Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren-2
A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Rachel Dwight

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]> wrote:

A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?

I don’t really see any problems with it.
(Is it too soon to +1?)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Rachel Dwight <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]> wrote:

A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?

I don’t really see any problems with it.
(Is it too soon to +1?)

Well, with the new style process there's no real schedule or need for +1ing as such, although knowing that people think the change is ok is never a bad thing so I can eventually take a decision :)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Frederic Da Vitoria
2014-10-20 21:52 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Rachel Dwight <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]> wrote:

A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?

I don’t really see any problems with it.
(Is it too soon to +1?)

Well, with the new style process there's no real schedule or need for +1ing as such, although knowing that people think the change is ok is never a bad thing so I can eventually take a decision :)

OK, since you asked for it: 

I don't see any reason for not doing this either.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

symphonick
The artist-artist should be doable. The question is how much accuracy you want; second/alternating, freelance and so on. Promotions - maybe Foo was hired as a tutti player first. In many cases it will be hard to find this data.
Also when is it OK to use this, and when should you not (most groups have a leader)?

Artist - recording is the easiest, I suppose: data is available and unambigous.

Artist - release sounds weird to me, is it just somewhere to put the info if you're lazy?

2014-10-21 9:00 GMT+02:00 Frederic Da Vitoria <[hidden email]>:
2014-10-20 21:52 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Rachel Dwight <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]> wrote:

A lot of orchestral releases give information on the orchestra's leader/concertmaster for that recording. Similarly, orchestra sites fairly often provide information about the concertmaster position. As WP says, "The concertmaster [...] is the second-most significant person in an orchestra" - so we probably should allow to record this information. For that I'd like to add artist-recording and artist-release "concertmaster" relationships, similarly to the conductor ones, plus a "concertmaster" attribute to the artist-artist "member of" relationship, to relate the people to the orchestras (since concertmasters are usually first violin or whatever, but in any case a member of the orchestra).

Does anyone feel any of the two changes would be problematic, and if so, why and what would be a better way of storing this info?

I don’t really see any problems with it.
(Is it too soon to +1?)

Well, with the new style process there's no real schedule or need for +1ing as such, although knowing that people think the change is ok is never a bad thing so I can eventually take a decision :)

OK, since you asked for it: 

I don't see any reason for not doing this either.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style



--

/symphonick

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:41 PM, symphonick <[hidden email]> wrote:
The artist-artist should be doable. The question is how much accuracy you want; second/alternating, freelance and so on. Promotions - maybe Foo was hired as a tutti player first. In many cases it will be hard to find this data.
Also when is it OK to use this, and when should you not (most groups have a leader)?

The idea was for the concertmaster(s) for the orchestra, not the leader/principal for each section. Not saying those shouldn't be eventually marked somehow, just not thinking about that much in-depth info yet.

If someone was promoted, just use two relationships - same as now for conductor vs. principal conductor or emeritus or whatever.

What do you mean with hard to find, for the concertmaster, or the promotions? If the latter - I suspect finding the promotion info won't be that hard for the cases where we also know when they joined / left - for the other cases, if you have no dates it doesn't really matter much not knowing if it was concertmaster for the duration or not, I'd say.

About the specific positions: looking at a few examples below, the main doubt would seem to be whether things like "Sub-Leader" and "Assistant leader" should be marked as concertmaster or not (I'd probably say no, for the time being).

 
Artist - release sounds weird to me, is it just somewhere to put the info if you're lazy?

It's the same as orchestra-release or conductor-release - somewhere to put it if for some reason it's not obvious to which tracks it applies (two orchestras credited, not specified who plays what, or whatever). Admittedly, it's unlikely that a release will care to specify the concertmaster but not the specific tracks the orchestra played in - but not impossible :)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

symphonick


2014-10-24 13:00 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:41 PM, symphonick <[hidden email]> wrote:
The artist-artist should be doable. The question is how much accuracy you want; second/alternating, freelance and so on. Promotions - maybe Foo was hired as a tutti player first. In many cases it will be hard to find this data.
Also when is it OK to use this, and when should you not (most groups have a leader)?

The idea was for the concertmaster(s) for the orchestra, not the leader/principal for each section. Not saying those shouldn't be eventually marked somehow, just not thinking about that much in-depth info yet.

