Print

Print


----- 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
>