Author Topic: Improvements for Classical Music Support  (Read 11255 times)

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
The areas to discuss could be divided into four: (1) Tagging scheme (2) Tag editing (3) Display/Organization (4) Playback support. #3 & #4 would be rather straightforward if the discussion over #1 & #2 can set the right direction.

Here's my proposal of a new (optional) tag editor layout to support classical music tagging.

First I think this whole thing needs to be grounded on some established conventions rather than inventing everything ourselves that would be useless in the real world outside MB. I think iTunes Style Guide can serve the role at least regarding formatting title.

http://www.dailyrindblog.com/classical-music-metadata-101/

http://dailyrindblog.com/newsletter/iTunesStyleGuide_July2015.pdf (Look at from p.39)


I agree Work Title (Composition) should be stored as a separate tag (TOAL frame sounds reasonable) but the problem is many (portable) players won't support displaying the field. But this information is the most important piece for identifying a classical music as you won't be able to tell a work from others just with "Movement II - Andante" title. But entering everything into title field again would be tedious and redundant. Then how about making title field (TIT2) dynamic that's auto-adjusted in accordance with other tag values? It can be called "display title", but the difference (from display artist) is it follows hard-coded format unless overwritten with its own value.

I suggest tag editor displays the following layout for work and title field:

Work Title: (input)
Act: (drop-down number) Scene: (drop-down number)
Key: (input)  Catalogue Number: (input)
Movement: (drop-down number)  Tempo: (input)  Track Subtitle: (input)

Display Title: (dependent on values above unless its own value is entered)

e.g.

1. Symphony

Work Title: Symphony No.35 "Haffner"
Act: (none) Scene: (none)
Key: D major  Catalogue Number: K. 385
Movement: 4 Tempo: Presto  Track Subtitle: (none)

Display Title: Symphony No. 35 "Haffner" in D major, K. 385: Movement IV - Presto

2. Concerto

Work Title: Piano Concerto No. 3
Act: (none) Scene: (none)
Key: C minor  Catalogue Number: Op. 37
Movement: 2 Tempo: Largo  Track Subtitle: (none)

Display Title: Piano Concerto No. 3 in C minor, Op. 37: Movement II - Largo

3. Piano Work

Work Title: Waltz No. 9
Act: (none) Scene: (none)
Key: A flat  Catalogue Number: Op. 69 No. 1
Movement: (none) Tempo: (none)  Track Subtitle: "L'adieu" (posth.)

Display Title: Waltz No. 9 in A flat, Op. 69 No. 1 "L'adieu" (posth.)

4. Opera piece

Work Title: Götterdämmerung
Act: 3 Scene: 2
Key: (none)  Catalogue Number: WWV 86D
Movement: (none) Tempo: (none)  Track Subtitle: Mime hiess ein muerrischer Zwerg

Display Title: Götterdämmerung, WWV 86D, Act III Scene 2: Mime hiess ein muerrischer Zwerg


Now, as for tagging scheme, the work title should go to TOAL frame.
Key should be TKEY, and Catalogue Number is for TIT3 (subtitle).
And Display Title should be TIT2 but not sure about others.

Also support formatting options for Display Title: including/excluding work, key & number in it.
Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 06:54:24 AM by redwing

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
@Bee-liever;

I just saw your post. Feel free comment on my proposal especially regarding tag frames.

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
*different multiple artist splitter fields: orchestra, ensemble, soloist (including the ability to specify voice/instrument, which would dovetail with TMCL tags), chorus, choirmaster, etc.  For those who like to include ALL the performers, this would cut way down on the need for custom tags.

+1

Also add "Conductor" role too. I don't use conductor field because first artist matter in many places in MB like TM, artist bio, etc. so I have to enter conductor as first artist for symphonies and orchestral works to use those features.

*turning grouping (in the tag editor) into a special composition field (I've been using grouping for composition already, but there are times when that conflicts, like when a classical CD has a disc title that I want to include - it would be better to have a TXXX/Composition in my opinion)

-1

I am using grouping field for sub-genres for classical music. It's one of the rare fields that are readily available from other players as well and I think people use the field for various purposes. Tying that field to a specific tag wouldn't be a good idea as it can't work for many people.

hiccup

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
Is this what your trying to achieve?

Very nice, I also achieved something very similar.
But of course that needs quite some MB experience and lots of tweaking.

