Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi folks,

I am going to post some (you guessed it!) 'tagging' questions here.

I have now ripped over 50GB of my CD collection to date, and am thinking of making some amendments. The questions will mostly be related to ',' and ';' (within CD ripper), but there will be a few different fields I would like to discuss.

My other (popular) thread is already very long (though I am of course most grateful for all of the kind responses), and so I though I might tackle these recent issues under separate cover.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

This album ("The Enchantment") by Chick Corea and Bela Fleck was also PRODUCED by these two artists. Hence I stated both their names in the PRODUCER field:


1743

I have been learning about the difference between ',' ad ';' this week (thanks!) in the context of ARTISTS and ALBUM_ARTISTS, but I am not quite sure what I should use in this instance, please?

I mean, I would like each artist (ie. Producer) to be treated discreetly (I think that's the term?), and not as a combo (to borrow Gary's term). Therefore, should I write:


PRODUCER = Chick Corea; Bela Fleck

The reason I ask is because I am not sure if the same rules apply to the PRODUCER tag as to ARTIST and ALBUM_ARTIST?

Much appreciated,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have, up to now, been using the '/' within some of the tagging fields of dBpa.

For example, I might use:


PRODUCER = Quincy Jones / Herbie Hancock

LABEL = Polydor / Verve

VENUE = CBS / New York

1744

But now I am thinking I would have been better using a ',' or ';' instead? I think the reason I used the forward slash may have been directly in relation to how my (no more) Sony Walkman handled the data.

I am not sure if this would make any difference in Foobar - I am pretty should it would not - but I have an Amazon Tablet now and who knows, maybe in a few years time I might own a different player altogether. In which case, I would like to follow the traditional path here.

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

You first need to figure out which tags handle multiple values. We know that ARTIST does for example. and the ";" is something used to create multiple value tags. But I think many of the tags you mention do not currently allow for multiple values. For example, I'm not sure about PRODUCER, LABEL, VENUE. But I'd guess they do NOT handle multiple values. So you'd be back to using "," or "/".

You need to make sure you fully understand this multiple value issue. When you have "Chick Corea; Bela Fleck" in an ARTIST tag in dbpa in a FLAC file, you are actually creating TWO different ARTIST tag fields. But if you create ARTIST = Chick Corea, Bela Fleck, you have created a SINGLE ARTIST tag with the value "Chick Corea, Bela Fleck". See for example, how the tag detail shows up in this pic from mp3tag program. I created multiple tag value for ARTIST = Willie Nelson; Wynton Marsailis. But note in pic how there are actually two tag fields called ARTIST, each with one of the artist values.
1745

And even with mulitple field tags, it often depends on how the server/player you use displays things. Nothing can replace trial and error in making these decisions and testing them out. There is no right answer. Only what works in your situation.

edit: tagging is a never ending job for me. Just showing you that willie nelson example, made me realize I needed to change the Genre to "Blues" instead of Jazz. I also noticed that I had a total DISCs tag set to "1" when I actually didn't even want that tag, so I deleted it. Fortunately, post-rip tag editing is easy compared with ripping. Then again, you're paying a lot more attention to the metadata for each disk you rip than I used to. I'm better at it now.

[mville]

You first need to figure out which tags handle multiple values. We know that ARTIST does for example. and the ";" is something used to create multiple value tags. But I think many of the tags you mention do not currently allow for multiple values. For example, I'm not sure about PRODUCER, LABEL, VENUE. But I'd guess they do NOT handle multiple values. So you'd be back to using "," or "/".

You need to make sure you fully understand this multiple value issue. When you have "Chick Corea; Bela Fleck" in an ARTIST tag in dbpa in a FLAC file, you are actually creating TWO different ARTIST tag fields. But if you create ARTIST = Chick Corea, Bela Fleck, you have created a SINGLE ARTIST tag with the value "Chick Corea, Bela Fleck". See for example, how the tag detail shows up in this pic from mp3tag program. I created multiple tag value for ARTIST = Willie Nelson; Wynton Marsailis. But note in pic how there are actually two tag fields called ARTIST, each with one of the artist values.
1745

And even with mulitple field tags, it often depends on how the server/player you use displays things. Nothing can replace trial and error in making these decisions and testing them out. There is no right answer. Only what works in your situation.

Spot on garym, but we shouldn't need to keep repeating ourselves in these forums. This is pretty much what I have already answered in post no. 603 here: RE: Ripping Level Question (help?) (https://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?39942-RE-Ripping-Level-Question-(help-)/page41)

[monsterjazzlick]

You first need to figure out which tags handle multiple values. We know that ARTIST does for example. and the ";" is something used to create multiple value tags. But I think many of the tags you mention do not currently allow for multiple values. For example, I'm not sure about PRODUCER, LABEL, VENUE. But I'd guess they do NOT handle multiple values. So you'd be back to using "," or "/".

Hi Gary,

Thanks very much.

Yes, that's kinda what I thought to be honest, and also going by what mville had kindly mentioned earlier on this week.

As I say, I am considering changing the '/' to a ',' (in the instances of: PRODUCER, LABEL, VENUE). The reason I was asking is because I am thinking that it might be best to use a consistent selection of 'symbols' across my tagging scheme. Really, in this sense, the forward-slash would be better being replaced by the comma. And there is also the guesstimate that most playback devices would interpret a ',' more accurately than a '/' symbol.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

You need to make sure you fully understand this multiple value issue. When you have "Chick Corea; Bela Fleck" in an ARTIST tag in dbpa in a FLAC file, you are actually creating TWO different ARTIST tag fields. But if you create ARTIST = Chick Corea, Bela Fleck, you have created a SINGLE ARTIST tag with the value "Chick Corea, Bela Fleck". See for example, how the tag detail shows up in this pic from mp3tag program. I created multiple tag value for ARTIST = Willie Nelson; Wynton Marsailis. But note in pic how there are actually two tag fields called ARTIST, each with one of the artist values.
1745

And even with mulitple field tags, it often depends on how the server/player you use displays things. Nothing can replace trial and error in making these decisions and testing them out. There is no right answer. Only what works in your situation.

Gary,

That was interesting to see how 'mp3tag' created ARTIST tags for Masarlis and Nelson. Thanks for the screenshot.

I think I am OK now with the fact that - in dBpa - I am tagging:


ARTIST = Chick Corea; Bela Fleck (so as to create two individual artists) and omitting the combo (Chick Corea, Bela Fleck)

ALBUM ARTIST = Chick Corea; Bela Fleck (so as to create two individual artists) and omitting the combo (Chick Corea, Bela Fleck)

I took a while, admittedly!, but I am happy with the folder structure and the way in which everything appears in Foobar. I think that spending an afternoon testing and testing yesterday, it really helped me. Also, when I first purchased Illustrate, I was totally concerned and paranoid about messing something up, irretrievably. Now, because I have the data backed-up in two separate locations, I am experimenting more.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

edit: tagging is a never ending job for me. Just showing you that willie nelson example, made me realize I needed to change the Genre to "Blues" instead of Jazz. I also noticed that I had a total DISCs tag set to "1" when I actually didn't even want that tag, so I deleted it. Fortunately, post-rip tag editing is easy compared with ripping. Then again, you're paying a lot more attention to the metadata for each disk you rip than I used to. I'm better at it now.

Gary,

Ha ha, I noticed that the Genre was set to 'Jazz'. But it kind of is because Masarlis plays Jazz trumpet throughout. But I would probably list it under Jazz, Blues and possibly Country (RE: Nelson).

I have added more tagging fields as time progressed, as you mention. I only started out with the basic info, but now there is quite a lot of data. The great thing is though. Foobar will pick up anything and from any angle (unlike any other player I have, and do, own). I can search for (say) VENUE location by typing in 'New Jersey' and it will bring up all of the 'Blue Note' Recordings. Or I can search for CBS STUDIO and it will provide me with 'Columbia Studios A/B/C/D/E' - so I can narrow it down to the specific studio!

'VLC' on my new Amazon Tablet is nowhere near as sophisticated in this sense. But at least I can HEAR the music (unlike the Sony)!

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Spot on garym, but we shouldn't need to keep repeating ourselves in these forums. This is pretty much what I have already answered in post no. 603 here: RE: Ripping Level Question (help?) (https://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?39942-RE-Ripping-Level-Question-(help-)/page41)


You probably need to get your head around the difference between a single tag and a multi-value tag and which tags are single and multi-value, as not all tags are multi-value e.g. the Album tag.

For a multi-value tag, Illustrate uses the semi-colon purely as a searator for display purposes. Example, Composer and Composer Sort are multi-value tags:

Composer Sort = Lennon, John; McCartney, Paul

here, composer sort holds 2 separate data values Lennon, John and McCartney, Paul with no semi-colon. The semi-colon is purely for display.

Hi mville,

Thanks for your reply.

I did look over the above post many times (I probably spent an hour analysing it!) and used your protocol in this instance:

eg. COMPOSER = Miles Davis; John Coltrane

COMPOSER SORT = Davis, Miles; Coltrane, John

And I also used the ';' for ARTIST and ALBUM ARTIST (alongside their respective SORT tags). Everything seems to be working GREAT now and so I am very grateful for your help, thanks.

But I chose to post a new thread here for a couple of reasons, if you don't mind:

1 - the initial thread was becoming very long (though I do really appreciated everyone's contributions);

2 - I wanted to look into some of the different options of tagging in a little more detail. I have stopped all ripping now until I have addressed any data which my need amending. For example, the PRODUCER and VENUE tags (where I have used the '/' symbol).

Much appreciated,

Paul

EDIT: I am putting off CLASSICAL until next year!!!

[mville]

I chose to post a new thread here for a couple of reasons, if you don't mind:

1 - the initial thread was becoming very long (though I do really appreciated everyone's contributions);

2 - I wanted to look into some of the different options of tagging in a little more detail. I have stopped all ripping now until I have addressed any data which my need amending. For example, the PRODUCER and VENUE tags (where I have used the '/' symbol).

No problem. It's just that often when I read these forums it does seem that the pertinent information is ignored, for one reason or another.

[monsterjazzlick]

No problem. It's just that often when I read these forums it does seem that the pertinent information is ignored, for one reason or another.

Hi Mville,

OK, I see your point.


