From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
> This article highlights an overall interesting trend. But the reviewer
> also points out the confusing and inconsistent tagging that happens with
> classical music in MP3 and other tag-enabled formats.
> I have found that cddb/Gracenote and freedb are fraught with problematic
> and inconsistent data-entry for classical titles. There are actually tags
> that work great for how classical music is generally understood --
> COMPOSER, ARTIST, ALBUM ARTIST and ALBUM TITLE for instance. You can
> customize iTunes and other database programs to list by whatever field you
> wish, for instance by artist and album title or by composer and title, so
> if the data is entered correctly, it need not be totally PITA to use
> classical music in an iTunes setting. But unfortunately, most of the
> pre-programmed metadata out there is garbage, typical of internet "group
> volunteer" operations with no oversight or quality control. Sometimes
> "help" is not helpful.
> What has surprised me is that the owners of copyrighted classical
> recordings haven't gotten together to standardize and publish correct
> tag-entry methods and to correct at least their active catalogs. I can
> understand how there's no economic incentive to fix out of print items,
> but the active catalog gets lost in the shuffle (ipod pun intended) if the
> tags aren't right.
> Classical titles are just the most glaring examples of the problems with
> the online auto-tag databases. I used the Catraxx catalog-database program
> to gather and organize my jazz, rock, country and popular CD's and I found
> that at least 50% of the auto-loaded tags needed tweaking for something.
> Either the recording year was wrong (most common), or something that was
> not a compilation was listed as one (also very common), or in the case of
> jazz, the musicians weren't listed in the MEMO field (this is a
> convenience and I don't hold it against the online databases that this
> information is usually missing or incorrect), or the record company was
> incorrectly or inconsistently named (very common), etc.
> Gracenote is a for-profit entity, so there should be better quality
> control. Apple's own database at the iTunes store has more errors than
> you'd think in the more obscure corners of jazz, and classical selections
> are harder to correctly indentify and locate than rock or jazz. For these
> for-profit entities, there's no excuse for the poor quality control. And
> what's particularly galling is, none of this should be necessary since CD
> Text was available from the beginning of CD's and should have been used to
> correctly identify artists and songs (which would then make filling in
> other tags much easier and more prone to be complete and correct).
> I wish I could propose an easy solution to this, but the only one I can
> think of is that buyers of digital downloads demand better
> tagging/database information from the highly profitable entities they buy
> from. As for cleaning up Gracenote and freedb, I won't hold my breath. I
> do submit corrected information to Gracenote from both Catraxx and the
> iTunes software most of the time, and appreciate all other users who do so
What is needed is a ACD...a classical-based equivalent to the familiiar
Currently, there is NO discography covering the classical-music recordings
of 19??-1943...I discovered this when attempting to include classical discs
in my Dating Guide...?
Steven C. Barr