[mb-style] Should track names of musicals contain the name of the musical itself?

[Bogdan Butnaru]

I only half agree with this idea, but I can't articulate quite clearly
why. Maybe the discussion will find a good reasoning.

It seems perfectly desirable to have tracks on a compilation (like the
one mentioned by Peter) contain the name of the musical they come
from.

But it also seems perfectly redundant to have a release called "Some
Musical Title" where every track in titled "Some Musical Title: Real
Track's Name". Of course this applies for artists like ALW, where
tracks _do_ have titles. If a musical contained just "Part 1"–"Part
17", then it would make sense to include its title everywhere.

It is a bit similar to live tracks and live releases, isn't it?

On Feb 9, 2008 3:40 PM, Peter Radig <peter at radig.de> wrote:
> I would like to see all track names of musicals' recordings preceded by the
> name of the musical itself. To me, a musical is like an opera with a story
> and a well defined sequence of songs and (sometimes) spoken text. Most of
> them even have acts, parts and scenes. All songs together make a whole piece
> of art, which differs from a simple collection of songs (e.g. on a pop
> album).
>
> To me a track name like "West Side Story: Maria" makes more sense than just
> "Maria", especially because you will find many of the more famous tracks on
> compilations of pieces from several musicals and then you really don't know
> from which musical a single track is. Have a look at
> http://musicbrainz.org/release/dfe3422c-d1b3-4941-8af0-b8094ada2803.html --
> without knowing all the works of Andrew Lloyd Webber, do you know from which
> musical the tracks are?
>
> Unfortunately, I started to submit a couple of edits on releases before
> having the proper discussion here. So I'm getting a well deserved "no vote"
> massacre now. Sorry to all who voted "no" for that.

-- 
Bogdan Butnaru — bogdanb at gmail.com
"I think I am a fallen star, I should wish on myself." – O.