For a multi-value tag, Illustrate uses the semi-colon purely as a searator for display purposes. Example, Composer and Composer Sort are multi-value tags:

Composer Sort = Lennon, John; McCartney, Paul

here, composer sort holds 2 separate data values Lennon, John and McCartney, Paul with no semi-colon. The semi-colon is purely for display.

I am going to edit my COMPOSER tags next following your kind (above) suggestion.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

... just to double-check (if you don't mind please; because it's going to be a mammoth task!), I have used:


COMPOSER: David Foster; Jay Graydon; Al Jarreau

COMPOSER_SORT: Foster, David; Graydon, Jay; Jarreau, Al

I have never used a COMPOSER_SORT tag before. But, because you seem like an expert!, it seems like a good idea to include one.

As you can see, I place the composers in alphabetical order because I like them to show up this way on my playback-device. 99% of the time, you have to re-shuffle them from how they appear by default within dBpa.

With regards to ',' and ';' I am assuming that the same rules apply for 2 composers as they do for 3.

Many thanks,

Paul

[mville]

... just to double-check (if you don't mind please; because it's going to be a mammoth task!), I have used:
COMPOSER: David Foster; Jay Graydon; Al Jarreau

COMPOSER_SORT: Foster, David; Graydon, Jay; Jarreau, Al

I have never used a COMPOSER_SORT tag before. But, because you seem like an expert!, it seems like a good idea to include one.

Don't include tags because it seems like a good idea, because you might be wrong or not understand their impact on server/player software and you could end up with unpredictable results (as I think you have discovered previously). Far better for you to understand why these tags exist and what they do.

The sort tags are used by server/player software to sort the tags. If you only have the Composer tag populated:
COMPOSER = David Foster; Jay Graydon; Al Jarreau

then server/player software sorts David Foster under D, Jay Graydon under J and Al Jarreau under A.

If you add the sort tag:
COMPOSER SORT = Foster, David; Graydon, Jay; Jarreau, Al

then server/player software sorts David Foster under F, Jay Graydon under G and Al Jarreau under J, based on what you populate the sort tags with.


With regards to ',' and ';' I am assuming that the same rules apply for 2 composers as they do for 3.

Yes. The same rules apply regardless of how many composers you have.

If your server/player software does not use the comma to perform any specific task, it can be viewed just like any other alpha-numeric character. The semi-colon is different however, as some software (including Illustrate) use the semi-colon as the multi-value tag separator.

[garym]

Gary,

That was interesting to see how 'mp3tag' created ARTIST tags for Masarlis and Nelson. Thanks for the screenshot.


Small point. But note that mp3tag did NOT create those ARTIST tags. Dbpa created them using the semicolon when I ripped. But mp3tag *displays* the actual output, that is that two artist tag fields were created.

[monsterjazzlick]

The sort tags are used by server/player software to sort the tags. If you only have the Composer tag populated:
COMPOSER = David Foster; Jay Graydon; Al Jarreau

then server/player software sorts David Foster under D, Jay Graydon under J and Al Jarreau under A.

If you add the sort tag:
COMPOSER SORT = Foster, David; Graydon, Jay; Jarreau, Al

then server/player software sorts David Foster under F, Jay Graydon under G and Al Jarreau under J, based on what you populate the sort tags with.

If your server/player software does not use the comma to perform any specific task, it can be viewed just like any other alpha-numeric character. The semi-colon is different however, as some software (including Illustrate) use the semi-colon as the multi-value tag separator.

Thanks very much mville,

I appreciate that.

I think, in light of the above, that I am going to leave out the COMPOSER_SORT tag now. Thinking about it, I will just stick with:


COMPOSER = David Foster; Jay Graydon; Al Jarreau

and no respective SORT.

I amended a couple of CDs just to see how much time it would take and it's a big task! Rearranging all of the christian and surnames is a bit of a mission! But compiling the COMPOSER tag alone is, by comparison, a pretty quick job.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

I'm not sure about PRODUCER, LABEL, VENUE. But I'd guess they do NOT handle multiple values. So you'd be back to using "," or "/".

Hi,

I have totally killed off COMPOSER_SORT now.

And am in the process of losing the '/' symbol - within VENUE and PRODUCER fields - in favour of a ',' (please see "Heavy Heart" - Carla Bley / "Master Strokes" - Bill Bruford):


1748


1749

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I am editing an album (a compilation called "Stan Getz & Colleagues") which has (for one track) a rather long medley!:


1750

I have re-tagged the COMPOSERS properly (ie. with a ',' instead of '/'), but I am not sure which symbol I should use for the actual SONGS, please? As you can see, at the moment, they are still '/'.

I would think the decision as to whether or not to tag as individual songs, or as a medley in it's own right, would depend upon if the user wanted the songs to show up - when running a search - as a whole, or as separate titles.

This is the first time I have come across a 'medley' as yet.

Many thanks in advance,

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi,

I am editing an album which has (for one track) a rather long medley:


1750

I have re-tagged the COMPOSERS properly (ie. with a ',' instead of '/'), but I am not sure which symbol I should used for the actual SONGS, please? As you can see, at the moment, they are still '/'.

I would think the decision as to whether or not to tag it as individual songs or as a medley in it's own right would depend upon if the user wanted the songs to show up - when running a search - as a whole, or as separate titles.

This is the first time I have come across a 'medley' as yet.

Many thanks in advance,

Paul

Paul, I use / for medleys. Because of the forbidden Windows filename characters, this will show as - on Windows devices.

[monsterjazzlick]

Paul, I use / for medleys. Because of the forbidden Windows filename characters, this will show as - on Windows devices.

Hi Oggy,

Thanks for the fast response!

Oh really? So no ',' or ';'! I should just leave it exactly as it is then?

If you look at the very top field in the screenshot, then you will see a '-' separator, which I think is what you are specifically referring to?

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Hi Oggy,

Thanks for the fast response!

Oh really? So no ',' or ';'! I should just leave it exactly as it is then?

If you look at the very top field in the screenshot, then you will see a '-' separator, which I think is what you are specifically referring to?

Cheers,

Paul

definitely NOT a semicolon. I use / or sometimes >

[monsterjazzlick]

definitely NOT a semicolon. I use / or sometimes >

Hi Gary,

Thanks for clarifying.

Does the '>' appear as a '>', please? And is this - for yourself - just more of a visual (aesthetic) preference to a '/', or does it have a specific function, please?

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for clarifying.

Does the '>' appear as a '>', please? And is this - for yourself - just more of a visual (aesthetic) preference to a '/', or does it have a specific function, please?

Cheers,

Paul

nothing special. I tend to use the ">" in live shows where one song blends into another. This has long been a common indicator of this by collectors of live "bootleg" shows. I use "/" on studio albums where there is a medley.

[monsterjazzlick]

nothing special. I tend to use the ">" in live shows where one song blends into another. This has long been a common indicator of this by collectors of live "bootleg" shows. I use "/" on studio albums where there is a medley.

Thanks for the insight Gary.

I think I will stick with the '/' as I have a lot on my plate as it is! I can always go back and change such symbols at a later date, if need be.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I am tagging an album in which Chick Corea is playing and being interviewed by Marian McPartland.

The format is basically:


1 - Interview

2 - Song

3 - Interview

4 - Song

and so on ...

Obviously the songs take care of themselves. But with the interviews, what do you place in COMPOSER? I would guess that the two options would be to state:


'Chick Corea; Marian McPartland'

or to state:


'N/A' (non applicable)

Many thanks,

Paul

EDIT: 1751

[garym]

Hi,

I am tagging an album in which Chick Corea is playing and being interviewed by Marian McPartland.

The format is basically:

1 - Interview

2 - Song

3 - Interview

4 - Song

and so on ...

Obviously the songs take care of themselves. But with the interviews, what do you place in COMPOSER? I would guess that the two options would be to state:

'Chick Corea; Marian McPartland'

or to state:

'N/A' (non applicable)

Many thanks,

Paul

If its not a song, I'd leave the COMPOSER tag blank.

[mville]

Does the '>' appear as a '>', please? And is this - for yourself - just more of a visual (aesthetic) preference to a '/', or does it have a specific function, please?

Be careful. I have always tried to avoid using semi-colon and forward slash characters in my tags (unless as a separator), as tag editing software use these characters as separators in multi-value tags.

Historically, there have always been issues with users using AC/DC in the artist and album artist tags.

[monsterjazzlick]

If its not a song, I'd leave the COMPOSER tag blank.

Gary,

Would you just leave it empty, or would you check the red-cross and DELETE the field completely, please?

Or it is the same difference?

Thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

definitely NOT a semicolon. I use / or sometimes >

I've never seen a > used, with the exception of, <segue> between two tracks from a 24/96 FLAC file. On both the LP and CD, these are listed as separate tracks, but the music is continuous, I changed it to /

If you look at the track names from the metadata providers, most use / or - some have a space, on the LHS, some on the RHS, the rest a space either side - I use the latter.

I really like the idea of using the > !

This is all personal preference, as you can rename a song title, to anything you want.

Choices!!

[mville]

but with the interviews, what do you place in composer? I would guess that the two options would be to state:

'chick corea; marian mcpartland'

or to state:

'n/a' (non applicable)




FWIW, when a composer is unknown, I use unknown, for dialog, interviews etc. I use n\a.

For medleys (in the title) I use ~. :)

[monsterjazzlick]

Be careful. I have always tried to avoid using semi-colon and forward slash characters in my tags, as tag editing software use these characters as separators in multi-value tags. Historically, there have always been issues with users using AC/DC in the artist and album artist tags.

Thanks mville,

Do you mean if/when you open/edit your FLACs in a s/w other than Illustrate?

Paul

[Oggy]

Be careful. I have always tried to avoid using semi-colon and forward slash characters in my tags, as tag editing software use these characters as separators in multi-value tags. Historically, there have always been issues with users using AC/DC in the artist and album artist tags.

AC/DC, became AC-DC in the folder view, but displays the / on all of my, non-Windows, apps. Others obviously weren't so lucky.

Perhaps I should find a lightning symbol? :)

[monsterjazzlick]

I've never seen a > used, with the exception of, <seague> between two tracks from a 24/96 FLAC file. On both the LP and CD, these are listed as separate tracks, but the music is continuous, I changed it to /

If you look at the track names from the metadata providers, most use / or - some have a space, on the LHS, some on the RHS, the rest a space either side - I use the latter.

I really like the idea of using the > !

Oggy,

I do have some live Miles Davis 1970s CDs where the tracks segue (between disc 1 and disc 2). I have not made any such personal amendments. It's a bit to ahead of me at the moment.

