box sets etc.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

box sets etc.

tommycrock
I'm starting a separate thread for all discussion of a new type (be it primary or secondary) for box sets (or whatever we might call them) so bflaminio's RFC [1] doesn't get hijacked.
There's some existing discussion on this at [2]

Personally, I'd be in favour of this as a primary type. I think box set is a good choice of name because it's recognisable and understood in the sense we mean [3] but a bad choice because it conflates packaging and release group content. Perhaps just 'set' would do, but I still think it's difficult to define in a useful way.

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

Re: box sets etc.

bflaminio
Intuitively I perceive a distinction between a "compilation", "box set", and "anthology"; but I have no idea how to unambiguously define each.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

Alex Mauer
On 08/04/2014 01:32 PM, bflaminio wrote:
> Intuitively I perceive a distinction between a "compilation", "box set", and
> "anthology"; but I have no idea how to unambiguously define each.

Might be ambiguous, but:

Compilation: collection of recordings from a variety of sources,
possibly by several different artists. Example: “Greatest Hits”, “Love
Songs”

Box set: collection of previously-released albums packaged together with
each approximating their original form. (So a bonus disc or bonus tracks
would not detract from the 'box set' type)

Anthology: Collection of previously-released recordings, with an effort
towards comprehensiveness. Example: “Chronological Classics” series,
“All the Singles”

Of course, there could be some overlap in deciding whether a given
release is a compilation or an anthology. One solution would be to
explicitly define "compilations” as meaning “Various Artists
Compilations” while “Anthology” would be any single-artist compilation,
regardless of comprehensiveness.

On the other hand, I’m not even sure that ‘anthology’ is really an
appropriate term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthology doesn’t
describe anything like the description given above: “a collection of
literary works chosen by the compiler.” is so vague as to cover just
about anything, and seems to fit much better with "compilation" in
general. The stuff listed under “Media” on that page does not fit with
that idea of an anthology at all. I’m mostly familiar with it in the
context of “sci-fi anthologies” which are generally … compilations of
short stories from a variety of authors. Not at all like anthology as
described above.

We could go flying off into esotericism and call the latter 'opera
omnia'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Complete_Works ) (kidding, of
course).


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

Re: box sets etc.

tommycrock


On 4 Aug 2014 22:40, "Alex Mauer" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Compilation: collection of recordings from a variety of sources,
> possibly by several different artists. Example: “Greatest Hits”, “Love
> Songs”
>
> Box set: collection of previously-released albums packaged together with
> each approximating their original form. (So a bonus disc or bonus tracks
> would not detract from the 'box set' type)
>

This seems about right, although they can be sets of eps or singles (or some combination) too

> Anthology: Collection of previously-released recordings, with an effort
> towards comprehensiveness. Example: “Chronological Classics” series,
> “All the Singles”
>
> Of course, there could be some overlap in deciding whether a given
> release is a compilation or an anthology. One solution would be to
> explicitly define "compilations” as meaning “Various Artists
> Compilations” while “Anthology” would be any single-artist compilation,
> regardless of comprehensiveness.
>
> On the other hand, I’m not even sure that ‘anthology’ is really an
> appropriate term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthology doesn’t
> describe anything like the description given above: “a collection of
> literary works chosen by the compiler.” is so vague as to cover just
> about anything, and seems to fit much better with "compilation" in
> general. The stuff listed under “Media” on that page does not fit with
> that idea of an anthology at all. I’m mostly familiar with it in the
> context of “sci-fi anthologies” which are generally … compilations of
> short stories from a variety of authors. Not at all like anthology as
> described above.

I don't like the anthology name for this reason. I know it's how it's been used by some artists recently but I don't think it's a widely accepted meaning.

I'd be more tempted to put collections aiming at some form of completeness in with (box) sets.


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

Re: box sets etc.

Frederic Da Vitoria
In reply to this post by Alex Mauer
2014-08-04 23:39 GMT+02:00 Alex Mauer <[hidden email]>:
On 08/04/2014 01:32 PM, bflaminio wrote:
> Intuitively I perceive a distinction between a "compilation", "box set", and
> "anthology"; but I have no idea how to unambiguously define each.

