----- Original Message ----- From: "Karl Miller" <[log in to unmask]> Is it not a technical fact that CD's contain data files, which CD players use to keep track of what they are playing? If so, a catalogue of CD's could be created by copying that data into a larger database table...is this correct? > On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, David Lewis wrote: > > > Karl, > > > > The data is mostly licensed from AMG, Muze and Gracenote - Apple, Microsoft, > > Yahoo, Sony, Real Networks, MusicMatch, Dell and Wal-Mart combine a cocktail > > of all three services, and a few use a small in-house staff to address > > individual issues as well. It took AMG fifteen years to amass the data we > > now have, which amounts to about 500,000 pop CDs, 128,000 classical ones and > > more than 50,000 DVDs. > > Do you have any estimates as to the number of person hours needed to > accomplish this? > > > > besides the fact that I would guess the various labels are supplying their > > own information, > > > > NOT! They should, to all reputable services, to insure their own survival at > > the very least. But they don't, and you have no idea how hard it is to get > > some of them even to consider it. A few have wised up by now, and it has > > helped them, I believe, to gain a slight advantage over others who don't. > > As I try to watch the way in which my label is represented at amazon and > other vendors? I would be happy to provide all required information at the > time of pressing. > > > I can't speak for Gracenote or Muze, but the AMG Free website is used as an > > authority by libraries and music stores, particularly for birth/death dates, > > issue numbers and that kind of data. > > To which I will add that I frequently encounter authority records, both > name and subject which cite AMG. > > The reason that commercial databases > > "(are) not subject to authority control" is that there is no dialogue > > between the commercial databases and the libraries. OCLC is prohibited by > > their own guidelines from opening up such an avenue. But their database was > > designed to catalogue books, not recordings. On the other hand, from a > > proprietary standpoint an open structure like OCLC presents an immense > > problem for a commercial data enterprise, which doesn't want it's product > > all over the web without certain tagging and protections. > > While Google may be considered more of a search engine versus a database, > it seems that OCLC is exploring partnerships as in the Google Scholar > access. > > As I am sensing from what you are writing, a world I know little about, it > would seem that information provided by producers to a "free" database > would threaten the commercial data enterprises? > > If so, would that then preclude it from happening? > > > > However, I would assume people are able to find what they want. > > > > If it's Britney Spears, yes, but if it's an analog recording of Lynn Harrell > > playing a cello concerto only issued on LP, then probably not. If it's a > > tune that Frank Sinatra recorded with Tommy Dorsey in 1940, then they might > > have the problem of too many choices. > > Searching in world cat...OCLC mixed keywords dorsey and sinatra and form > sound recording brings up 537 hits, searching in OCLC connection, personal > name Sinatra personal name dorsey brings up 243 entries. Our local online > system mixed keywords dorsey and sinatra brings up 44 entries. > > > So, if I am understanding things... > > We have the non-profit sector with say...how many catalogers > world-wide, doing original cataloging of recordings, both old and new, > with a 40 year old system that talks only to itself, but can be > accessed for a fee (since the system needs to be self-sustaining it is a > shared cost)... and that those working in the system will often > rely on for-profit information for authority control. > > Then there is the for-profit sector using their own proprietary systems > creating "cataloging" information to support the needs of their > clients...not just sales of goods but things like radio station catalogs > which include timings, etc. They work with only items available for sale. > > And we have the producers who cringe we see our work misrepresented in > data files in both the for-profit and-non profit sectors. > > With all of this we have probably a relatively low error rate in all of > the data, but a substantial backlog? > > While the methodology and end goals of both sectors differ, there would > seem to be plenty of duplication of effort. > > Please tell me the flaws in my thinking...but might it not be worth > exploring having the non-profits write specifications for cataloging > and pay the for-profits to do it? > > As I was typing this I recalled some old library supply catalogs where the > vendors would not only sell you the phonograph record, but also a set of > cards for your catalog. > > Karl >