Cheers.

[garym]

I've never seen a > used...

Visit Live Music Archive for many thousands of high quality (legal) live show downloads. Great stuff, all different genres. And you'll see lots of ">" :)
https://archive.org/details/etree

[garym]

Be careful. I have always tried to avoid using semi-colon and forward slash characters in my tags (unless as a separator), as tag editing software use these characters as separators in multi-value tags.

Historically, there have always been issues with users using AC/DC in the artist and album artist tags.

Excellent point. Looking closer, I see I use backslash rather than "/"

[monsterjazzlick]

FWIW, when a composer is unknown, I use unknown, for dialog, interviews etc. I use n\a.

For medleys (in the title) I use ~. :)

mville,

I have used 'unknown' for an unknown COMPOSER throughout.

So for dialogue and interviews you use 'n\a'. A backwards slash as opposed to forwards?

For a 'medley', I have written:


(Medley) Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

On the CDs it typically states:


Medley: Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

I prefer parentheses to a colon.

Thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

Visit Live Music Archive for many thousands of high quality (legal) live show downloads. Great stuff, all different genres. And you'll see lots of ">" :)
https://archive.org/details/etree

Thanks, I've just looked<:thumbup::)>!!!

[mville]

Do you mean if/when you open/edit your FLACs in a s/w other than Illustrate?

Yes. If you search these forums I think you'll find users with issues when they wanted the artist to be AC/DC.

I imagine that software that uses the forward slash character as a separator, interpreted AC/DC, not as a single artist but as 2 artists, AC and DC.

[mville]

I have used 'unknown' for an unknown COMPOSER throughout.

So for dialogue and interviews you use 'n\a'. A backwards slash as opposed to forwards?

Correct.


For a 'medley', I have written:

(Medley) Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

On the CDs it typically states:

Medley: Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

I prefer parentheses to a colon.

Yes. That is your choice and is fine.

However for me and the reasons given earlier, I don't want to use forward slash, if I can help it, so for me:
Medley: Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

becomes:
Blues~Jam In F Major~Drum Solo~Blues Refrain

and the tilde character ~ tells me the title consists of a medley (of titles).

[monsterjazzlick]

mville,

For MEDLEYS:


(Medley) Blues / Jam In F Major / Drum Solo / Blues Refrain

should I instead use:


(Medley) Blues \ Jam In F Major \ Drum Solo \ Blues Refrain

Thanks a lot.

[monsterjazzlick]

However for me and the reasons given earlier, i don't want to use forward slash, if i can help it, so for me:
Medley: Blues / jam in f major / drum solo / blues refrain

becomes:
Blues~jam in f major~drum solo~blues refrain

and the tilde character ~ tells me the title consists of a medley (of titles).

Thanks mville,

That's great mate.

I am going to make all the INTERVIEW tracks to an 'n\a' COMPOSER now.

I never even used that '~' symbol ever before!

And you have not experienced any issues with the '~' symbol appearing or being misinterpreted by different playback devices? I guess not.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

... I only have a few 'medley' CDs. But this is how they now appear in Foobar:


1752

So you don't leave any space between each song title and the '~'?

Is the '~' just a symbol you chose because it does not have any actually effect on anything? I mean, it does not have any actual function as such?

[Oggy]

Excellent point. Looking closer, I see I use backslash rather than "/"

I tried one using the forward slash, and for me, excepting in a Windows environment, it hasn't caused issues, so continued to use it. I am fully aware of the problematical symbols, and it could be that I've been lucky, but, so far, so good.

[mville]

for medleys:
(medley) blues / jam in f major / drum solo / blues refrain

should i instead use:
(medley) blues \ jam in f major \ drum solo \ blues refrain


It really is up to you. (Remember also that forward slash is an illegal filename character, so it will need handling).

In this example (the Title tag), it will only be an issue for you if the software you use treats the Title tag as a multi-value tag and uses the forward slash as a multi-value tag separator (which is unlikely).

However, I have been tagging my library for years and even Illustrate has moved the goalposts in this regard and as such has caused me many issues, historically.

As a result, I now try to avoid the use of semi-colon and forward slash characters in my tags where I can (it gets difficult to avoid with genre and style), just in case the goalposts move once more.

[mville]

... I only have a few 'medley' CDs. But this is how they now appear in Foobar:

1752

So you don't leave any space between each song title and the '~'?

Correct.



Is the '~' just a symbol you chose because it does not have any actually effect on anything? I mean, it does not have any actual function as such?

It may cause a problem, but I have yet to discover one. I could just as easily have used the > character, but such standards did not exist when I set off on my tagging marathon, many moons ago.

[monsterjazzlick]

Thanks Oggy,

I have just been trying out the '~' kind suggestion and I have to say that I am favouring this format.

In Foobar, if I search for '~', then all of the 'medleys' appear!

I think I also prefer the visual appearance. In the attached Santana/McLaughlin (PNG) track, I saved 15 x characters; '(Medley)' swallowed up 8 of them!


1753

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

I could just as easily have used the > character, but such standards did not exist when I set off on my tagging marathon, many moons ago.

OK, I see, thanks.

So you might say that '~' vs. '>' could be a matter of personal preference.

[mville]

So you might say that '~' vs. '>' could be a matter of personal preference.

It IS only a matter of personal preference (remember also, that the > is an illegal filename character, so it will need handling).

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

On the Santana/McLaughlin CD, track-one is half music and half announcement!:


"Echoes Of Angels" / Introductions

Do you class this as:


Echoes Of Angels~Introductions

Many thanks.

[monsterjazzlick]

It IS only a matter of personal preference (remember also, that the > is an illegal filename character, so it will need handling).

mville, Cheers. I am settling for '~'. Thanks.

[Oggy]

Thanks Oggy,

I have just been trying out the '~' kind suggestion and I have to say that I am favouring this format.

In Foobar, if I search for '~', then all of the 'medleys' appear!

I think I also prefer the visual appearance. In the attached Santana/McLaughlin (PNG) track, I saved 15 x characters!


1753

Cheers,

Paul

I have seen some names using the tilde character from one of the metadata providers; maybe they are rips entered by mville?! It is certainly a neat solution, and I like how you're using search to the max! Pleased that you've found a (legal) solution, that works well for you.

Let's hope that Aphex Twin considers the illegal characters, if he ever gives us another, Computer Controlled Accoustic Instruments, album!!

[Jailhouse]

Let's hope that Aphex Twin considers the illegal characters, if he ever gives us another, Computer Controlled Accoustic Instruments, album!!

He might have used those characters because they're illegal. He wouldn't the first. :)

[monsterjazzlick]

On the Santana/McLaughlin CD, track-one is half music and half announcement!:


"Echoes Of Angels" / Introductions

Do you class this as:


Echoes Of Angels~Introductions

Hope I am not being a pain by bumping my earlier question. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks a lot.

[Oggy]

He might have used those characters because they're illegal. He wouldn't the first. :)

Ha! A work colleague got prison for importing an illegal character.

I like flirting with danger, so AC/DC remains!

[Oggy]

Hope I am not being a pain by bumping my earlier question. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks a lot.

I thought you agreed with mville's suggestion, in post *49?

I forgot about the hash being replaced! This is exactly why the use of a legal character, such as the tilde, helps compatibility. :)

[monsterjazzlick]

I thought you agreed with mville's suggestion, in post *49?

I forgot about the hash being replaced! This is exactly why the use of a legal character, such as the tilde, helps compatibility. :)

Hi Oggy,

Yes, I am using the '~' symbol for medley tracks.

But my question was rather would you use '~' when a single track consists of a song immediately followed by introductions/spoken material? I mean, it is not a medley because there is only one song!

eg. American Trilogy ~ Band Introductions

Really, the intros should have been placed on a separate track, rather than the tail end of another.

Cheers.

[Oggy]

Hi Oggy,

Yes, I am using the '~' symbol for medley tracks.

But my question was rather would you use '~' when a single track consists of a song immediately followed by introductions/spoken material? I mean, it is not a medley because there is only one song!

eg. American Trilogy ~ Band Introductions

Really, the intros should have been placed on a separate track, rather than the tail end of another.

Cheers.

Yes, intros are often indexed incorrectly on CDs, so unless you split the track and re-index, in mville's words of wisdom, "it IS only a matter of personal preference".

[mville]

Yes, I am using the '~' symbol for medley tracks.

But my question was rather would you use '~' when a single track consists of a song immediately followed by introductions/spoken material? I mean, it is not a medley because there is only one song!

When a single CD track contains more than 1 title, I use the tilde ~. I don't restrict it's use simply to medleys.

[monsterjazzlick]

Yes, intros are often indexed incorrectly on CDs, so unless you split the track and re-index, in mville's words of wisdom, "it IS only a matter of personal preference".

Oggy,

OK, cheers.

I will stick with:

American Trilogy ~ Band Introductions

for now. 'Splitting' the track might be something for the future.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

When a single CD track contains more than 1 title, I use the tilde ~. I don't restrict it's use simply to medleys.

mville,

OK great, thanks for clarifying.

Paul

[mville]

Ha! A work colleague got prison for importing an illegal character.

I like flirting with danger, so AC/DC remains!

You do realise that I work undercover for the tagging police!!

[Oggy]

You do realise that I work undercover for the tagging police!!

And what a fine job you are doing, upholding the law, despite so many guilty parties!

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have been testing out some additional tags of which I would like to include in my rips. These all fall under the main GENRE of JAZZ.

For STYLE (as per discussed in a separate thread) I am using descriptions including: Blues; Gospel; Funk; Bebop. (I now view STYLE as SUB-GENRE.)

The most recent tag I have been looking at is INSTRUMENT. I narrowed it's usage (for my own needs) down to two possible functions of practicality.


1 - Stating the MAIN/LEAD INSTRUMENT of the album. So for a Tony Bennett, Chaka Khan, and Bessie Smith album, the INSTR. tag would be: 'VOCALS'. For a Charlie Parker, Kenny G, and Stan Getz album, the INSTR. tag would be: 'SAXOPHONE'. And for a Miles Davis, Louis Armstrong, and Dizzy Gillespie album, the INSTR. tag would be: 'TRUMPET'.

