Philip Jägenstedt | 30 Jun 2012 19:26
Gravatar

Sampling at the composition/work level

http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18155855

In short, I know of at least 3 works where a well-known piece of music
was "sampled" in a new work:

http://musicbrainz.org/work/faacf69c-a008-47bf-a705-4099219c35af
http://musicbrainz.org/work/1a5edc0e-a2eb-40b3-92a9-78d15fb536d4
http://musicbrainz.org/work/ed1600ee-46f0-4e5d-adc1-03341d515287

The "version of" work-work AR seems inappropriate, so what to do?

--

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 30 Jun 2012 20:35
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philip@...> wrote:
> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18155855
>
> In short, I know of at least 3 works where a well-known piece of music
> was "sampled" in a new work:
>
> http://musicbrainz.org/work/faacf69c-a008-47bf-a705-4099219c35af
> http://musicbrainz.org/work/1a5edc0e-a2eb-40b3-92a9-78d15fb536d4
> http://musicbrainz.org/work/ed1600ee-46f0-4e5d-adc1-03341d515287
>
> The "version of" work-work AR seems inappropriate, so what to do?

I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.

>
> --
> Philip Jägenstedt
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> MusicBrainz-style@...
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

--

-- 
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 30 Jun 2012 20:39
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
<reosarevok@...> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Philip Jägenstedt
<philip@...> wrote:
>> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18155855
>>
>> In short, I know of at least 3 works where a well-known piece of music
>> was "sampled" in a new work:
>>
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/faacf69c-a008-47bf-a705-4099219c35af
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/1a5edc0e-a2eb-40b3-92a9-78d15fb536d4
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/ed1600ee-46f0-4e5d-adc1-03341d515287
>>
>> The "version of" work-work AR seems inappropriate, so what to do?
>
> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.

On second thought I guess that doesn't really solve the issue anyway.
I would love more options to link works, including "transcription" for
classical and probably something like what you mention - although I'm
not too sure how I would call it since I don't think "sampling" is a
correct name.

>>
>> --
>> Philip Jägenstedt
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
(Continue reading)

monxton | 30 Jun 2012 22:56
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On 30/06/2012 19:39, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
> <reosarevok@...>  wrote:
>>
>> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
>> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.

As I said in the edit, there are at least two reasons why I don't like 
it. First, because Beethoven obviously did not compose this this work. 
But even if it was "closer" to Beethoven's work than it is, I dislike to 
see these mashups among the list of works that Beethoven composed - it 
just seems wrong, and I think it discredits the database.

In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it 
tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful 
than just setting Beethoven as the composer.

> I would love more options to link works, including "transcription" for
> classical

+1
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 30 Jun 2012 23:51
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:56 PM, monxton
<musicbrainz@...> wrote:
> On 30/06/2012 19:39, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
>> <reosarevok@...>  wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
>>> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.
>
> As I said in the edit, there are at least two reasons why I don't like
> it. First, because Beethoven obviously did not compose this this work.
> But even if it was "closer" to Beethoven's work than it is, I dislike to
> see these mashups among the list of works that Beethoven composed - it
> just seems wrong, and I think it discredits the database.
>
> In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it
> tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful
> than just setting Beethoven as the composer.

Yeah, in any case, I'd like that - with or without the composer
credit. For the composer lists I'd like if we could agree on some
mockup of how a catalog page should look like, and try to get those
added in the next schema change - wouldn't solve all the issues with
this but it would give a much better work list (or rather, several!)
for most major composers. This is probably not the thread to talk
about it but if you (general you) feel it's worth it we could open one
:)

>> I would love more options to link works, including "transcription" for
>> classical
(Continue reading)

Philip Jägenstedt | 1 Jul 2012 09:34
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:56 PM, monxton
<musicbrainz <at> jordan-maynard.org> wrote:
> On 30/06/2012 19:39, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
>> <reosarevok <at> gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
>>> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.
>
> As I said in the edit, there are at least two reasons why I don't like
> it. First, because Beethoven obviously did not compose this this work.
> But even if it was "closer" to Beethoven's work than it is, I dislike to
> see these mashups among the list of works that Beethoven composed - it
> just seems wrong, and I think it discredits the database.
>
> In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it
> tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful
> than just setting Beethoven as the composer.

Note that Beethoven is listed as a composer on the same level as 陳輝陽
in the music video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR20mI5LxSU) which
says 作曲: 陳輝陽/貝多芬. I don't know what the booklet says, but it would be
a bit weird if the two composers couldn't be deduced without ambiguity
from the data we have.

