composition 6. a Musical Work can have a number like Opus or BWV for Bach or KV for Mozart 7. a Musical Work usually has a tonality like F major for example 8. a Work can contain several Parts, an opera contains several Acts which each contain Parts 9. large Musical Works like Operas are spread out over more than one CD Do you think that there will ever be a version of song-db that will offer these options? If not I will have to create my own db. Hopefully this message interests you. Kind regards, Jaap Both | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Attached Files | |||||
| Fixed in build | |||||
|
|
re. 1) another option is to add a 'Classical' tab containing all of the options described above. Also, another field that is required is: Year Composed (=original year). If tab selection is persisted, then if the user last used the 'Classical' tab when editing properties, then it'll open up again (thereby eliminating the need for 'modes'--at least as far as the properties editor is concerned). re. 5) the additional node requirements in the tree are a bit more extensive than I originally thought. The following nodes are probably needed: a) Composition (instead of title) b) Composer (instead of artist) -----Ensemble -----Album c) Ensemble (instead of artist) -----Composer -----Album |
|
|
Also see the following re. clarification about 'Parts': http://www.songs-db.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1001 |
|
|
Another user requested the addition of 'musicians' . See: http://www.songs-db.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=842 Not sure if this makes sense, but noting it for later investigation. |
|
|
http://www.songs-db.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1003 |
|
|
Reducing the priority to low, on the expectation that a much smaller subset of this functionality will satisfy the majority of users. This subset has been documented in 0001545 . |
|
|
Here is some more input from nathan.harrenstein@gmail.com I am a fan of both Classical and Popular Music. Whenever I mix classical and popular music in the same media library, however, it is a mess. The classical genre takes into account composer, opus number , conductor, key, time period, and others. It would be absolutly perfect if there was an option allowing one to separate the two styles. When both on, the menu would look like in the example For Example: MENU + All Music - Classical Music + Title - Time Period + Romantic + Baroque + Classical + 20th Century + Medieval + Rennaissance + Artist + Album + Composer + Orchestra - Popular Music + Title + Artist + Album + Genre Also, when one clicks on title in Classical Music, for example, then the sorting bar would include: | composer | title | opus | artist | orchestra | accompianist | Or something similar, and when title is clicked under popular, it would look like: | title | artist | album | track | year | genre | PLEASE take this into consideration, for it would make your media player flawless! |