For this specific thread it would be interesting to see if we can come up with some specific proposals to make this easier to achieve for less savvy users, and see if we can steer to a more or less agreed framework for this.
Then any changes/improvements would not only be for the handful of savvy users who probably already know how to create their own personal solutions for this, but would benefit more users and spread the gains...

Steven

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26336
Is this what your trying to achieve?
off topic but i have improved the spacing for sub-headers when double rows are needed

vincent kars

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
http://dailyrindblog.com/newsletter/iTunesStyleGuide_July2015.pdf (Look at from p.39)

Nice link, thanks
Maybe these ones are of use as well
http://blog.musichi.eu/post/2874852211/the-zen-of-classical-music-tagging-part1-the
http://blog.musichi.eu/post/3617245298/the-zen-of-classical-music-tagging-part-2-with


At page 39 of the Apple guide I of course immediately took offence
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is correct.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus is incorrect!
This is about classical artist names!
If this is about Artist please give me that true authentic performance by Mozart himself.

iDiots those Apple guys.
I’m firmly in the Last, First camp.
Anybody a bit familiar with programming knows that First/Last to Last/First is hard and Last/First to First/Last is easy thanks to this comma.
Beside if you want to prefix an album of a composition with the composers name, you won’t type it, you will use a formula.  In this case Last/First is the one you need.

Anyway, I don’t think it should be about this kind of standards.
MusicBee should provide facilities to handle classical, not constrains.

You proposed a very elaborate tagging schema.
Nothing wrong with the schema but the burden is to populate it.

That’s the reason I use the MusiCHI tagger.
It knows the anatomy of a classical recording and can split it into these kinds of items.
It also features an extensive database with composers, performers and works.
This is a great help in keeping your tagging consistently spelled.
I don’t expect MusicBee to emulate this.

Best

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3062
  • MB Version: 3.1.6525
I agree Work Title (Composition) should be stored as a separate tag (TOAL frame sounds reasonable)
I wouldn't like to see TOAL ('Original album/movie/show title') frame used for this purpose.  I already use TOAL for the original songs for parody/re-recording/mashup tracks
I still think the TSST ('Set subtitle') frame to use
Quote
The 'Set subtitle' frame is intended for the subtitle of the part of a set this track belongs to.

*different multiple artist splitter fields: orchestra, ensemble, soloist (including the ability to specify voice/instrument, which would dovetail with TMCL tags), chorus, choirmaster, etc.  For those who like to include ALL the performers, this would cut way down on the need for custom tags.

+1

Also add "Conductor" role too. I don't use conductor field because first artist matter in many places in MB like TM, artist bio, etc. so I have to enter conductor as first artist for symphonies and orchestral works to use those features.

*turning grouping (in the tag editor) into a special composition field (I've been using grouping for composition already, but there are times when that conflicts, like when a classical CD has a disc title that I want to include - it would be better to have a TXXX/Composition in my opinion)

-1

I am using grouping field for sub-genres for classical music. It's one of the rare fields that are readily available from other players as well and I think people use the field for various purposes. Tying that field to a specific tag wouldn't be a good idea as it can't work for many people.
I would agree with both of these.


I think a lot tagging issues, classical or otherwise, could be overcome with a floating (or docked) vertically arranged tagging panel (as already suggested by a user in the wishlist).  
One similar to the LH tagging panel in Mp3tag, where you can arrange all your tags, standard and custom, into a format that suits your tagging schema.


off topic but i have improved the spacing for sub-headers when double rows are needed
only a small change but looks good! much appreciated  :)
Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 01:49:00 AM by Bee-liever
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

psychoadept

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6977
I wouldn't like to see TOAL ('Original album/movie/show title') frame used for this purpose.  I already use TOAL for the original songs for parody/re-recording/mashup tracks

Is that likely to create a conflict with classical tracks?  The fact that MusicBrainz puts the Work into this tag means it's going to be there anyway in a lot of cases.
MusicBee Wiki
Use & improve MusicBee's documentation!

Latest beta patch (3.1)
(Unzip and overwrite existing program files)

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
Nothing wrong with the schema but the burden is to populate it.

That’s the reason I use the MusiCHI tagger.
It knows the anatomy of a classical recording and can split it into these kinds of items.

That's a good point.
My proposal was mainly for entering tag values manually with the help of autocomplete feature for each box (BTW I edited my proposal slightly, combining work, series number, work subtitle into one "Work Title"). But it should also support easy conversion of existing title to the new set of tags. It would be also useful when you have purchased or ripped full-tagged tracks.