If we can agree on the work-work AR perhaps the rest will fall into
place, but how broad should it be. The wording I used in the
annotations was "includes elements of" and "incorporates part of". I
suppose that the AR we invent should also be used for Beethoven's
variations of Mozart compositions, how would someone with a clue about
(Continue reading)

Rachel Dwight | 1 Jul 2012 09:41
Picon

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level


On Jul 1, 2012, at 2:34 AM, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:56 PM, monxton
> <musicbrainz <at> jordan-maynard.org> wrote:
>> On 30/06/2012 19:39, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
>>> <reosarevok <at> gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
>>>> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.
>> 
>> As I said in the edit, there are at least two reasons why I don't like
>> it. First, because Beethoven obviously did not compose this this work.
>> But even if it was "closer" to Beethoven's work than it is, I dislike to
>> see these mashups among the list of works that Beethoven composed - it
>> just seems wrong, and I think it discredits the database.
>> 
>> In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it
>> tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful
>> than just setting Beethoven as the composer.
> 
> Note that Beethoven is listed as a composer on the same level as 陳輝陽
> in the music video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR20mI5LxSU) which
> says 作曲: 陳輝陽/貝多芬. I don't know what the booklet says, but it would be
> a bit weird if the two composers couldn't be deduced without ambiguity
> from the data we have.
> 
> If we can agree on the work-work AR perhaps the rest will fall into
> place, but how broad should it be. The wording I used in the
(Continue reading)

practik | 2 Jul 2012 09:16
Picon
Favicon

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level


Philip Jägenstedt wrote
> 
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:56 PM, monxton wrote:
>> In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it
>> tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful
>> than just setting Beethoven as the composer.
> 
> If we can agree on the work-work AR perhaps the rest will fall into
> place, but how broad should it be. The wording I used in the
> annotations was "includes elements of" and "incorporates part of". I
> suppose that the AR we invent should also be used for Beethoven's
> variations of Mozart compositions, how would someone with a clue about
> classical phrase the relationship between two such works?
> 

I've had the idea of such a work-work relationship on my AR wish list for a
while now.  A pretty common term I've seen in the classical context is
"quotation,"* but I personally would prefer to see us use a broader term lke
"adaptation."  To me, quotation implies a "straight" reproduction of a
section of the original work, without changing it, but I feel like lyricists
and composers often rework the original material, at least in the pop
context.

An example:  The line "And everything depends upon how near you sleep to
me," from Leonard Cohen's song "Take This Longing," is quoted in "Hand in
Glove" by The Smiths, except the word "sleep" is replaced by "stand."  It's
not quotation in the strictest sense of the word, but it's still clearly a
reference to Cohen.  Semantically, "adaptation" would encompass this sort of
thing nicely.
(Continue reading)

Philip Jägenstedt | 2 Jul 2012 10:09
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:16 AM, practik <kronpilz@...> wrote:
>
> Philip Jägenstedt wrote
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 10:56 PM, monxton wrote:
>>> In any case, a work-work relationship gives more information, because it
>>> tells you which of Beethoven's works is quoted. This is much more useful
>>> than just setting Beethoven as the composer.
>>
>> If we can agree on the work-work AR perhaps the rest will fall into
>> place, but how broad should it be. The wording I used in the
>> annotations was "includes elements of" and "incorporates part of". I
>> suppose that the AR we invent should also be used for Beethoven's
>> variations of Mozart compositions, how would someone with a clue about
>> classical phrase the relationship between two such works?
>>
>
> I've had the idea of such a work-work relationship on my AR wish list for a
> while now.  A pretty common term I've seen in the classical context is
> "quotation,"* but I personally would prefer to see us use a broader term lke
> "adaptation."  To me, quotation implies a "straight" reproduction of a
> section of the original work, without changing it, but I feel like lyricists
> and composers often rework the original material, at least in the pop
> context.
>
> An example:  The line "And everything depends upon how near you sleep to
> me," from Leonard Cohen's song "Take This Longing," is quoted in "Hand in
> Glove" by The Smiths, except the word "sleep" is replaced by "stand."  It's
> not quotation in the strictest sense of the word, but it's still clearly a
> reference to Cohen.  Semantically, "adaptation" would encompass this sort of
(Continue reading)

practik | 2 Jul 2012 16:20
Picon
Favicon

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level


Philip Jägenstedt wrote
> 
> "[work] includes [lyrics|music] adapted from [work]" sounds good to
> me, at least it would work in the cases that I have encountered. Are
> you interested in pursuing an RFC/RFV for this?
> 

I am, although I wouldn't be able to get the RFC together until later this
month or early August.  If anyone else wanted to take the idea and run with
it before that, I wouldn't mind.  I'd also want to check with caller#6 to
see if he had any other thoughts about how this relationship should work,
since it was really his idea.

