Dec 20 14:01:12 * pbryan has changed the topic to: Agenda: Works: qualification, granularity, hierarchy, opera/classical. Dec 20 14:01:26 Well, it's 11:01 PST, so time to get started. Dec 20 14:01:37 Thanks everyone for attending. Dec 20 14:02:00 The objective is to discuss works and try to establish some foundations for a guideline to be written. Dec 20 14:02:23 * jdlh (~jdlh@XXX) has joined #musicbrainz-style Dec 20 14:02:31 So far, there's been a lot of varying opinion on what works should be, and a lot of open questions and I was hoping an interactive chat would help move things along. Dec 20 14:02:43 So, topic #1: what should be and what should not be a work? Dec 20 14:02:48 Hello all! Dec 20 14:02:53 Hi jdlh. Dec 20 14:03:16 pbryan: start simple and easy, why don't you? :) Dec 20 14:03:21 :-) Dec 20 14:03:38 I think there's general agreement that it should be some composition. Dec 20 14:03:41 A work should be a database record in which we can hang Classical Style track titles and album titles. Dec 20 14:03:59 (It may be other things besides.) Dec 20 14:04:34 In my opinion, a work should be an entity that represents new creative input. Dec 20 14:05:09 jdlh: Classical track titles are usually individual movements, and sometimes contains more than one movement. Dec 20 14:05:35 kepstin: So, your definition would include a remix of a previous composition? Dec 20 14:05:52 pbryan, in many cases, I believe it would, yes. Dec 20 14:06:23 Would it be safe to say that every work has at least a composer? Dec 20 14:06:44 that's a bit more tricky, because it would then be a work derived from recordings, derived from original works Dec 20 14:06:58 which, by transitivity, means that there is a composer involved eventually Dec 20 14:07:00 If the answer is yes, then works should be limited to musical content only. Dec 20 14:07:17 * nikki doesn't see why works can't be used for things like audiobooks too Dec 20 14:07:18 In other words, do we rule-out audio books, oratories, etc? Dec 20 14:07:41 and poems? some lyrics started as poems Dec 20 14:07:51 yeah, In that case I don't think a composer would be a requirement for a work. Dec 20 14:07:56 Okay. Dec 20 14:08:25 So, is there agreement works represent more than music? Dec 20 14:08:29 I agree with kepstin on both the remix and not needing a composer requirement. Dec 20 14:08:43 what about, instead, "writer"? every work has a (fuzzy) writer. Dec 20 14:08:52 all in all, some human input is probably required, whether it be a composer/lyricist/writer/producer, or whatnot. Dec 20 14:09:01 A work represents a piece of recorded audio content that is authored in some way. Dec 20 14:09:06 In Classical Music, I can think of at least 3 things that might be called "works": Dec 20 14:09:08 pbryan: +1 Dec 20 14:09:18 I think a work requires some "createive" work. Dec 20 14:09:24 Okay. Dec 20 14:09:29 pbryan, A work represents the authoring of a piece of recorded audio content. Dec 20 14:09:29 1. A complete composition, e.g. a symphony or concerto. Sometimes assigned "opus numbers" by the cultural tradition. Dec 20 14:09:30 caller_6: at least one :) Dec 20 14:09:35 but it doesn't really have to be a composition. a remix or mash-up is ok. Dec 20 14:09:46 jdlh, That's topic #2: granularity. Dec 20 14:09:51 pbryan: a work must be recorded? Dec 20 14:10:08 caller_6: Well, that's a good question. Dec 20 14:10:16 Do we want to track non-recorded works? Dec 20 14:10:21 caller_6, that's more of a musicbrainz thing, we're primarily representing works that have been recorded. Dec 20 14:10:29 I think in general they should be recorded, but I don't think it should be a hard and fast rule Dec 20 14:10:45 it's not really part of the definition of works; more of a side-effect of how people use the database Dec 20 14:10:52 2. A movement (or part) of a complete composition. because complete compositions are long and the cultural tradition accords great significance to the movement as a segmentation of the whole work, and because movements are often the granularity of tracks in recordings. Dec 20 14:10:54 I think Brian has mentioned wanting to list "lost" classical works. Dec 20 14:11:00 +1 on nikki Dec 20 14:11:21 Are works meaningful in MB if they're not associated with recordings? Dec 20 14:11:28 no. Dec 20 14:11:30 Is that an objective of works? Dec 20 