2 - Stating the SIZE of the COLLECTIVE INSTRUMENTS (ie. band size). So for a Buddy Rich, Gene Krupa, and Duke Ellington album, the INSTR. tag would be: 'BIG BAND'. For a Oscar Peterson, Diana Krall, and Dudley Moore album, the INSTR. tag would be: 'TRIO'. And for a Mahavishnu Orchestra, Weather Report, and Chick Corea Elektric Band, INSTR. tag would be: 'COMBO'.

My preference - for what it's worth! - is towards the latter.

Many thanks in advance.

Paul

[Jailhouse]

Go with what you feel works best for you. Or, choose the first option for the "Instrument" tag and create a "Band Size" (or similar) tag for your second option. You can have it all!

[monsterjazzlick]

Go with what you feel works best for you. Or, choose the first option for the "Instrument" tag and create a "Band Size" (or similar) tag for your second option. You can have it all!

Thanks JH, I will have a think over the weekend. Should be quite an easy job thanks to the Batch Processor! Paul.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have drawn up a rough list of INSTRUMENT possibilities for various artists I have ripped so far.

For Miles Davis's 'Sketches Of Spain':


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sketches_of_Spain

1762 (scroll down.)

For Al Jarreau:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarreau_(album)

1763

For Chick Corea's 'The Mad Hatter':


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mad_Hatter_(album)

1764 (scroll down.)

I think the above three work fine.

However, I am not sure what I should state in INSTRUMENT if the album is by a DUO? For instance, 'The Enchantment' by Bela Fleck and Chick Corea:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enchantment

Would one write 'Duo' (or 'Duet'), or would you state both of the instruments (ie. Piano and Banjo):


INSTRUMENT = Duo

INSTRUMENT = Piano; Banjo

INSTRUMENT = Piano, Banjo

Regarding the latter two, I guess this would depend if they were multi-tags or not?

Many thanks,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

Secondly, instead of stating: Quartet, Quintet, Sextet, Septet (in the INSTRUMENT field), I am thinking of simply writing: COMBO. The latter encompasses all of the former.

I am not quite sure whether to write: Trio as Trio, or also as COMBO? Possibly the latter.

For albums such as: Miles Davis's 'Bitches Brew' (where various sizes of bands are used for different tracks, and where most of the bands size is around 8+ players):


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitches_Brew

I will write: ENSEMBLE.

This seems a sensible approach to me.

Thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

As long as you remember what "Combo," "Ensemble," and whatever other definitions you come up with mean in this context, it should be fine. After all, it's your library.

For me, this looks like a pallet stacked high with cans of worms. All this putting actual instruments in with band sizes seems unwieldy at least. Combining different kinds of data can become very confusing. If I were to tag instruments used and the makeup of the bands, I would do so separately, as I mentioned earlier.

Then again, I do minimal tagging; while you're looking to add tags, I'm culling them. So, follow my advice at your peril. ;)

[monsterjazzlick]

As long as you remember what "Combo," "Ensemble," and whatever other definitions you come up with mean in this context, it should be fine. After all, it's your library.

For me, this looks like a pallet stacked high with cans of worms. All this putting actual instruments in with band sizes seems unwieldy at least. Combining different kinds of data can become very confusing. If I were to tag instruments used and the makeup of the bands, I would do so separately, as I mentioned earlier.

Then again, I do minimal tagging; while you're looking to add tags, I'm culling them. So, follow my advice at your peril. ;)

Hi JH,

Remembering 'Combo' and 'Ensemble' is easy, for me. But might it confuse foobar, etc?

Do you still mean that you would create a tag called BAND SIZE and use that one for the size of the group (eg. 'Combo' and 'Ensemble')? I think that is actually a good idea. However, rather than BAND SIZE, I would call it INSTRUMENTATION (though some might prefer LINE UP).

Then for the INSTRUMENT tag, I will use this for: Vocals, Bass, Drums, etc.

How does that sound? A little tidier perhaps?

Thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

The tags won't confuse foobar as it won't know what they mean. It will do with them what you tell it to, the same as with the more standard metadata.

I would indeed set up a discrete "Instrumentation" tag (although not using that name) rather than bundling that information with Instrument.

That said, I may be somewhat biased. I do a fair amount of programming and, most of the time, have to keep data types separated. For me, your Instrument and (proposed) Instrumentation tags are different data types. I'm sure foobar's query syntax can handle searching through a single tag with differing information like that. Maybe it can sort it, too, but that would be far easier for me to deal with by using separate tags.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi JH,

OK, thanks; that's what I will do then.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

For LABEL tag, in some instances there are (RE: CD liner notes) more than one company.

For instance:


Columbia / Legacy

Sony / Jazz Legends

ECM / Watt Works

If I wanted to include both companies then should I use the comma or the semicolon, please? I would prefer to use a semicolon (so as to use the same system as I have used for tagging ARTIST). However, my reason for questioning here is because I am not sure if LABEL is designed to accommodate such tagging (ie. like ARTIST)?; and so I wanted to double-check, please, before making any amendments in this respect.

Many thanks,

Paul

[mville]

For LABEL tag, in some instances there are (RE: CD liner notes) more than one company.

For instance:
Columbia / Legacy

Sony / Jazz Legends

ECM / Watt Works

If I wanted to include both companies then should I use the comma or the semicolon, please? I would prefer to use a semicolon (so as to use the same system as I have used for tagging ARTIST). However, my reason for questioning here is because I am not sure if LABEL is designed to accommodate such tagging (ie. like ARTIST)?; and so I wanted to double-check, please, before making any amendments in this respect.

In the case of a multi-value tag e.g. Artist, the semi-colon is never stored in the data. It is used by software for display purposes only, to separate the individual artists.


Label is not a multi-value tag, so Label = Columbia; Legacy would result in a single data value, where the semi-colon is stored as part of the data.

[Jailhouse]

The second entry in each instance is more a subsidiary than a separate company. (I'm sure there's a better word for it, but it won't come to mind.) Anyway, given mville's information, I think the way you list them in your post above looks best. I would do it that way if I were to do it at all.

[monsterjazzlick]

The second entry in each instance is more a subsidiary than a separate company. (I'm sure there's a better word for it, but it won't come to mind.) Anyway, given mville's information, I think the way you list them in your post above looks best. I would do it that way if I were to do it at all.

Thanks JH,

So, my choices would be to use a slash '/' symbol (forwards not backwards?), or else to drop the second entry (so 'ECM / Watt Works' becomes 'ECM').

Yes, I have heard the phrase: "... is a subsidiary of ..." before in this context. 'Parent Company' is another. If you follow the tracks, then it seems that so many of the smaller labels have all been swallowed up by the likes of Warner Bros. Even Columbia falls under Sony!

'Polydor / Verve' is another common one for Jazz-Fusion of the 1970s.

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Thanks JH,

So, my choices would be to use a slash '/' symbol (forwards not backwards?), or else to drop the second entry (so 'ECM / Watt Works' becomes 'ECM').

Yes, I have heard the phrase: "... is a subsidiary of ..." before in this context. 'Parent Company' is another. If you follow the tracks, then it seems that so many of the smaller labels have all been swallowed up by the likes of Warner Bros. Even Columbia falls under Sony!

'Polydor / Verve' is another common one for Jazz-Fusion of the 1970s.

Cheers,

Paul
use / or , as seperator. Do not need ; as not a multi value tag.
ps. You can actually use anything you want. It is just text. You can use @ or & or $ or whatever.

[monsterjazzlick]

In the case of a multi-value tag e.g. Artist, the semi-colon is never stored in the data. It is used by software for display purposes only, to separate the individual artists.


Label is not a multi-value tag, so Label = Columbia; Legacy would result in a single data value, where the semi-colon is stored as part of the data.

Cheers mville,

Thanks for confirming that.

Do you ever tag the: 'UPC' (Universal Product Code)?

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

use / or , as seperator. Do not need ; as not a multi value tag.
ps. You can actually use anything you want. It is just text. You can use @ or & or $ or whatever.

Great stuff, Cheers Gary.

[Jailhouse]

So, my choices would be to use a slash '/' symbol (forwards not backwards?), or else to drop the second entry (so 'ECM / Watt Works' becomes 'ECM').

The forward slash is pretty much standard for this kind of thing, but if you like the backslash, use it. Another possibility is the pipe, e.g., Sony | Jazz Legends. As garym said, you can use anything you want; it boils down to what looks right to you.

There's no reason you can't use both single and double entries depending on the information available. It's your call.

[monsterjazzlick]

The forward slash is pretty much standard for this kind of thing, but if you like the backslash, use it. Another possibility is the pipe, e.g., Sony | Jazz Legends. As garym said, you can use anything you want; it boils down to what looks right to you.

There's no reason you can't use both single and double entries depending on the information available. It's your call.

Hi JH,

I always wondered what that '|' line was called?! I have seen it before on occasion. Does it serves the same function - grammatically speaking - as the fwd-slash?

I don't really like the comma for this purpose. So it's a toss-up between the 'pipe' and the 'fwd-slash' I guess.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I wanted to double-check on something, please, before making any adjustments to my files:

For instances where there is more than one PRODUCER, should I use:


PRODUCER = Bill Bruford / Jeff Berlin

or

PRODUCER = Bill Bruford; Jeff Berlin

Apologies for this being similar to my earlier Q.

Thanks in advance for any kind clarification.

Cheers

Paul

[Jailhouse]

I always wondered what that '|' line was called?! I have seen it before on occasion. Does it serves the same function - grammatically speaking - as the fwd-slash?

Grammatically, it's meaningless; I just like the way it looks. It's mainly used in math and computing. See this Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_bar).

[monsterjazzlick]

Grammatically, it's meaningless; I just like the way it looks. It's mainly used in math and computing. See this Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_bar).

Thanks JH, I saw the paragraph where it is referred to as a 'pipe'. Cheers, Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

For me, this looks like a pallet stacked high with cans of worms. All this putting actual instruments in with band sizes seems unwieldy at least. Combining different kinds of data can become very confusing. If I were to tag instruments used and the makeup of the bands, I would do so separately, as I mentioned earlier.

Hi JH,

Well, after a couple of weeks of testing out different INSTRUMENTS and BAND SIZES, I have decided that I am actually better off without them! The main issue was that their usage, in Foobar, turned out to be counter-productive. The scheme did not narrow down my searches as I had hoped. In fact it was confusing them!