Another question to discuss:  caller#6 also suggested it would be even
better to have a three-point AR: "[work] includes [lyrics|music] adapted by
[artist] from [work]."  I don't believe three-point ARs are currently
possible, but I wonder if we could approximate one by adding an attribute. 
It would be analogous to the [instrument] attribute, except you'd pick from
the list of artists instead of the instrument tree.  I have no idea whether
that's possible, and I don't think it's an essential feature, but I wanted
to mention it.

Patrick

--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Sampling-at-the-composition-work-level-tp4637121p4637191.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren | 2 Jul 2012 16:25
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 5:20 PM, practik <kronpilz@...> wrote:
>
> Philip Jägenstedt wrote
>>
>> "[work] includes [lyrics|music] adapted from [work]" sounds good to
>> me, at least it would work in the cases that I have encountered. Are
>> you interested in pursuing an RFC/RFV for this?
>>
>
> I am, although I wouldn't be able to get the RFC together until later this
> month or early August.  If anyone else wanted to take the idea and run with
> it before that, I wouldn't mind.  I'd also want to check with caller#6 to
> see if he had any other thoughts about how this relationship should work,
> since it was really his idea.
>
> Another question to discuss:  caller#6 also suggested it would be even
> better to have a three-point AR: "[work] includes [lyrics|music] adapted by
> [artist] from [work]."  I don't believe three-point ARs are currently
> possible, but I wonder if we could approximate one by adding an attribute.
> It would be analogous to the [instrument] attribute, except you'd pick from
> the list of artists instead of the instrument tree.  I have no idea whether
> that's possible, and I don't think it's an essential feature, but I wanted
> to mention it.

I don't think this is possible at the moment - and while 3-point
relationships have been requested a few times, I suspect we're still
quite far from them. I wouldn't count on them for now.

> Patrick
>
(Continue reading)

caller#6 | 5 Jul 2012 19:15
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On 07/02/2012 07:20 AM, practik wrote:
> Philip Jägenstedt wrote
>> "[work] includes [lyrics|music] adapted from [work]" sounds good to
>> me, at least it would work in the cases that I have encountered. Are
>> you interested in pursuing an RFC/RFV for this?
>>
> I am, although I wouldn't be able to get the RFC together until later this
> month or early August.  If anyone else wanted to take the idea and run with
> it before that, I wouldn't mind.  I'd also want to check with caller#6 to
> see if he had any other thoughts about how this relationship should work,
> since it was really his idea.
>
>
>
> Patrick
>

Hi all,

I think the way this could work is to have a set of "Appropriation" ARs 
[1] with attributes for different levels of appropriation.

It's still pretty half-baked[2], but the basic idea would be

     [WORK] [refers to|quotes|parodies|includes elements of|adapts] 
[lyrics from|music from] [WORK]
     [WORK] [includes samples from|mashes up|uses beat from]  [RECORDING]

Does that make sense? I mean, I know it needs a lot of work still, but 
does the framework make sense? Kinda? If not, don't let me hold things 
(Continue reading)

David Hilton | 1 Jul 2012 02:35
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Sampling at the composition/work level

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <reosarevok-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
<reosarevok-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Philip Jägenstedt <philip-0vxbLIdyC5Qdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18155855
>>
>> In short, I know of at least 3 works where a well-known piece of music
>> was "sampled" in a new work:
>>
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/faacf69c-a008-47bf-a705-4099219c35af
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/1a5edc0e-a2eb-40b3-92a9-78d15fb536d4
>> http://musicbrainz.org/work/ed1600ee-46f0-4e5d-adc1-03341d515287
>>
>> The "version of" work-work AR seems inappropriate, so what to do?
>
> I don't really see a big issue with listing Beethoven as composer,
> although I know monxton and I won't agree on this one.

On second thought I guess that doesn't really solve the issue anyway.
I would love more options to link works, including "transcription" for
classical and probably something like what you mention - although I'm
not too sure how I would call it since I don't think "sampling" is a
correct name.

"Borrows material from' wouldn't be a bad description, though it may be a bit too broad...

David
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Gmane