14:11:38 since they are tied to other things with ARs only... Dec 20 14:11:42 pbryan: point taken Dec 20 14:12:16 3. A work (concerto, etc.) in the #1 or #2 sense, but altered by additional composition to make a related but distinct creative product. Dec 20 14:12:22 Okay, if we're okay with #1, I'd like to move onto #2. Dec 20 14:12:31 (and so does jdlh, I think! ;-) Dec 20 14:12:51 Granularity! Dec 20 14:12:52 Hold on, I think my #1 #2 #3 are part of answers to your first question, pbryan. Dec 20 14:13:02 Okay, holding... Dec 20 14:13:41 But maybe I'm not understanding what you meant by your question 1. Dec 20 14:13:52 I think jdlh that you'd agree a work is at it's most basic a a piece of recorded audio content that is authored in some way? Dec 20 14:14:01 s/a a/a/ Dec 20 14:14:30 " a piece of recorded audio content that is authored" agreed. Dec 20 14:14:51 pbryan, I think that definition's a little backwards, because the work isn't a piece of recorded audio content; it's what leads up to the recording (as there may be multiple recordings of a work) Dec 20 14:15:01 that's just a wording issue tho Dec 20 14:15:07 Point taken. Dec 20 14:15:24 I'll work on the wording. Dec 20 14:15:37 I just wanted something to root the rest of the discussion on. Dec 20 14:15:56 anyways, granularity? Dec 20 14:16:27 Note, I'm sure others will come back with traditional or Gregorian chants at some point later, at which point I may need to justify the definition of "authored", at which point I'll do my Bill Clinton impersionation. Dec 20 14:16:30 Granularity: Dec 20 14:16:43 What should be the supported granularit(ies) of works? Dec 20 14:16:58 Work: "A set of authored instructions to performer(s) on who to take a musical performance, which has been recorded". Dec 20 14:17:04 I've heard albums, I've heard tracks, I've heard movements. Dec 20 14:17:25 jdlh: Definitely an improvement to what I've said. Dec 20 14:17:41 pbryan: I would think that can vary depending on the work you're trying to model Dec 20 14:17:44 jdlh, that's not necessarily accurate; because for many types of modern music, the only "performer" is a computer synthesiser Dec 20 14:18:03 I think releases or tracks. we don't have the concept of a movement, do we? Dec 20 14:18:21 for most pop music, the song is the work... for some concept albums, I guess the entire album would also make sense as a work... no idea about classical Dec 20 14:18:28 Well, classical works in general definitely have the concept of movements. Dec 20 14:18:31 ruaok, the point is, we may be able to use works to add the concept of a movement. Dec 20 14:18:41 interesting Dec 20 14:18:56 And certainly movements have been well represented in CSG. Dec 20 14:19:14 @kepstin: ah, but what instructs the synthesiser how to be behave? Programming for that performance, entered by a musician? If so that might be the composition. If the synthesiser is autonomous, maybe it's the composer. Dec 20 14:19:26 Are we still talking about works as nestable entities with different layers of abstraction? Dec 20 14:19:43 caller_6: Yes, it's certainly possible. Dec 20 14:19:58 caller_6, are they? There's really two things that might need some sort of work→work link Dec 20 14:20:09 The model allows for a web of ARs if we wanted. Dec 20 14:20:19 1. Work A is a new work which derives from Work B Dec 20 14:20:34 Opera and musicals: the entire show is a work, but there are "songs" or "numbers" or "choruses" or "overtures" which are subdivisions that are works in their own right. Dec 20 14:20:45 2. Work A is larger work which incorporates Work B Dec 20 14:21:19 I think that if song is a work, then probably musical number, movement, etc. should also be considered a work. Dec 20 14:21:41 I think if concept album is also a work, and so is opus, etc. then we're talking hierarchy. Dec 20 14:21:57 We'd want an AR to say work A is a part of work B. Dec 20 14:22:24 we don't want an AR that says "Work A is part of a set, the next Work in the set is Work B". Or do we? Dec 20 14:22:40 Maybe that too... Dec 20 14:22:42 :-( Dec 20 14:22:51 I frown because this can get very complex, very quickly. Dec 20 14:23:01 So, something like Composition>Derivative_Composition>Arrangement>Recording>Mix/Re-mix? Dec 20 14:23:27 hierarchy \o/ Dec 20 14:23:39 caller_6: That's one type of AR. Dec 20 14:24:00 [ Would