LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  April 2010

ARSCLIST April 2010

Subject:

Re: article points to some of the problems with classical music and iTunes

From:

"Steven C. Barr" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:22:11 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (114 lines)

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Baoshan Sheng | International Classical Music Database" 
<[log in to unmask]>
> Hello Steven:
>
"Steven C" to be more accurate?!

> Thank you for the important information and critics you gave. We're trying
> to make you and other collectors like you satisfied through our research 
> and
> programs. Although you and me do not share a similar collection structure,
> but this doesn't change the truth that we both would like to have a better
> experience in collection management.
> I'll try to sort our your needs line by line, please correct me when 
> needed.
>
> 1: Include 78 rpm recordings rather than digital formats only.
>
Not "rather than," but "In addition to!" AFAIK, there are still many record
collectors who search out and collect those original 78 albums of noted
(in some but not all cases) performances of classical works. The collecting
of classical vocal records was the first form of "78 collecting" and started
WELL before the collection of jazz/dance band 78's...! As well, we 78
collectors inevitably encounter and acquire numbers of classical 78's
(often as album sets!) and have neither a source for data thereupon nor
any idea what to do with them...?!

> 2: Include information as : recording venue, recording date, performers,
> matrix number, and also need the information of the composer and the work.
>
Recording date is vital...and easily found for Columbia and Victor 
recordings,
since both labels' ledgers still exist! Performers need only be noted 
when/if
they are (1) noted, and (2) audibly featured in the recordings. Matrix 
numbers
are VERY important, since most discographies specifically omit any data
on classical recordings! The "venue" data should include mainly city/state
and studio, if that data can easily be established. Composer and Work are
probably required, but should be easily established...?! Beyond that, I
"yield the floor" to collectors of classical 78's; I don't actively collect
them, but have accumulated a number thereof...?!

> 3: Show information "discographical".
>
Refer to Brian Rust's "American Dance Band Discography." We record
collectors have become accustomed to Rust's format for discographies;
while it is less than perfect, it has essentially become the "default
format" for discographic works...?!

> There are also some things you didn't mention, but is important for us to
> achieve our goals without compromise:
>
> First, a definition of possible "discographical" presentation you would 
> like
> to see:
>
> Will it be arranged by classical compositions? e.g.
> http://a9music.com/beethoven/symphony-no.5
> Will it be arranged by conductors? e.g. http://a9music.com/karajan
> Will it be arranged by ensembles? e.g. http://a9music.com/aam
>
> Although the current design is not satisfying, but I think it's very clear
> to clarify the concepts we need to agree on. Each way has its audience, 
> and
> has its own design consideration.
>
Here, NOT being a collector of classical 78's, I shall step out and allow
that group to define their needs/desires/wants! Again, see the works
of Brian Rust for guidance...?!

> Second, do you care about the musicology facts beyond the discography? 
> e.g.
> the compositions by J.S.Bach.
> What kind of presentation do you need? Chronological / By BWV catalogue / 
> By
> BC catalogue / By genre or something else?
>
This data is probably appreciated by collectors of classical 78's; however, 
it
is NOT needed in the "basic discographic data source!"

As far as the arrangement of data, I think that could be selected by
the viewer of the data...?! I know I can choose how I see a MS Access
database...I assume that a "web viewer" has the same choice...?!

What I want is this: IF I acquire a bunch of 78's, I can look up the
data on most of the "popular" discs and find when (+/-) they
were recorded, as well as whether any musicians "of note"
participated...! I'd like to see a similar work covering classical
recordings...?!
> We lack information source of the 78 rpms which are very precious in
> meaning. But if you would like to help us in obtaining some raw materials,
> we believe we can compile a *meaningful, useful, beautiful and
> modern*discography which really belongs to our time. What I mean here
> is a new
> version of *World's Encyclopedia of Recorded Music* is not we need. Am I
> right?
>
Yes...and no! What I am thinking of is a discographic volume which lists
EVERY known recording of classical music...and provides the known/
estimated recording date of each side, as well as where (city/state,
studio if known) it was cut...?! Note that "personnel" only becomes
important for featured soloists (or person on early recordings),
UNlike jazz/dance band sides. However, it could be useful to
know about any important participants...?!

As an example, one of my favourite recordings is Sergei Rachmannanov
playing his own "Second Piano Concerto!" IIRC, this was cut in 1927,
In my "perfect world," I could look this record up in my "Classical
Discograpy" and find out the recording date!

Steven C. Barr 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager