Print

Print


--------------------------------------------------
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