Might be ambiguous, but:

Compilation: collection of recordings from a variety of sources,
possibly by several different artists. Example: “Greatest Hits”, “Love
Songs”

Box set: collection of previously-released albums packaged together with
each approximating their original form. (So a bonus disc or bonus tracks
would not detract from the 'box set' type)

Anthology: Collection of previously-released recordings, with an effort
towards comprehensiveness. Example: “Chronological Classics” series,
“All the Singles”

Of course, there could be some overlap in deciding whether a given
release is a compilation or an anthology. One solution would be to
explicitly define "compilations” as meaning “Various Artists
Compilations” while “Anthology” would be any single-artist compilation,
regardless of comprehensiveness.

On the other hand, I’m not even sure that ‘anthology’ is really an
appropriate term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthology doesn’t
describe anything like the description given above: “a collection of
literary works chosen by the compiler.” is so vague as to cover just
about anything, and seems to fit much better with "compilation" in
general. 

I'm not sure it fits better: I feel that anthology and compilation are indeed close, but the important word in the wikipedia definition may be "chosen". I was surprised when you insisted on comprehensiveness for "anthology", for me an anthology is the reverse of comprehensiveness, it means that a careful choice was made, that some works were kept but that some were rejected. The difference between anthology and compilation may be that a compilation contains works which were well known (even if they are not really interesting), while an anthology would contain works which the compiler thinks interesting, even if they never reached fame. But maybe I'm applying French meanings to English words?

--
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

Brant Gibbard

Agreed, I would not consider anthology to imply comprehensiveness, and anthologies would very often include multiple authors or composers, rather than just one. “Great Short Stories about Animals”, “Greatest Dance Hits of the 70s”

 

Brant Gibbard
Toronto, ON
[hidden email]

 

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frederic Da Vitoria
Sent: August-05-14 3:27 AM
To: MusicBrainz Style Discussion
Subject: Re: [mb-style] box sets etc.

 

2014-08-04 23:39 GMT+02:00 Alex Mauer <[hidden email]>:

On 08/04/2014 01:32 PM, bflaminio wrote:
> Intuitively I perceive a distinction between a "compilation", "box set", and
> "anthology"; but I have no idea how to unambiguously define each.

Might be ambiguous, but:

Compilation: collection of recordings from a variety of sources,
possibly by several different artists. Example: “Greatest Hits”, “Love
Songs”

Box set: collection of previously-released albums packaged together with
each approximating their original form. (So a bonus disc or bonus tracks
would not detract from the 'box set' type)

Anthology: Collection of previously-released recordings, with an effort
towards comprehensiveness. Example: “Chronological Classics” series,
“All the Singles”

Of course, there could be some overlap in deciding whether a given
release is a compilation or an anthology. One solution would be to
explicitly define "compilations” as meaning “Various Artists
Compilations” while “Anthology” would be any single-artist compilation,
regardless of comprehensiveness.

On the other hand, I’m not even sure that ‘anthology’ is really an
appropriate term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthology doesn’t
describe anything like the description given above: “a collection of
literary works chosen by the compiler.” is so vague as to cover just
about anything, and seems to fit much better with "compilation" in
general. 


I'm not sure it fits better: I feel that anthology and compilation are indeed close, but the important word in the wikipedia definition may be "chosen". I was surprised when you insisted on comprehensiveness for "anthology", for me an anthology is the reverse of comprehensiveness, it means that a careful choice was made, that some works were kept but that some were rejected. The difference between anthology and compilation may be that a compilation contains works which were well known (even if they are not really interesting), while an anthology would contain works which the compiler thinks interesting, even if they never reached fame. But maybe I'm applying French meanings to English words?

 

--
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen
In reply to this post by Frederic Da Vitoria
Den 05-08-2014 kl. 09:26 skrev Frederic Da Vitoria:
> I'm not sure it fits better: I feel that anthology and compilation are
> indeed close, but the important word in the wikipedia definition may be
> "chosen". [...]