This is already somewhat possible with MB, but can be improved. I'm referring to "infer tags from filename" command. That could be expanded to "infer tags from selected tags" feature, allowing to add multiple conversion rules from different tags just like auto-playlist rules. That way, existing title could be easily split into multiple new tags, and when the user empty the title field, it will display the formatted title properly.

I wouldn't like to see TOAL ('Original album/movie/show title') frame used for this purpose.  I already use TOAL for the original songs for parody/re-recording/mashup tracks
I still think the TSST ('Set subtitle') frame to use

If we can't reach an agreement about frames, MB could just assign those new fields to internal custom tags saved in database only, leaving mapping of each field to users.

vzell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
This is already somewhat possible with MB, but can be improved. I'm referring to "infer tags from filename" command. That could be expanded to "infer tags from selected tags" feature, allowing to add multiple conversion rules from different tags just like auto-playlist rules. That way, existing title could be easily split into multiple new tags, and when the user empty the title field, it will display the formatted title properly.


+1

theta_wave

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
+1

Also add "Conductor" role too. I don't use conductor field because first artist matter in many places in MB like TM, artist bio, etc. so I have to enter conductor as first artist for symphonies and orchestral works to use those features.
Don't use the conductor field?  So do you not have a quick way to bring up Karajan's Beethoven Symphony cycle, Mravinsky's Shostakovich, Ančerl's Dvořák, etc?

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
Don't use the conductor field?  So do you not have a quick way to bring up Karajan's Beethoven Symphony cycle, Mravinsky's Shostakovich, Ančerl's Dvořák, etc?

They are first artist & album artist. For concertos, soloists get that position.

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3062
  • MB Version: 3.1.6525
I wouldn't like to see TOAL ('Original album/movie/show title') frame used for this purpose.  I already use TOAL for the original songs for parody/re-recording/mashup tracks

Is that likely to create a conflict with classical tracks?  The fact that MusicBrainz puts the Work into this tag means it's going to be there anyway in a lot of cases.
Probably not.  I just don't like bastardising a published standard to fit in with the short-comings of some players.  Just because MusicBrainz allocates the metadata to that frame, doesn't turn it into the correct frame.


Don't use the conductor field?  So do you not have a quick way to bring up Karajan's Beethoven Symphony cycle, Mravinsky's Shostakovich, Ančerl's Dvořák, etc?

They are first artist & album artist. For concertos, soloists get that position.

This is what irritates me with the whole classical/popular tagging debate.  The disregard for the ID3 standard when it doesn't work how we want it to and the expectation that player software should adjust to our own personal revisions of that tagging system.
I'm one of the few (maybe the only one?  ;)  ) that makes no distinction between classical and other music.  It's all music for tagging purposes.
A Composer is a Composer is a Composer.
An Artist is an Artist is an Artist.
A Conductor is a Conductor is a Conductor.
Mozart certainly did compose and was the original performing Artist (if it had been able to be recorded at that time)
So lets keep Mozart and other composers as composers.
By all means, do as I do and use the multiple artist splitter to put the composer as the first artist, for backwards compatibility with players that only read the first artist and can't read the composer frame.
Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 10:07:57 AM by Bee-liever
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

redwing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
Just to be clear, I am using composer field for composer, just not using conductor field for those (MB-specific) reasons I already mentioned (TM, artist bio, etc.). So in my tagging scheme, the most principal artist in the performance becomes first artist & album artist (conductor for symphonies, soloist for concertos).
I also think the usual recommendations for classical music tagging that puts composer in artist tag is just plain wrong.

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3062
  • MB Version: 3.1.6525
Just to be clear, I am using composer field for composer, just not using conductor field for those (MB-specific) reasons I already mentioned (TM, artist bio, etc.). So in my tagging scheme, the most principal artist in the performance becomes first artist & album artist (conductor for symphonies, soloist for concertos).
Sorry redwing. I know I quoted you, but it was meant as a more general illustration of using named tag frame not entirely as listed in the standardisation guidelines.  It wasn't a finger-pointing exercise aimed at you.  :-[
I actually use something similar. The ensemble/orchestra is my (first) album artist and the principal artist/conductor going in as my display artist (the actual first artist in the list is the composer - they're just not displayed).
And I still tag the conductor as I use that field in my grouping header.


I also think the usual recommendations for classical music tagging that puts composer in artist tag is just plain wrong.
I'm happy to see I'm not the only one after all  ;D
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together