[mb-style] [instrumental] [cover] performance

Koen Renders renders.koen at gmail.com
Sun Jul 10 23:36:55 UTC 2011


Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 10:04:52 -0400
From: Calvin Walton <calvin.walton at kepstin.ca>
Subject: Re: [mb-style] [instrumental] [cover] performance
To: MusicBrainz Style Discussion
       <musicbrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org>
Message-ID: <1310220292.8007.6.camel at ayu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 13:27 +0200, Koen Renders wrote:
>> I'm linking the peformances on "A Tribute to Joni
>> Mitchell" (
http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/0c6db2e3-caeb-417f-a6c0-4606d08050e7), to
their related works, and one question arose.
>>
>> Would you describe Brad Mehldau's performance of Don't Interrupt the
>> Sorrow as an instrumental cover performance or simply an instrumental
>> performance?
>I?m not familiar with this particular case, but the general guideline
>I?ve been following is that if the new recording is credited to a
>different artist (and not just a different name for the same artist), it
>should be counted as a cover. There?s exceptions and special cases for
>everything, of course.

Thanks Calvin,

This particular case is actually an instrumental jazz arrangement (more
interpretation/improvisation) of the song... I don't know if jazz versions
are counted as a "cover", not even as an "instrumental version", since often
harmonies and melodies are altered in such a way that they are not that
recognizable anymore. You could actually see it as a new work, based on the
original, but would we see every jazz version of let's say Carmichael's
"Stardust" as an arrangement of that work?

But my question was also, would you use a term like "instrumental cover" at
all? On the one hand, it would be useful to indicate that it is actually an
instrumental performance by another artist than the original performer, but
on the other hand it seems a bit weird to call it a cover since it's mostly
used for vocal pieces...

And also, is the term "cover" used outside popmusic? Clearly you wouldn't
use it for classical music, but would you use it for jazz? Seems not natural
to me...

Has there been a discussion on the introduction of a link "jazz performance"
or something like that? I think it would be useful... or not?

>> Is there BTW a guideline as to where we would use the "cover"
>> attribute?

>The only guidelines related to this are on
>http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Performance_Relationship_Type
>which? doesn?t really talk about covers at all.

>> And maybe a bit confusing; "This indicates that the recording is just
>> of the instrumental portion of the work (doesn't include its lyrics)"
>> wouldn't it be more accurate to use "musical portion" instead of
>> "instrumental", 'cause this might include that also the melody is left
>> out. Just a minor remark though...

>This is currently a topic of discussion on the mailing list. We?re
>trying to come up with a better wording for the attribute description.
>I?ve summarized (my opinion of) the intent behind the instrumental
>attribute at
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2011-July/012330.html
>But please read the entire email thread to see everyone?s opinions, and
>help out if you can.

Thanks, I'll do my best,
Koen

--
Calvin Walton <calvin.walton at kepstin.ca>

2011/7/9 Koen Renders <renders.koen at gmail.com>

> Hi all,
>
> I'm quite new to musicbrainz. Sorry if I ask anything that has been
> discussed before, though I tried to browse through the list archives...
>
> I'm linking the peformances on "A Tribute to Joni Mitchell" (
> http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/0c6db2e3-caeb-417f-a6c0-4606d08050e7),
> to their related works, and one question arose.
>
> Would you describe Brad Mehldau's performance of Don't Interrupt the
> Sorrow<http://www.musicbrainz.org/recording/d4b9f3b2-08ca-4012-a3b0-bfe567f35ed4> as
> an *instrumental cover performance *or simply an *instrumental performance
> *?
>
> Is there BTW a guideline as to where we would use the "cover" attribute?
> And maybe a bit confusing; "This indicates that the recording is just of
> the instrumental portion of the work (doesn't include its lyrics)" wouldn't
> it be more accurate to use "musical portion" instead of "instrumental",
> 'cause this might include that also the melody is left out. Just a minor
> remark though...
>
> Thanks,
> Koen
>
> www.spencertherover.com
>



-- 
32 499 16 70 55
www.spencertherover.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20110711/3280ca27/attachment.htm 


More information about the MusicBrainz-style mailing list