At 09:17 PM 10/17/2005, Steve Smolian wrote:
>Which is a great reason for publishing them on line.

But only if you've got access to the correct info!

Leaving aside the plagiarism issues, copying a ton of stuff straight 
out of a book is very ambitious and it takes time and effort. However 
- in the end you only get what was already in the book (if you're 
careful enough not to introduce copying errors). And if you start 
with decades-old books (like has done), you aren't 
aware that Roland Kirk's Argo record has actually been released on 
more than just the original Argo LP.

Every discography I've done *improves* what is in the books, by 
including quantitatively more data (timings, composers, release 
dates, studios, track sequences, etc. etc.).

And if you are going to do an electronic discography, a sophisticated 
database is the way to go. I can immediately generate a song index, 
personnel index, etc. Can't be done if you just keep typing text into 
a word processor. The formatting may look the same, but the 
functionality is quite different.

Then there's the data exchange feature that allows information to be 
transferred and for multiple users to collaborate on a single discography.

Then there's the subject of authority control. The site 
doesn't know that "Bill Green" and "William Green" are the same LA 
studio guy. Or the even more important fact that "Jamil Nasser" and 
"George Joyner" are the same bassist. They just copied what some book 
said, without doing any research. Which is why I don't trust and 
can't recommend them.


mike at