History:Classical Style Guide Discussion History
| Status: This Page is Glorious History! The content of this page either is bit-rotted, or has lost its reason to exist due to some new features having been implemented in MusicBrainz, or maybe just described something that never made it in (or made it in a different way), or possibly is meant to store information and memories about our Glorious Past. We still keep this page to honor the brave editors who, during the prehistoric times (prehistoric for you, newcomer!), struggled hard to build a better present and dreamed of an even better future. We also keep it for archival purposes because possibly it still contains crazy thoughts and ideas that may be reused someday. If you're not into looking at either the past or the future, you should just disregard entirely this page content and look for an up to date documentation page elsewhere. |
Contents |
Operatic works & Act formatting
The history of these discussions has been moved to HistoryOfOperaTrackStyle
Track titles on discs with only a single work
- Is it really necessary to repeat "Symphony No.9 in D Minor: " at the beginning of every track title when that is the only work on the disc, and the title of the disc is the same "Symphony No.9 in D Minor" perhaps with "(some orchestra feat. conductor somebody)"? I understand the motivation for these track titles when there are multiple works on a disc (the most common case) but it seems totally redundant when a disc contains only one work. See for example the discussion on this track title edit. Yes, I think it is. Because the track title must inform about what work is it. If you see only "Ludwig van Beethoven - Allegro", then how can you know what is it ? (I suppose audioscrobbler make it more relevant). This is how I want to see them in my playlist though. It also make title more "uniform", so different album always use the same title for the same pieces. Can be handy for search too. --lindestinel I agree with this, and it seems to be becoming common practice. Can we move this to ClassicalStyleGuide now? --mebourne
Key indication
An agreement says that the statement "in" if missing should be added, lower case:
- "Concerto for Violin and Orchestra No. 5 in A major, K. 219: I. Allegro aperto"
Please note also that tone is uppercase and that the movement follows CapitalizationStandardItalian; so be careful using "Guess Case" since it converts "A" to "a" and capitalizes "Aperto" --ClutchEr2
A rife inconsistency is with capitalisation on Major/major. ClassicalStyleGuide has Major, a lot of other places have major, as probably do the majority of entries. I think all of the sleeve notes on my classical CDs use the lower case, and that would be my preference. --mebourne
Instruments indication
We could agree on a style for instruments indication on feat. as from this mod
- Impromptus Op. 90, D. 899 / Op. 142, D. 935 (feat. piano: Jenö Jandó)
Probably because in italian is so, I would not write "pianist" or "violinist" but only the indication of the instrument played, it' cleaner and easier. (As a side note, I wouldn't use anything at all in this particular case since in a Piano Sonata the executor is surely using a piano.) --ClutchEr2
- I mostly agree with that, but it does fall down for organ music. There it is sometimes is useful to record the name of the organ and the name of the organist. How would we do that with this scheme? --mebourne