Tracks on compilations are also chosen by someone. If the defining word
is "chosen", then there's no difference between anthologies and
compilations. (And really, as far as I'm concerned, the two are indeed
most often synonymous.)

--
Namasté,
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>
MB:   https://musicbrainz.org/user/Freso
Wiki: https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Freso


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

signature.asc (902 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

swisschris
A term used in french is "Intégrale", showing the ambition to gather everything of certain a artist or of a certain period of the artists career ("The complete 50s masters"; "The complete Sun recordings"). Is there a similar term in english? Thus we could keep the term box set for packaging


On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Den 05-08-2014 kl. 09:26 skrev Frederic Da Vitoria:
> I'm not sure it fits better: I feel that anthology and compilation are
> indeed close, but the important word in the wikipedia definition may be
> "chosen". [...]

Tracks on compilations are also chosen by someone. If the defining word
is "chosen", then there's no difference between anthologies and
compilations. (And really, as far as I'm concerned, the two are indeed
most often synonymous.)

--
Namasté,
Frederik "Freso" S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>
MB:   https://musicbrainz.org/user/Freso
Wiki: https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Freso


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

Alexander VanValin
On 08/05/2014 04:27 PM, SwissChris wrote:
> A term used in french is "Intégrale", showing the ambition to gather
> everything of certain a artist or of a certain period of the artists
> career ("The complete 50s masters"; "The complete Sun recordings"). Is
> there a similar term in english? Thus we could keep the term box set
> for packaging
>

Related thread:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Complete-recordings-as-a-type-of-release-groups-tp4042454.html

I can't think of an English term for "complete" compilations.

Alex / caller#6

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

Re: box sets etc.

tommycrock


On 7 Aug 2014 00:58, "caller#6" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 08/05/2014 04:27 PM, SwissChris wrote:
> > A term used in french is "Intégrale", showing the ambition to gather
> > everything of certain a artist or of a certain period of the artists
> > career ("The complete 50s masters"; "The complete Sun recordings"). Is
> > there a similar term in english? Thus we could keep the term box set
> > for packaging
> >
>
> Related thread:
> http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Complete-recordings-as-a-type-of-release-groups-tp4042454.html
>
> I can't think of an English term for "complete" compilations.
>
> Alex / caller#6
>

Me neither. It would be adjective-noun like  the complete/comprehensive works/masters/recordings/collection etc.


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

Re: box sets etc. -- packaging vs type

Alexander VanValin
In reply to this post by tommycrock
On 08/04/2014 10:04 AM, Tom Crocker wrote:
I'm starting a separate thread for all discussion of a new type (be it primary or secondary) for box sets (or whatever we might call them) so bflaminio's RFC [1] doesn't get hijacked.
There's some existing discussion on this at [2]

Personally, I'd be in favour of this as a primary type. I think box set is a good choice of name because it's recognisable and understood in the sense we mean [3] but a bad choice because it conflates packaging and release group content. Perhaps just 'set' would do, but I still think it's difficult to define in a useful way.



Is it really a problem to conflate packaging (the box) with type (box set)?

I mean, in general I agree that it's important to choose terminology carefully. But in this case, isn't it like "album"? Album was originally[1] a packaging type, but is now commonly understood as a type of release(group) and is applied to digital releases without confusion.

I don't know how many digital "box sets" there are, but it seems likely that such a thing exists, doesn't it? (Or would that simply be a "bundle" of digital releases?)

Alex / caller#6



[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Album_%28music%29

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

Re: box sets etc. -- packaging vs type

Rachel Dwight

On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:30 PM, caller#6 <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 08/04/2014 10:04 AM, Tom Crocker wrote:
I'm starting a separate thread for all discussion of a new type (be it primary or secondary) for box sets (or whatever we might call them) so bflaminio's RFC [1] doesn't get hijacked.
There's some existing discussion on this at [2]

Personally, I'd be in favour of this as a primary type. I think box set is a good choice of name because it's recognisable and understood in the sense we mean [3] but a bad choice because it conflates packaging and release group content. Perhaps just 'set' would do, but I still think it's difficult to define in a useful way.



