[mb-style] [Clean up CSG] Release Title

[Aaron Cooper]

On 14-Feb-08, at 3:56 PM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> Brian Schweitzer wrote:
>>
>> Trying to clean out the last of the issues...
>>
>> Classical Release Titles:
>>
>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle
>>
>> Presents a structure of:
>>
>> MainTitle [SubTitle(s)] [VolumeNumber [VolumeTitle]] [ [?BoxNumber
>> [?BoxTitle]] DiscNumber [DiscTitle]] [FeaturingArtist]
>>
>> ... [snip] ...
>> 1) Example like
>> http://musicbrainz.org/release/3261a468-953d-4dba-817e-a18e1d1e98b4.html
>> where the work mentioned (Symphony 9) is actually only a single
>> movement from the symphony.
>>
>> - My sense, there's no link, but if the title on the box was "The  
>> Best
>> of Beethoven", that should be the title, and not us cramming the rest
>> in - and thus, no need to worry about this.  :)
>>
>> 2) Example like
>> http://musicbrainz.org/release/37c3923f-2e6a-4ae8-898e-8201e96fe24e.html
>> where cooperaa asked on the wiki on 1/31: "Should releases that  
>> simply
>> say "The 5 Piano Concertos" or "The 9 Symphonies" etc be changed to
>> "Piano Concertos Nos. 5" or "Symphonies Nos. 1-9"?"
>>
>> - For myself, see my answer to #1 - the work clearly shows a title of
>> "The 5 Piano Concertos" on the box...  I'd reserve applying any CSG
>> structuring of the title for
>> those that fail to provide a title.  (eg: "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart"
>> and no title on the liner) - just glancing at that same stack of 22  
>> or
>> so classical CDs next to my desk, that single example would be the
>> only one thus in need of any special "titling".
>> ...
>> As I guess is clear, I agree with the unsigned comment in #4 of  
>> CSGD (...)
>> - imho, normalization of the release title should be a last resort  
>> where
>> there truly is no release title.  CSG ought to provide framework  
>> where no
>> common framework exists.  While this is true of works, it
>> isn't true for the vast majority of release titles.  Taking a  
>> "hands off"
>> approach, albeit with minor guidance (see item #5 above) also has the
>> benefit of being essentially cat-corner-free.  :)
>>
>
> Brian, I share your inclination to use the title printed on the  
> physical
> Release unless there's a strong reason to meddle with it — for  
> example, if
> the release doesn't supply a meaningful title.
>
> Thus I disagree with the phrasing "The ReleaseTitle should contain  
> the names
> of the works on the release followed by the performer information."  
> at the
> start of ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle. Also the phrase "For  
> ClassicalMusic,
> the MainTitle is typically the name of the MusicalWork or works on the
> Relase."
>
> Most of the rest of the article is about defining what MainTitle to  
> impose
> once you've thrown out the title printed on the physical Release.
>
> What was the rationale for overriding the release title and putting  
> in a
> list of works in the first place? Does anyone remember?

When classical discs are reissued with new cover art or new  
"spellings" of the works on the disc, http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle 
  provides a means of grouping them all together under one release  
with a common release title derived from the works on the release in a  
specified format.

Otherwise we might get the following:

Symphonies Nos. 1, 2, 3
Symphonies Nos. 1-2-3
Beethoven: Symphonies No. 1 / No. 2 / No. 3
Symphonies 1-3
... and so on.

ClassicalReleaseTitleStyle let's us group these all under one release  
(assuming same performers and same recording) as "Symphonies Nos. 1-3".

-Aaron