Print

Print


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/arts/music/04download.html
> 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 
> too.
>
What is needed is a ACD...a classical-based equivalent to the familiiar 
ADBD!!
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