And so, I pose a question which I feel may offer a halfway-house:


If I wanted to tag all albums which contained VOCALS, and to be able to differentiate between those that contained none, then could I create a tag that exclusively used a YES/NO factor? I am thinking - on every album - of creating a tag called: VOCALS, and then simply stating either YES or NO in the data field. I think it would be a little like COMPILATION in the way that you only have two choices?

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

Well, after a couple of weeks of testing out different INSTRUMENTS and BAND SIZES, I have decided that I am actually better off without them!

Ah, simplification. I smile. :)



If I wanted to tag all albums which contained VOCALS, and to be able to differentiate between those that contained none, then could I create a tag that exclusively used a YES/NO factor? I am thinking - on every album - of creating a tag called: VOCALS, and then simply stating either YES or NO in the data field. I think it would be a little like COMPILATION in the way that you only have two choices?

I don't how you would limit the choices in a custom tag (I haven't needed one yet). If that's not possible, you would have to stick to your choices. With Y/N, that shouldn't be much of a problem. Incidentally, I would use Y and N rather than Yes and No; single letters are easier to type. Your taggage may vary.

Keep in mind that tags are track-based. The Compilation tag will be the same for all tracks on an album, which either is, or is not, a compilation. But if you're proposing tagging all tracks as Vocals=Yes on albums which also have instrumental-only tracks, you're risking confusion. I'm all for a Vocals track tag--I've toyed with using one myself--but if you want a tag to tell you whether an album does or does not have one or more vocal tracks, I advise a different tag name. AlbumHasVocals, perhaps.

On the other hand, it's your library, so as long as you know what a Vocals tag means in your context, who am I to argue?

[monsterjazzlick]

I don't how you would limit the choices in a custom tag (I haven't needed one yet). If that's not possible, you would have to stick to your choices. With Y/N, that shouldn't be much of a problem. Incidentally, I would use Y and N rather than Yes and No; single letters are easier to type. Your taggage may vary.

Keep in mind that tags are track-based. The Compilation tag will be the same for all tracks on an album, which either is, or is not, a compilation. But if you're proposing tagging all tracks as Vocals=Yes on albums which also have instrumental-only tracks, you're risking confusion. I'm all for a Vocals track tag--I've toyed with using one myself--but if you want a tag to tell you whether an album does or does not have one or more vocal tracks, I advise a different tag name. AlbumHasVocals, perhaps.

Hi JH,

Regarding the COMPILATION tag, this is how it (ie. my two comp. albums) appears in Foobar:


1786

As you state, you can use a Y/N comment for COMPILATION. But I am not sure if this would work, or how it would work, for a self created VOCALS tag? I was thinking was possible, with COMPILATION, because such albums are placed in a dedicated folder of their own:


1787

Taking into consideration your kindly suggested AlbumHasVocals tag, then this might be a good solution for the latter-mentioned.

Many thanks,

Paul

[garym]

Hi JH,

Regarding the COMPILATION tag, this is how it (ie. my two comp. albums) appears in Foobar:

1786

As you state, you can use a Y/N comment for COMPILATION. But I am not sure if this would work, or how it would work, for a self created VOCALS tag? I was thinking was possible, with COMPILATION, because such albums are placed in a dedicated folder of their own:

1787

Taking into consideration your kindly suggested AlbumHasVocals tag, then this might be a good solution for the latter-mentioned.

Many thanks,

Paul

COMPILATION tag should not have yes,no or Y/N. It should have a value of either 1, or the tag should not exist at all. Paul, you may be confused because the Foobar2000 setup I gave you displays a YES or NO in the compilation column. But this is just how I set up foobar2000 to read the "1' in the COMPILATION tag. If it sees the value of 1, it assigns YES to the track/album. Otherwise it assigns NO. This is all related to a setting within foobar2000 and has nothing to do with the tag itself.

[monsterjazzlick]

COMPILATION tag should not have yes,no or Y/N. It should have a value of either 1, or the tag should not exist at all. Paul, you may be confused because the Foobar2000 setup I gave you displays a YES or NO in the compilation column. But this is just how I set up foobar2000 to read the "1' in the COMPILATION tag. If it sees the value of 1, it assigns YES to the track/album. Otherwise it assigns NO. This is all related to a setting within foobar2000 and has nothing to do with the tag itself.

Hi Gary,

OK, thanks a lot for explaining Foobar.

Regarding 'dBpa', YES (wording) appears alongside the COMPILATION tag when the album has been categorised as being a 'compilation'; as per (eg.) 'Stan Getz & Colleagues':


1789

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Hi Gary,

OK, thanks a lot for explaining Foobar.

Regarding 'dBpa', YES (wording) appears alongside the COMPILATION tag when the album has been categorised as being a 'compilation'; as per (eg.) 'Stan Getz & Colleagues':

1789

Cheers,

Paul

Correct, but the *value* in that COMPILATION tag is just a "1". the tag editor is interpreting that to report YES.

[monsterjazzlick]

Correct, but the *value* in that COMPILATION tag is just a "1". the tag editor is interpreting that to report YES.

Cheers Gary, What do you think the best approach might be in creating a tag for VOCALS then, please? Would you follow Jailhouse's kind suggestion? And would it involve 'tweaking' any settings within Foobar? Thanks, Paul

[garym]

Cheers Gary, What do you think the best approach might be in creating a tag for VOCALS then, please? Would you follow Jailhouse's kind suggestion? And would it involve 'tweaking' any settings within Foobar? Thanks, Paul

nothing I'd tweak in foobar. Personally, I use the genre "Jazz Vocal" if any of the tracks on an album have vocals (and are jazz). But I'm not doing near the detailed tagging you are. Maybe you could add vocal as one of the styles.

[Jailhouse]

As you state, you can use a Y/N comment for COMPILATION.

Not according to Gary, and I believe he's correct. I can use Edit ID-Tag to add a Compilation tag set to No--in fact, that's the only way I can add it, after which I can change it to Yes. This is part of a larger issue which I think has been addressed in the beta. In any event, the behavior is the same.


But I am not sure if this would work, or how it would work, for a self created VOCALS tag? I was thinking was possible, with COMPILATION, because such albums are placed in a dedicated folder of their own[.]

Are you proposing dedicated folders for vocals and non-vocals albums? That would make albums harder to find in File Explorer (more places to look, although a foobar library search shouldn't have a problem), and each group would need to have its own Compilation sub-folder. For me, that's rather messy.

My use for a Vocals tag, should I implement it, will be to differentiate tracks, not albums. I have a fair number of albums with a mixture of vocal and instrumental tracks, and I'm not comfortable tagging those as either Vocals=Yes or Vocals=No. But I may want to be able to quickly find instrumental-only tracks.

(Incidentally, your Gary-supplied foobar setup is different to mine. The look isn't the same, and my compilation albums reside in a Various Artists folder. Options! :))


Taking into consideration your kindly suggested AlbumHasVocals tag, then this might be a good solution for the latter-mentioned.

I believe it's a useful alternative, whatever you name it. Adding it only to the tracks in albums with vocals would likely do the trick, as you then just search for the existence of the tag. Or make it a Y/N and add the tag to all tracks. The more expert members of the forum may have something to say about the advantages and disadvantages of each choice. I'll be watching!

[monsterjazzlick]

Thanks Gary/JH,

I will have a think over the next few days ...

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Are you proposing dedicated folders for vocals and non-vocals albums? That would make albums harder to find in File Explorer (more places to look, although a foobar library search shouldn't have a problem), and each group would need to have its own Compilation sub-folder. For me, that's rather messy.

My use for a Vocals tag, should I implement it, will be to differentiate tracks, not albums. I have a fair number of albums with a mixture of vocal and instrumental tracks, and I'm not comfortable tagging those as either Vocals=Yes or Vocals=No. But I may want to be able to quickly find instrumental-only tracks.

I believe it's a useful alternative, whatever you name it. Adding it only to the tracks in albums with vocals would likely do the trick, as you then just search for the existence of the tag. Or make it a Y/N and add the tag to all tracks. The more expert members of the forum may have something to say about the advantages and disadvantages of each choice. I'll be watching!

Hi JH,

Again, after much thinking and some testing out, I feel this is another tag I might actually be better without! It is not imperative and I am running into possible grounds of over-tagging.

As you say, folder-structure-wise, it's going to get messy.

I was intending to tag such albums which were predominantly VOCALS rather than single tracks. If I was to follow your own logic then it is going to be another long-winded task for me to compile alongside ripping my entire CD collection (albeit I am not saying that there is anything wrong with your suggested system).

Cheers,

Paul

[Boss4001PL]

Hello. i Have a problem. i want to change title for my files from oryinal file name using id tag procesing. how can i do it? i have a lot of files. i cant change title one by one

[mville]

Hello. i Have a problem. i want to change title for my files from oryinal file name using id tag procesing. how can i do it? i have a lot of files. i cant change title one by one

it's probably best, if you create your own thread. In answer to your question, you can use the Arrange Audio utility codec.

[Boss4001PL]

it's probably best, if you create your own thread. In answer to your question, you can use the Arrange Audio utility codec.
i instaled but how to use this?

1800

[mville]

i instaled but how to use this?

1800

That is the ID Tag Update utility codec, not the Arrange Audio utility codec.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi guys,

What would be the best way to ARTIST SORT the band: 'Blood, Sweat & Tears', please?

I have been using the naming scheme:


'Orchestra, Mahavishnu, The';

'Report, Weather'

'Davis, Miles'

for my rips to date.

Would it be: 'Tears, &, Sweat, Blood'?

I am not really sure about the commas or the 'and' symbol?

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

'Davis, Miles' is standard operating procedure, as you would find him in the 'D' section when looking for his works in a shop.

However, the others should be 'Mahavishnu Orchestra, The' and 'Weather Report'. You would expect those last two to be in the 'M' and 'W' bins, respectively.

In the same vein, 'Blood, Sweat & Tears' should be listed exactly that way.

[mville]

What would be the best way to ARTIST SORT the band: 'Blood, Sweat & Tears', please?

I have been using the naming scheme:

'Orchestra, Mahavishnu, The';

'Report, Weather'

'Davis, Miles'

for my rips to date.

I don't think you are understanding the use of Artist Sort. You have The Mahavishnu Orchestra sorted under O and Weather Report sorted under R. This does not make sense to me.