like to add to agenda for later: cross-check, how can taggers use this Work concept we've sketched out to generate CSG-style Track Name strings and Album Name strings and Artist strings for music files? ] Dec 20 14:24:17 I guess that's what "granularity" means to me. Asking how many abstraction layers we want. Dec 20 14:24:18 jdlh: Noted, time permitting... Dec 20 14:24:42 So, there's two arms here: Dec 20 14:24:46 1. Works and sub-works. Dec 20 14:24:50 caller_6: I don't think we need to define that, it will differ depending on the work Dec 20 14:24:54 2. Works and derivatives. Dec 20 14:25:30 In Classical, Opera, Musicals, the sub-works are in a definite sequence. We need some way to preserve that ordering. Don't want the DB to list movement IV before movement II. Dec 20 14:25:37 To get concrete here, would there be disagreement Pink Floyd's The Wall is a concept album. Dec 20 14:26:10 for that matter, is a DJ-mix album of multiple tracks a work? Dec 20 14:26:22 pbryan: no. Dec 20 14:26:25 kepstin: yes. Dec 20 14:26:40 Is there any disagreement that The Wall should be considered a work? Dec 20 14:26:50 pbryan: not from me Dec 20 14:27:14 Is there any disagreement that Another Brick in the Wall , Part 2 should also be considered a work? Dec 20 14:27:20 (a track on The Wall) Dec 20 14:27:25 not from me. Dec 20 14:27:30 Anyone else/ Dec 20 14:27:31 ? Dec 20 14:27:41 agreed so far Dec 20 14:27:54 pbryan: not from me on Wall, or on Another Brick. Dec 20 14:27:55 Because if these propositions are true, then we certainly need work->sub work AR. Dec 20 14:28:07 * ruaok nods Dec 20 14:28:14 yes. that seems appropriate. Dec 20 14:28:19 * jdlh nods Dec 20 14:28:31 that would cover mash-ups as well? and the like? Dec 20 14:28:35 What about a run-of-the mill album? Dec 20 14:28:45 caller_6: Trying to build there. Dec 20 14:28:52 for a run of the mill album, there is a work, yes. Dec 20 14:28:55 how do we caputer order of sub-works under a work? Dec 20 14:29:00 and that is composed to sub-works. Dec 20 14:29:05 Good luck, y'all in pop music land, writing the Concept Album as Work style guideline. What is and isn't a Concept Album? Dec 20 14:29:05 capture Dec 20 14:29:06 warp: Good question... Dec 20 14:29:31 Answer may be that the NGS model doesn't really support that. Dec 20 14:29:37 I think that for most pop albums, people will not bother adding a super-work, because it doesn't add any additional useful information, and would be extra work. Dec 20 14:29:44 jdlh: if there needs to be a test, maybe it's that the work is often performed "in order" like Rush's 2112 Dec 20 14:30:20 Safe to say that if someone represents a pop album in works, it will/can be tolerated? Dec 20 14:30:26 caller_6: good observation Dec 20 14:30:33 pbryan: yes, any album is a work IMO. Dec 20 14:30:45 * nikki doesn't think any album is a work, we have releases for that Dec 20 14:31:03 (and release groups) Dec 20 14:31:04 someone somewhere decided on a certain order for those tracks. Dec 20 14:31:07 nikki: Is there a way to make a distinction that we can use to guide? Dec 20 14:31:13 If "any album is a work" then no need for a Concept Album style guide. Dec 20 14:31:56 nikki: +1 Dec 20 14:33:04 basically, I only think a work is needed for a collection of works in the cases where either a) additional useful ARs can be added to the super-work, or b) the collection represents something different from the release. Dec 20 14:33:24 pbryan: well, concept albums aren't something I know much about, I listen to stuff that's mostly "the artist's singles so far with some filler songs thrown in" :P but from what I've seen of simon's albums, they're often one "song" split into multiple parts and things like that Dec 20 14:34:02 Okay, so the consensus is concept albums, yes, typical pop albums, for the most part, no. Dec 20 14:34:25 If there's nothing of note in a pop album, it can probably be safely left out as a work. Dec 20 14:34:32 (Anybody have a URL which summarises the current and immediately planned NGS database schema, with technical detail? I'd like to look at it re: sub-work ordering.) Dec 20 14:35:08 So, works are multi-level. Dec 20 14:35:28 As warp brought-up, order of sub-works within a super-work is pertinent. Dec 20 14:35:44 And I don't think ARs as they stand can cope with this requirement. Dec 20 14:35:50 