No, I only meant concertmasters. I had a look in the wiki and found my old research page: wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/sandbox/concertmaster
 
If someone was promoted, just use two relationships - same as now for conductor vs. principal conductor or emeritus or whatever.

What do you mean with hard to find, for the concertmaster, or the promotions? If the latter - I suspect finding the promotion info won't be that hard for the cases where we also know when they joined / left - for the other cases, if you have no dates it doesn't really matter much not knowing if it was concertmaster for the duration or not, I'd say.

About the specific positions: looking at a few examples below, the main doubt would seem to be whether things like "Sub-Leader" and "Assistant leader" should be marked as concertmaster or not (I'd probably say no, for the time being).

That's the kind of issues I ran into when researching this before. There will usually be more than one concertmaster, and different orchestras will use different titles, and I'm not sure they mean the same thing. Not really a problem for the "first" concertmaster, but a mess when you get to the "assistant" & "sub-" posistions. I'd start with plain "concertmaster" for everything, but you probably have to say something about when not to use it too.
 
 
Artist - release sounds weird to me, is it just somewhere to put the info if you're lazy?

It's the same as orchestra-release or conductor-release - somewhere to put it if for some reason it's not obvious to which tracks it applies (two orchestras credited, not specified who plays what, or whatever). Admittedly, it's unlikely that a release will care to specify the concertmaster but not the specific tracks the orchestra played in - but not impossible :)

/symphonick

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

symphonick
Maybve you could begin with recording (& release) - artist now, so this doesn't get stalled? Save artist-artist for later.


2014-10-24 21:43 GMT+02:00 symphonick <[hidden email]>:


2014-10-24 13:00 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:41 PM, symphonick <[hidden email]> wrote:
The artist-artist should be doable. The question is how much accuracy you want; second/alternating, freelance and so on. Promotions - maybe Foo was hired as a tutti player first. In many cases it will be hard to find this data.
Also when is it OK to use this, and when should you not (most groups have a leader)?

The idea was for the concertmaster(s) for the orchestra, not the leader/principal for each section. Not saying those shouldn't be eventually marked somehow, just not thinking about that much in-depth info yet.

No, I only meant concertmasters. I had a look in the wiki and found my old research page: wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Symphonick/sandbox/concertmaster
 
If someone was promoted, just use two relationships - same as now for conductor vs. principal conductor or emeritus or whatever.

What do you mean with hard to find, for the concertmaster, or the promotions? If the latter - I suspect finding the promotion info won't be that hard for the cases where we also know when they joined / left - for the other cases, if you have no dates it doesn't really matter much not knowing if it was concertmaster for the duration or not, I'd say.

About the specific positions: looking at a few examples below, the main doubt would seem to be whether things like "Sub-Leader" and "Assistant leader" should be marked as concertmaster or not (I'd probably say no, for the time being).

That's the kind of issues I ran into when researching this before. There will usually be more than one concertmaster, and different orchestras will use different titles, and I'm not sure they mean the same thing. Not really a problem for the "first" concertmaster, but a mess when you get to the "assistant" & "sub-" posistions. I'd start with plain "concertmaster" for everything, but you probably have to say something about when not to use it too.
 
 
Artist - release sounds weird to me, is it just somewhere to put the info if you're lazy?

It's the same as orchestra-release or conductor-release - somewhere to put it if for some reason it's not obvious to which tracks it applies (two orchestras credited, not specified who plays what, or whatever). Admittedly, it's unlikely that a release will care to specify the concertmaster but not the specific tracks the orchestra played in - but not impossible :)

/symphonick



--

/symphonick

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, symphonick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Maybve you could begin with recording (& release) - artist now, so this doesn't get stalled? Save artist-artist for later.

I actually added those two a couple hours ago :) 

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Concertmaster relationships (STYLE-328/STYLE-341)

symphonick
Good thinking. ;-)

2014-10-29 12:54 GMT+01:00 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[hidden email]>:
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, symphonick <[hidden email]> wrote:
Maybve you could begin with recording (& release) - artist now, so this doesn't get stalled? Save artist-artist for later.

I actually added those two a couple hours ago :) 

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style



--

/symphonick

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style