I agree with Jailhouse and would have:
Artist = The Mahavishnu Orchestra
Artist Sort = Mahavishnu Orchestra, The

Artist = Weather Report
Artist Sort = Weather Report

Artist = Blood, Sweat & Tears
Artist Sort = Blood, Sweat & Tears

[Oggy]

I don't think you are understanding the use of Artist Sort. You have The Mahavishnu Orchestra sorted under O and Weather Report sorted under R. This does not make sense to me.

I agree with Jailhouse and would have:
Artist = The Mahavishnu Orchestra
Artist Sort = Mahavishnu Orchestra, The

Artist = Weather Report
Artist Sort = Weather Report

Artist = Blood, Sweat & Tears
Artist Sort = Blood, Sweat & Tears

You've made me so very happy, with this explanation, obviously agree.

[monsterjazzlick]

'Davis, Miles' is standard operating procedure, as you would find him in the 'D' section when looking for his works in a shop.

However, the others should be 'Mahavishnu Orchestra, The' and 'Weather Report'. You would expect those last two to be in the 'M' and 'W' bins, respectively.

In the same vein, 'Blood, Sweat & Tears' should be listed exactly that way.

JH,

To be honest, it's been that long since I visited a record store to buy a CD than I forgot about how - ordering - they might be stacked. But thinking about it, I agree with your protocol, thanks.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

I don't think you are understanding the use of Artist Sort. You have The Mahavishnu Orchestra sorted under O and Weather Report sorted under R. This does not make sense to me.

I agree with Jailhouse and would have:
Artist = The Mahavishnu Orchestra
Artist Sort = Mahavishnu Orchestra, The

Artist = Weather Report
Artist Sort = Weather Report

Artist = Blood, Sweat & Tears
Artist Sort = Blood, Sweat & Tears

Cheers Mville,

I have made those changes now.

But how, please, might you tag the ARTIST SORT for bands which include the leader's name alongside the size of the ensemble? For example:


Oscar Peterson Trio

Dave Brubeck Quartet

Miles Davis Quintet

Would it be:


Peterson, Oscar, Trio

Brubeck, Dave, Quartet

Davis, Miles, Quintet

Very much appreciated,

Paul

[Dat Ei]

From my point of view: while "Oscar Peterson" is a combination of a first and a last name and "Peterson, Oscar" is ok for a sort tag, "Oscar Peterson Trio" is a commonly used term in itself. But if you prefer to have "Oscar Peterson" in the near of his trio, quartet or whatever, why not the other way? It is your tagging!!! There are no standards except your own ones.


Dat Ei

[mville]

how, please, might you tag the ARTIST SORT for bands which include the leader's name alongside the size of the ensemble? For example:


Oscar Peterson Trio

Dave Brubeck Quartet

Miles Davis Quintet

Would it be:


Peterson, Oscar, Trio

Brubeck, Dave, Quartet

Davis, Miles, Quintet

It all depends on how YOU want these artists sorted.

If you want Oscar Peterson Trio to be sorted under O, then Artist Sort = Oscar Peterson Trio is ok.

If you want Oscar Peterson Trio to be sorted under P, then Artist Sort = Peterson, Oscar, Trio is ok.

[Oggy]

Cheers Mville,

I have made those changes now.

But how, please, might you tag the ARTIST SORT for bands which include the leader's name alongside the size of the ensemble? For example:


Oscar Peterson Trio

Dave Brubeck Quartet

Miles Davis Quintet

Would it be:


Peterson, Oscar, Trio

Brubeck, Dave, Quartet

Davis, Miles, Quintet

Very much appreciated,

Paul

Hi Paul,

Just found The Dave Brubeck Quartet in Ds, and The Oscar Peterson Trio, in Ps!

So, be consistent!!

For your information, I will change Dave Brubeck, to Bs.

As has been said, this is purely personal preference.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi Paul,

Just found The Dave Brubeck Quartet in Ds, and The Oscar Peterson Trio, in Ps!

So, be consistent!!

For your information, I will change Dave Brubeck, to Bs.

As has been said, this is purely personal preference.

Thanks Oggy, I am workin' on it man ...

[monsterjazzlick]

It all depends on how YOU want these artists sorted.

If you want Oscar Peterson Trio to be sorted under O, then Artist Sort = Oscar Peterson Trio is ok.

If you want Oscar Peterson Trio to be sorted under P, then Artist Sort = Peterson, Oscar, Trio is ok.

Hi Mville,

I prefer Oscar Peterson Trio under 'P'; so: 'Peterson, Oscar, Trio'.

I really appreciate your patience here!

I need to make some adjustments now ...

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

From my point of view: while "Oscar Peterson" is a combination of a first and a last name and "Peterson, Oscar" is ok for a sort tag, "Oscar Peterson Trio" is a commonly used term in itself. But if you prefer to have "Oscar Peterson" in the near of his trio, quartet or whatever, why not the other way? It is your tagging!!! There are no standards except your own ones.

Dat Ei,

Many thanks.

I have an answer for you but I will type it up later as it will take a little bit of explaining ...

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

From my point of view: while "Oscar Peterson" is a combination of a first and a last name and "Peterson, Oscar" is ok for a sort tag, "Oscar Peterson Trio" is a commonly used term in itself. But if you prefer to have "Oscar Peterson" in the near of his trio, quartet or whatever, why not the other way? It is your tagging!!! There are no standards except your own ones.

Dat Ei,

I wanted to include the size of the ensemble somewhere within my tagging. I originally created a new tag called 'ENSEMBLE' but I ended up doing away with it because it because slightly conflicting; plus it was not recognised by one of my playback devices; and it was yet another tag to complete.

So now I state the size of the ensemble after the artist's name. Yes, many artists have the ensemble size incorporated
into their name (eg. John Coltrane Quartet) and so this scheme kinda works fine. However, I have used it for all artists regardless of whether or not it is a part of the ensembles official title. So, for instance, I have:


Miles Davis Septet

Oscar Peterson Quartet

Dave Brubeck Quintet

As you see, these are not the regular title for each group; but they do inform me of the ensemble size (ie. it's the Dave Brubeck Quartet with an extra member added):


1822

Cheers,

Paul

[Dat Ei]

Ok, I see. I for myself prefer the offical title of the Ensemble, which is printed on the cover or in the booklet.

What would you do with a onetime cooperation of the Esbjörn Svensson Trio and the radio.string.quartet.vienna? Would it be the "Esbjörn Svensson.radio.string.septet.vienna"? :eek:


Dat Ei

[monsterjazzlick]

Ok, I see. I for myself prefer the offical title of the Ensemble, which is printed on the cover or in the booklet.

What would you do with a onetime cooperation of the Esbjörn Svensson Trio and the radio.string.quartet.vienna? Would it be the "Esbjörn Svensson.radio.string.septet.vienna"?

Dat Ei,

I would tag as:


Esbjörn Svensson Trio; Radio String Quartet Vienna

So, two separate artists; and I would lose the '.' in the latter ensemble.

Thanks,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi again,

I wanted to check, please, the ARTIST SORT tag for the group: 'Art Blakey & The Jazz Messengers':


1823

I have struggled a bit with this one, but to me the above looks to be correct?

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

You essentially want to sort under "Blakey." If he were a single artist, you would sort him as Blakey, Art. Anything else just needs to be appended to that after another comma. So in this case you get Blakey, Art, & The Jazz Messengers, which is the simplest and most readable solution. (You only need to force The to the end of a band name if it's normally the beginning of it.)

[monsterjazzlick]

You essentially want to sort under "Blakey." If he were a single artist, you would sort him as Blakey, Art. Anything else just needs to be appended to that after another comma. So in this case you get Blakey, Art, & The Jazz Messengers, which is the simplest and most readable solution. (You only need to force The to the end of a band name if it's normally the beginning of it.)

JH,

Thanks man. You really have got this stuff down mate!

I spent ages thinking about it but I now agree with your method.

Paul

[Jailhouse]

It just occurred to me that there is one way of naming a group that is harder to sort this way. For example, the group name for Jeff Lorber's fusion endeavors was originally The Jeff Lorber Fusion. (He later shortened it to Jeff Lorber Fusion. Thanks, Jeff!)

How to tackle that one? Lorber, Jeff, The Fusion implies that the band name is either "Jeff Lorber The Fusion" or, perhaps, "Jeff Lorber, The Fusion", neither of which is actually the case. Lorber, Jeff, Fusion, The is a total hash. If it were up to me, I would treat this as a special case and use Lorber, Jeff - The Jeff Lorber Fusion.

Of course, if you don't display Artist Sort in your player(s) it's a moot point, unless it somehow results in an artist list that doesn't look correctly sorted. But it does help maintain sanity when you're trying to decipher Artist Sort tags.

Since I don't even use Artist Sort I just skipped The and used Jeff Lorber Fusion as the Artist tag for all of his 'Fusion' albums. Because I can. Options! :)

[monsterjazzlick]

It just occurred to me that there is one way of naming a group that is harder to sort this way. For example, the group name for Jeff Lorber's fusion endeavors was originally The Jeff Lorber Fusion. (He later shortened it to Jeff Lorber Fusion. Thanks, Jeff!)

How to tackle that one? Lorber, Jeff, The Fusion implies that the band name is either "Jeff Lorber The Fusion" or, perhaps, "Jeff Lorber, The Fusion", neither of which is actually the case. Lorber, Jeff, Fusion, The is a total hash. If it were up to me, I would treat this as a special case and use Lorber, Jeff - The Jeff Lorber Fusion.

Of course, if you don't display Artist Sort in your player(s) it's a moot point, unless it somehow results in an artist list that doesn't look correctly sorted. But it does help maintain sanity when you're trying to decipher Artist Sort tags.

Since I don't even use Artist Sort I just skipped The and used Jeff Lorber Fusion as the Artist tag for all of his 'Fusion' albums. Because I can. Options!

Thanks a lot JH,

I would have actually thought the best option was: 'Lorber, Jeff, Fusion, The'!

But Lorber's dropping of the 'The' is obviously a neat and much appreciated resolution. Perhaps he owns 'dBpa'?!

Paul

[mville]

The idea of a tag with a corresponding sort tag, is that the tag is displayed, but is sorted by what is defined in the sort tag.

In an ideal world, we would never see the sort tag, anywhere (in the server/player).

[Jailhouse]

In an ideal world, we would never see the sort tag, anywhere (in the server/player).

While I couldn't think of a reason to do it, I wrote it that way because it's possible that someone, somewhere, actually does.