Is it really a problem to conflate packaging (the box) with type (box set)?

Not with me. For someone who doesn’t speak English well or is unfamiliar with North American music terminology, it might be a tad confusing.
There are a number of instances where people refer to certain actions or objects by old names, such as “videotaping” for video recording. The term is so deeply burned into our lexicon that we use it without thinking, but in other parts of the world there may be different terms or the terms we use have different meanings.


I mean, in general I agree that it's important to choose terminology carefully. But in this case, isn't it like "album"? Album was originally[1] a packaging type, but is now commonly understood as a type of release(group) and is applied to digital releases without confusion.

I don't know how many digital "box sets" there are, but it seems likely that such a thing exists, doesn't it? (Or would that simply be a "bundle" of digital releases?)

You might call it that (the Humble Bundle comes to mind). Of course some artists and labels might still use the term “box set” out of habit.

_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc. -- packaging vs type

tommycrock



On 7 August 2014 19:38, Rachel Dwight <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Aug 7, 2014, at 12:30 PM, caller#6 <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 08/04/2014 10:04 AM, Tom Crocker wrote:
I'm starting a separate thread for all discussion of a new type (be it primary or secondary) for box sets (or whatever we might call them) so bflaminio's RFC [1] doesn't get hijacked.
There's some existing discussion on this at [2]

Personally, I'd be in favour of this as a primary type. I think box set is a good choice of name because it's recognisable and understood in the sense we mean [3] but a bad choice because it conflates packaging and release group content. Perhaps just 'set' would do, but I still think it's difficult to define in a useful way.



Is it really a problem to conflate packaging (the box) with type (box set)?

Not with me. For someone who doesn’t speak English well or is unfamiliar with North American music terminology, it might be a tad confusing.
There are a number of instances where people refer to certain actions or objects by old names, such as “videotaping” for video recording. The term is so deeply burned into our lexicon that we use it without thinking, but in other parts of the world there may be different terms or the terms we use have different meanings.


Not much for me either, but I recognise that other people are concerned about it.

I mean, in general I agree that it's important to choose terminology carefully. But in this case, isn't it like "album"? Album was originally[1] a packaging type, but is now commonly understood as a type of release(group) and is applied to digital releases without confusion.
So I guess this gets to the heart of the question, if we want a box set type, what do we mean by it.  I (and Wikipedia [1]) think the term is used to mean two things: a big compilation (3+ discs) e.g. Trojan Box Set [2] or a set of releases (again, 3+). In general, you get more music than from an album, they aren't original releases and I don't think 2-on-1s fit here usually. So, to accommodate digital releases, my first stab at a definition would be:
A box set includes 3 or more previous release groups or is a compilation with at least 3 mediums or containing at least 3 hours of recordings.
But I recognise that's a very contrived and ugly definition :)

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

Re: box sets etc.

bflaminio
In reply to this post by tommycrock
How about a term like "release collection" or "release group collection"?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

Calvin Walton-2

On Sat, 2014-08-09 at 17:17 -0700, bflaminio wrote:
> How about a term like "release collection" or "release group
> collection"?
Using the term "collection" here might be confusing, since we already
have collections of releases in the MusicBrainz UI, e.g.
http://musicbrainz.org/collection/ea931fde-2286-42f7-b878-8d7da8fc8832

--
Calvin Walton <[hidden email]>

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

Re: box sets etc.

jesus2099
In reply to this post by tommycrock
Here is the ticket for this, if I don’t mistake : http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-243
 PATATE12   jesus2099   GOLD MASTER KING   FAKE E-MAIL ADDRESS 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: box sets etc.

tommycrock


On 28 Nov 2014 14:05, "jesus2099" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Here is the ticket for this, if I don’t mistake :
> http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-243
>
>

That ticket seems to be like caller#6's http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-331 no?

This 'thread' resulted in http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-335 which had discussions as RFCs and Vs on the mailing list under the old regime


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