is it something that needs to be solved NOW? Dec 20 14:36:10 Works can't cut Gordian Knot of CSG without sequencing of sub-works. Dec 20 14:36:11 Can we live with sub-works being listed in non-sequential order? Dec 20 14:36:18 pbryan: the only way to do ordering is like we did the part-of-set relationship Dec 20 14:36:39 nikki: Yeah, which presumes a work only appears in one and only one super-work. Dec 20 14:36:46 Is that a safe assumption? Dec 20 14:36:57 but I think non-ordered works would be ok for now, ngs is never going to solve everything Dec 20 14:37:01 if we can't do ordering, then we're still going to need a CSG that encodes the order into the names of the sub-works :/ Dec 20 14:37:11 kepstin: I'm inclined to agree. Dec 20 14:37:12 pbryan: no Dec 20 14:37:24 (and there'll be plenty of cleaning up to do in ngs anyway) Dec 20 14:37:51 pbryan: it is not uncommon for a track (a sub-work) to appear twice on the same album Dec 20 14:37:55 I think we're not going to fully solve the CSG problem with NGS as it stands. Dec 20 14:38:07 "Gordian Knot of CSG": refers to long post I sent to mb-style a couple of days ago. Basically, I think Works is our escape from the CSG mess, and if Works can't open the escape path, we should improve NGS until it does. Dec 20 14:38:07 I think it's a step in the right direction. Dec 20 14:38:11 pbryan: obviously it is common for a track (a sub-work) to appear on various albums Dec 20 14:38:31 pbryan: yes, exactly. a step in the right direction :) Dec 20 14:38:54 jdlh: I agree in principle. I think it will likely happen in steps though. Dec 20 14:39:08 And the issues we encounter with works in the first step can inform future steps. Dec 20 14:39:23 jdlh: there is always post-ngs though, just because it's not perfect for ngs doesn't mean it won't be improved later Dec 20 14:39:44 So, I think for the time being, we need to live without order-of-subworks. Dec 20 14:39:50 completely replacing a system with an entirely new one all at once really doesn't work as well as incremental steps, in my experience. Dec 20 14:40:11 But put it on the list of things we need post-NGS? Dec 20 14:40:42 for sure. Dec 20 14:40:46 Any major disagreement with that proposition? Dec 20 14:41:03 Going... Dec 20 14:41:05 going... Dec 20 14:41:14 ... (extra pause) ... Dec 20 14:41:15 okay. Dec 20 14:41:18 Sold. Dec 20 14:41:42 Okay, we've talked about hierarchy. Dec 20 14:41:45 Note that this NGS won't solve CSG mess, though. Dec 20 14:41:52 I totally agree. Dec 20 14:41:57 jdlh: its not intended to. Dec 20 14:42:24 its best to think of NGS as a new foundation with which we can solve CSG eventually. Dec 20 14:42:54 Okay, so we know we need a hierarchy. Dec 20 14:43:00 * jdlh resets his expectations. Dec 20 14:43:20 And we also want relationships to model derivative works, yes? Dec 20 14:43:25 yes, for sure. Dec 20 14:43:42 agreed Dec 20 14:43:45 So, there will be another hierarchy representing derivations. Dec 20 14:43:52 note that works may derive from recordings instead of other works directly - e.g. remixes/mashups/djmixes, etc. Dec 20 14:44:17 kepstin: Won't this also be represented within works though? Dec 20 14:44:35 Or do you see merely providing composer credit to the new work? Dec 20 14:44:51 kind of; a work may have multiple performances/recordings tho; and a remix is typically of a particular recording, and adds some new creative input. Dec 20 14:45:22 should it be a recording→work AR, or would work→work be enough? Dec 20 14:46:05 I think if it's a remix, I'd be inclined to say it's a new work, with composition credit to composers of the reused recorded material. That's how I most often see it credited on albums. Dec 20 14:46:30 So someone takes a Bee Gees track, remixes it with their new vocal track, B. Gibb gets composer credit. Dec 20 14:46:50 for the cases of derived works with work→work ARs, would we have to specify the composer on each work, or would that be inherited somehow? Dec 20 14:47:43 I don't think there's any inheritance exposed in the UI today... Dec 20 14:47:44 not all attributes would be inherited, would they? i mean, not necessarily. Dec 20 14:47:59 right, for example a cover of a song with new lyrics Dec 20 14:48:15 would have a different lyricist AR, but the others would be the same Dec 20 14:48:41 I'm wondering if there should be