[monsterjazzlick]

It just occurred to me that there is one way of naming a group that is harder to sort this way. For example, the group name for Jeff Lorber's fusion endeavors was originally The Jeff Lorber Fusion. (He later shortened it to Jeff Lorber Fusion. Thanks, Jeff!)

How to tackle that one? Lorber, Jeff, The Fusion implies that the band name is either "Jeff Lorber The Fusion" or, perhaps, "Jeff Lorber, The Fusion", neither of which is actually the case. Lorber, Jeff, Fusion, The is a total hash. If it were up to me, I would treat this as a special case and use Lorber, Jeff - The Jeff Lorber Fusion.

Of course, if you don't display Artist Sort in your player(s) it's a moot point, unless it somehow results in an artist list that doesn't look correctly sorted. But it does help maintain sanity when you're trying to decipher Artist Sort tags.

Since I don't even use Artist Sort I just skipped The and used Jeff Lorber Fusion as the Artist tag for all of his 'Fusion' albums. Because I can. Options! :)

Hi again,

I have another ARTIST (Band) I am tagging containing similar data: 'The Tony Williams Lifetime'.


https://www.discogs.com/The-Tony-Williams-Lifetime-Ego/release/2171911

Why TW used the word 'The' seems a bit pointless and less attractive to me than simply calling the outfit 'Tony Williams Lifetime'. Maybe it was because it was because his surname would need to be Williams's which caused them to prefer the word 'The'?

In 'dBpa' it appears, by default, as: 'Williams, Tony, Lifetime, The') I won't include a screenshot as they never seem to appear!); but I don't think you would agree with this format.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi.

(There area couple of typos in my above post I just noticed!).

I am thinking that the two possible solutions here would be to either completely lose the word 'The' and catalogue ARTIST SORT as: 'Williams, Tony, Lifetime'; or else include the word 'The' and place it at the end (ie. ARTIST SORT = 'Tony Williams Lifetime, The')?

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

I have another ARTIST (Band) I am tagging containing similar data: 'The Tony Williams Lifetime'. [-snip-]

Why TW used the word 'The' seems a bit pointless and less attractive to me than simply calling the outfit 'Tony Williams Lifetime'. Maybe it was because it was because his surname would need to be Williams's which caused them to prefer the word 'The'?

I think it was the hip thing back then, just as with The Jeff Lorber Fusion.


In 'dBpa' it appears, by default, as: 'Williams, Tony, Lifetime, The'; but I don't think you would agree with this format.

I, personally, would use Tony Williams Lifetime if I had CDs under his name only (which for me would list as Tony Williams), or The Tony Williams Lifetime if I didn't.

I don't so much disagree with the dBpa format, which will do what you need when sorting by surname. I just find it difficult to decipher at a glance.

[monsterjazzlick]

I think it was the hip thing back then, just as with The Jeff Lorber Fusion.

I, personally, would use Tony Williams Lifetime if I had CDs under his name only (which for me would list as Tony Williams), or The Tony Williams Lifetime if I didn't.

I don't so much disagree with the dBpa format, which will do what you need when sorting by surname. I just find it difficult to decipher at a glance.

Hi JH,

Thanks a lot.

I have settled for (dropping the 'The'): 'Tony Williams Lifetime' / 'Williams, Tony, Lifetime'. I think that should work OK.

The 'dBpa. default is OK when the name/artist is 'John Smith'. But when you have (say) 'Duke Ellington And His Orchestra', then things can, understandably, get a little muddled. But of course nobody would ever expect the s/w to be 100% correct every time as different users prefer different listings!

This ripping malarkey is a big job! It's never ending ...

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

I am thinking that the two possible solutions here would be to either completely lose the word 'The' and catalogue ARTIST SORT as: 'Williams, Tony, Lifetime'; or else include the word 'The' and place it at the end (ie. ARTIST SORT = 'Tony Williams Lifetime, The')?

If you want to sort by surname, it has to come first. A Williams, Tony, Lifetime tag would work fine; adding The at the end is superfluous, as it doesn't change the sort order.

If I were to start using sort tags, I would seriously consider using <last name, first name> followed by a number. Jeff Lorber would be sort-tagged as Lorber, Jeff 01; The Jeff Lorber Fusion as Lorber, Jeff 02; and Jeff Lorber Fusion as Lorber, Jeff 03. It would put the first several 'Fusion' releases (beginning with 'The') before the later ones and save me a lot of head-scratching.

I could also use this method to sort two [or more] albums released in the same year with titles don't sort the same alphabetically as they do chronologically; that's the drawback to not using full release dates.

[Jailhouse]

The 'dBpa' default is OK when the name/artist is 'John Smith'. But when you have (say) 'Duke Ellington And His Orchestra', then things can, understandably, get a little muddled.

Ellington, Duke, And His Orchestra


This ripping malarkey is a big job! It's never ending ...

It's a smaller job for me; I don't require so much information. :)

[monsterjazzlick]

Ellington, Duke, And His Orchestra

It's a smaller job for me; I don't require so much information. :)

Cheers JH,

Well, I think I must be close to half way through now. I have ripped over 70GB (which probably seems a very small amount to you!).

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi there,

I have an Xmas Jazz CD which contains zero information regarding anything (other than the tunes!):


https://www.discogs.com/Unknown-Artist-Christmas-Jazz/release/6374457

In which case, would you just write the track-titles and composer-names and leave everything else blank? I mean, I don't really think there is much else you can do here?

(Discogs site has included in the Genre tag: Country, Folk, World Music! lol.)

Cheers,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

You're probably right. Put in what information you have, and add more when (if) you can find any.

[Oggy]

Hi there,

I have an Xmas Jazz CD which contains zero information regarding anything (other than the tunes!):


https://www.discogs.com/Unknown-Artist-Christmas-Jazz/release/6374457

In which case, would you just write the track-titles and composer-names and leave everything else blank? I mean, I don't really think there is much else you can do here?

(Discogs site has included in the Genre tag: Country, Folk, World Music! lol.)

Cheers,

Paul

You could use Genre, Christmas.

Or perhaps, Jazz.

I'll admit to having Genre, Christmas. Very handy alongside the Genre, Party, I mentioned to you! :)

[Oggy]

Hi Paul,

Meant to mention, if you enter anything in the Genre box, you'll end up with Unknown Genre, so easier to enter something, at the time of rip.

[monsterjazzlick]

You could use Genre, Christmas.

Or perhaps, Jazz.

I'll admit to having Genre, Christmas. Very handy alongside the Genre, Party, I mentioned to you!

Hi Oggy,

Because I only have this solitary one Xmas CD, I am tempted to just whack in under Jazz Genre and Xmas Style.

The Genre folders I have to date are: Jazz, Prog. Rock, and Film Soundtrack.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

You're probably right. Put in what information you have, and add more when (if) you can find any.

Hi JH,

The reason I ask is because where I have not been able to source the required data in the past, I have written in 'Unknown'. For instance:


Producer = Unknown

Composer = Unknown

But now I am thinking I might be better not stating this. I think it was Gary who said he does not type in 'Unknown' because 'Unknown' tells him nothing! In which case, if I leave a field (such as 'Producer') BLANK, then does this tag just get deleted during the ripping process (because there is no metadata in it)?

Many thanks,

Paul

[mville]

I have a composer list in foobar2000. Any tracks without the composer tag are omitted from the list, but tracks with composer = unknown, appear under unknown, which I find quite useful.

... also, historically in some software, I found searching for tracks without certain tags problematic. That is, tracks were not returned if the tag was missing. As composer for me is quite important, I ended up with composer = unknown (and composersort = unknown).

[monsterjazzlick]

I have a composer list in foobar2000. Any tracks without the composer tag are omitted from the list, but tracks with composer = unknown, appear under unknown, which I find quite useful.

... also, historically in some software, I found searching for tracks without certain tags problematic. That is, tracks were not returned if the tag was missing. As composer for me is quite important, I ended up with composer = unknown (and composersort = unknown).

Nice one mville.

I was dreading having to make amendments to circa 80GB!

I do not use COMPOSERSORT.

I will make a rip and post a screenshot shortly ...

Paul

[mville]

I do not use COMPOSERSORT.

Why not?

In addition to my comments earlier, during my tagging exploits, I discovered that for some tracks the composer is literally unknown. I am now able to distinguish between this and tracks where I have not added the composer (as composer does not exist).

[monsterjazzlick]

Why not?

In addition to my comments earlier, during my tagging exploits, I discovered that for some tracks the composer is literally unknown. I am now able to distinguish between this and tracks where I have not added the composer (as composer does not exist).

Hi mville,

For the simple reason than I have umpteen tags to deal with every rip. And I did read (a while ago) on here of a few people who do not use COMPOSERSORT tags (for what ever reason).

I think circa 95% of my tracks have the COMPOSER tag completed. Luckily, with Jazz Standards, because they are derived from shows/musicals (eg. 'West Side Story', 'My Fair Lady', etc) it is very easy to source the writers - who are typically: Rodgers & Hart, Cole Porter, Oscar Hammerstein, etc.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

When 'dBpa' scanned the 'Xmas Jazz' CD, it came up with the Artist as: 'The One Notes'. I think this is just a quirky generic name the record company must have thought up as the personnel is listed nowhere. Probably a play-on-words for 'Blue Note' (ie. record label).

Here are screenshots of the ID-Tag for the complete rip:


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-dcxxSAhNx5Pr5I330l2BwP2jKuiNOiv/view?usp=sharing


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bQfuoV4TybSaiCgouKbictB7iTvTKqaM/view?usp=sharing

Thanks a lot,

Paul

(Oggy - I decided to create an 'Xmas' folder in the end.)

[garym]

I too use a "Christmas" genre. But I have about 100 xmas CDs.....

[mville]

For the simple reason than I have umpteen tags to deal with every rip. And I did read (a while ago) on here of a few people who do not use COMPOSERSORT tags (for what ever reason).

I think circa 95% of my tracks have the COMPOSER tag completed. Luckily, with Jazz Standards, because they are derived from shows/musicals (eg. 'West Side Story', 'My Fair Lady', etc) it is very easy to source the writers - who are typically: Rodgers & Hart, Cole Porter, Oscar Hammerstein, etc.

I was wondering more about consistency.

For example, if you have artist = Bob Dylan and artist sort = Dylan, Bob, then Bob Dylan is sorted under D, in artist lists.

But if you only have composer = Bob Dylan, then Bod Dylan is sorted under B, in composer lists.

A little confusing to my mind.