any derivative work inheritance in works.... Dec 20 14:49:09 Recording ARs seem to do a better job. Dec 20 14:49:35 the other issue is cancelling out previous ARs. for example an instrumental arrangement of a previously vocal song doesn't have lyrics, but is still a derived work Dec 20 14:50:08 so derivative work inheritance is probably too hard to get right automatically. Dec 20 14:50:12 Derivative-work ARs would need to distinguish what part is derived. Sounds ugly. Dec 20 14:50:54 so, duplicating ARs onto derived works is probably our best option right now, I think. Dec 20 14:51:00 Yeah, I think so. Dec 20 14:51:10 Any objections to this approach for NGS 1? Dec 20 14:51:44 Going... Dec 20 14:51:52 going... Dec 20 14:51:56 i'm still curious about whether remix works should use a work→work or recording→work ar, anyone have opinions on that? Dec 20 14:52:08 Would be nice to have better UI for assigning many ARs to many entities. Dec 20 14:52:20 Indeed. Dec 20 14:52:32 Okay, 8 mins to gloss-over classical/opera. Dec 20 14:52:37 jdlh, that's on the post-ngs wishlist already, I think. nikki really wants that :) Dec 20 14:52:41 Main problem: opera especially. Dec 20 14:52:46 This is obstacle now for classical, where same 10 Artists may get assigned to each track of 3 Releases. Dec 20 14:52:59 Opera splits tracks at arbitrary places in the libretto. Dec 20 14:53:03 * nikki wants lots of things :P Dec 20 14:53:23 I'm inclined to limit works to musical numbers, not recitatives, not random dialogue. Dec 20 14:53:48 Disagree. The recits matter also. I sing opera, I need to study the recits too. Dec 20 14:53:54 This implies that a track may link to the larger work, not the more granular in some cases. Dec 20 14:54:16 Okay, numbers and recits? Dec 20 14:54:28 In any case, there's no reason that a recording's Tracks will always conform to Sub-Work boundarie. Dec 20 14:54:35 or a recording may link to multiple of the more granular works, possibly? Dec 20 14:54:47 jdlh: Yes. Dec 20 14:54:52 kepstin: I thin so. Dec 20 14:54:55 s/thin/think/ Dec 20 14:55:03 So in general I expect cases where multiple Tracks make up one Sub-Work, and one Track contains multiple Sub-Works. Dec 20 14:55:29 jdlh: I agree. Dec 20 14:55:58 Anyone have any other points on this? Dec 20 14:55:59 I don't think it would make sense to add new works for each possible splitting of subworks into tracks. Dec 20 14:56:28 kepstin:+1 Dec 20 14:56:28 For Opera and Musicals especially, agree that we shouldn't create Subworks according to Track boundaries. Dec 20 14:56:39 So, we're admitting in some cases an ugly-at-best mapping of tracks to works, for opera especially. Dec 20 14:57:01 I see SubWorks as being governed by cultural tradition, not recording engineers choices. Dec 20 14:57:02 I think classical suffers this to some extent—sometimes multiple movements appear in the same track. Dec 20 14:57:16 jdlh: For opera/classical, I agree. Dec 20 14:57:26 It's an easier decision w. popular/jazz music I think. Dec 20 14:57:33 pbryan: yes, definitely classical suffers this too. Dec 20 14:57:49 Any last thoughts before the top of the hour? Dec 20 14:58:02 Idea about sequencing subworks: Dec 20 14:58:28 Tracks can link to subworks. Tracks have sequence. This imposes a sequence on subworks from a tagger's perspective. Dec 20 14:58:44 That may be enough to make progress with simplifying CSG. Dec 20 14:58:46 right, so in some cases you might have "Track A is a recording of Work A, Movement A and Work A, Movement B", other cases "Work A, Movement A has recordings Track A, Track B" Dec 20 14:59:19 jdlh: Agreed, this is a good direction to be driving toward. Dec 20 14:59:24 My plan going forward: another IRC this evening PST, then begin drafting a guideline, posting to email, continuing dialogue in email. Dec 20 14:59:28 hmm. that second case, the track names may need some sort of "(part x)" style. Dec 20 14:59:36 Work A, Movement A will potentially have hundreds of Tracks in different recordings. Dec 20 14:59:40 pbryan: sounds good. thanks for holding this meeting! Dec 20 14:59:56 pbryan: thank you! Dec 20 14:59:59 Your input here was very helpful everyone. Thanks for the input. Feel free to ping me directly with ideas pre-and post-email. Dec 20 15:00:08 jdlh, assume I was only mentioning the tracks from one of the recordings :)