[mville]

I too use a "Christmas" genre. But I have about 100 xmas CDs.....

Me too... and I have an Xmas style :)

[mville]

When 'dBpa' scanned the 'Xmas Jazz' CD, it came up with the Artist as: 'The One Notes'. I think this is just a quirky generic name the record company must have thought up as the personnel is listed nowhere. Probably a play-on-words for 'Blue Note' (ie. record label).

Here are screenshots of the ID-Tag for the complete rip:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-dcxxSAhNx5Pr5I330l2BwP2jKuiNOiv/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bQfuoV4TybSaiCgouKbictB7iTvTKqaM/view?usp=sharing



The screenshot is showing The Cool Notes. The Cool Notes are an 80's band, from my neck of the woods.

[Oggy]

Hi Paul,

Meant to mention, if you enter anything in the Genre box, you'll end up with Unknown Genre, so easier to enter something, at the time of rip.

I of course meant, if you don't enter anything... (leave Genre blank).

Recently helped a friend tag 100+ "Unknown Genre"; it was time consuming!

[Jailhouse]

I too use a "Christmas" genre. But I have about 100 xmas CDs.....

Bah! Humbug!* The only "Christmas" album I own is The Lost Christmas Eve from Trans-Siberian Orchestra, which I bought after hearing an excerpt that was the soundtrack for a commercial. (A beer ad, if memory serves.) It doesn't need a special tag as it's not exactly "Silent Night"....


*I'm not a Christmas-y kind of guy and don't care for the seasonal songs. But for all of you do, have a great Christmas and enjoy the music! :)

[monsterjazzlick]

I was wondering more about consistency.

For example, if you have artist = Bob Dylan and artist sort = Dylan, Bob, then Bob Dylan is sorted under D, in artist lists.

But if you only have composer = Bob Dylan, then Bod Dylan is sorted under B, in composer lists.

A little confusing to my mind.

Hi mville,

Yes, you are totally correct of course.

However, there will be a lot of donkey work involved in creating such a tag because very often (in Jazz at least) there are multiple personnel to include.

For example, this track is a medley (hence '~'!) and so requires multiple entries:


https://drive.google.com/file/d/103FJKvGRlGNUOlgHsmRRz0A1J7tFTef3/view?usp=sharing

To place this in a SORT fashion would - I estimate - take a great deal of time. However, it may be something I add at a much later date once I have finished all of my ripping; but for now I am going to skip over it.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

The screenshot is showing The Cool Notes. The Cool Notes are an 80's band, from my neck of the woods.

mville,

I did Google the, but it came up with perfumes and a bunch of other stuff!?

The only other option is to use: ARTIST = UNKNOWN (which I don't really want to do).

Thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

mville,

I did Google the, but it came up with perfumes and a bunch of other stuff!?

www.cool-notes.co.uk

[monsterjazzlick]

www.cool-notes.co.uk

Hi Oggy,

That's interesting, thanks.

So should I write UNKNOWN for the Artist now, please?

Paul

[mville]

So should I write UNKNOWN for the Artist now, please?

Why, when the artist is The Cool Notes? Does it not state the artist(s) anywhere on the CD case, artwork, CD?

[monsterjazzlick]

Why, when the artist is The Cool Notes? Does it not state the artist(s) anywhere on the CD case, artwork, CD?

mville,

Because it's a Trumpet & Saxophone Jazzband on the CD. I took a listen to Oggy's link and it is clearly not the same band!

Cheers,

Paul

[mville]

Because it's a Trumpet & Saxophone Jazzband on the CD. I took a listen to Oggy's link and it is clearly not the same band!

So no artist(s) listed? What about the CD album title? Any catalog numbers, barcodes etc?

[monsterjazzlick]

So no artist(s) listed? What about the CD album title? Any catalog numbers, barcodes etc?

mville,

Just a blank reverse side on the sleeve!

I only have the LINK I included earlier:


https://www.discogs.com/Unknown-Artist-Christmas-Jazz/release/6374457

On the CD it states: 'ILM-406'; which apparently is an abbreviation for 'I Love Music'.

The CD title is just the generic: 'Christmas Jazz'.

I think the record label just got a bunch of Jazz session musicians together and got them to jam over the twelve Xmas songs. In other words, it was a one-off session - everyone played, got paid, and went home!

Thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

The page on Discogs says ILM 046. Does the CD itself show ILM 406, or did you transpose digits?

Not that it matters much. Searching on either doesn't result in anything useful that I can see.

[monsterjazzlick]

The page on Discogs says ILM 046. Does the CD itself show ILM 406, or did you transpose digits?

Not that it matters much. Searching on either doesn't result in anything useful that I can see.

Thanks a lot for checking JH.

On the CD its '046'. My typo earlier!

Paul

[schmidj]

I have a number of CDs with no artist listed, or where the artist is some generic name, quite common for the "bargain basement" CDs, either session musicians or they bought (or stole) the material from the Caribbean steelband and just issued the CD. I have one particular one where the same tracks have been issued about 10 times with different names for the CD title and sometimes name of the band. I use "unattributed" for the artist and album artist for the cases where no or an obviously fake artist is used, I fill that in because it is part of my naming string.

I leave the composer blank in the many cases for pop Caribbean CDs (and often pop music in general) where the composer is not listed, and often even when it is, if it doesn't come up in the online databases. Someone else can go to the trouble of researching that, I have enough trouble cleaning up messed up titles and artists. One exception, Classical, there the composer is vital. And there I add the composer's name in parenthesis after the title like Fifth Symphony (Beethoven) because my portable players and car don't display the composer at all, and there are many fifth symphonies. Composers are not in my naming string, and I rarely sort on them except for classical.

I try to always fill in a genre, sometimes by track. My arbitrary choice, often by actually listening before ripping. I use a lot of semicolons in Genre so stuff appears under more than one sort when playing. For instance, Steelband; Christmas. or Rock; Christmas. If I were starting over again, I'd use style for some of this, although I'm not sure my portable player app supports it. But I'm not going to change this now on 60K tracks! Not in my naming string but I do sort to play (or not play) a particular genre.

Just my method, this is all personal preference and in my case past history.

[evasv]

If I were starting over again, I'd use style for some of this, although I'm not sure my portable player app supports it. But I'm not going to change this now on 60K tracks!

Hi monsterjazzlick & schmidj!

Me too realized that I needed Style when I had already tagged a big part of my collection... I bit the bullet and retagged, since I felt I needed to restrict Genre as I had too many. I looked at the genres allmusic use and adjusted them a little to my liking. So now I have a fixed list of genres that I obey, but allow full freedom within the Style tag instead.

When browsing my collection, I feel that sometimes I need to browse wide (genre) and sometimes I need to narrow it down (style). It's very practical to have these choices, so I'm glad I retagged.

[monsterjazzlick]

I have a number of CDs with no artist listed, or where the artist is some generic name, quite common for the "bargain basement" CDs, either session musicians or they bought (or stole) the material from the Caribbean steelband and just issued the CD. I have one particular one where the same tracks have been issued about 10 times with different names for the CD title and sometimes name of the band. I use "unattributed" for the artist and album artist for the cases where no or an obviously fake artist is used, I fill that in because it is part of my naming string.

I leave the composer blank in the many cases for pop Caribbean CDs (and often pop music in general) where the composer is not listed, and often even when it is, if it doesn't come up in the online databases. Someone else can go to the trouble of researching that, I have enough trouble cleaning up messed up titles and artists. One exception, Classical, there the composer is vital. And there I add the composer's name in parenthesis after the title like Fifth Symphony (Beethoven) because my portable players and car don't display the composer at all, and there are many fifth symphonies. Composers are not in my naming string, and I rarely sort on them except for classical.

I try to always fill in a genre, sometimes by track. My arbitrary choice, often by actually listening before ripping. I use a lot of semicolons in Genre so stuff appears under more than one sort when playing. For instance, Steelband; Christmas. or Rock; Christmas. If I were starting over again, I'd use style for some of this, although I'm not sure my portable player app supports it. But I'm not going to change this now on 60K tracks! Not in my naming string but I do sort to play (or not play) a particular genre.

Hi Schmidj,

While I actually much prefer the term "unattributed", I am going to remain consistent with the scheme I have used so far (ie. 'Unknown'). I prefer not to have more than one definition for an tag aspect which is essentially blank.

I do have quite a few CDs (possibly 100 so far) in which there is one tag aspect which is 'Unknown' (eg. Producer, Recording Date), but only 1 CD (ie. 'Christmas Jazz') where the Artist is 'Unknown'.

I tend to avoid purchasing bargain-basket CDs because I know I will crave the recording information! This 'Christmas Jazz' album fell in my lap and the only reason I am keeping it is because, rather surprisingly, the music is well above average! I am not a fan of Xmas music (I have never bought an Xmas album myself) but just in case I need to provide something of this genre (for whatever reason) then at least I have something to offer. And because it's Jazz I actually don't mind it so much.

I do use GENRE and STYLE tags on every rip. The latter being particularly handy. But with only one value in each.

I have not got around to ripping my Classical collection yet. Going to be a job for next year at this rate ...

Thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi monsterjazzlick & schmidj!

Me too realized that I needed Style when I had already tagged a big part of my collection... I bit the bullet and retagged, since I felt I needed to restrict Genre as I had too many. I looked at the genres allmusic use and adjusted them a little to my liking. So now I have a fixed list of genres that I obey, but allow full freedom within the Style tag instead.

When browsing my collection, I feel that sometimes I need to browse wide (genre) and sometimes I need to narrow it down (style). It's very practical to have these choices, so I'm glad I retagged.

Hi evasv,

Out of interest, how many different Genres do you have?

[evasv]

Hi evasv,

Out of interest, how many different Genres do you have?

These are my genres:

Avant-Garde
Blues
Children's
Classical
Comedy
Country
Easy Listening
Electronic
Ethnic
Folk
Holiday
International
Jazz
Latin
Miscellaneous
New Age
Pop/Rock
R&B
Rap
Reggae
Religious
Stage & Screen
Vocal


So it adds up to 23 genres, but I don't yet use all of them. Do you have more or less?

I took the genres from Allmusic.com, but I think I added Ethnic and Miscellaneous. The latter because I have some odd albums with bird songs and technical CD's for HiFi testing etc.

Allmusic don't separate Pop from Rock, and I struggled with this. I was used to separate them, but realized that Pop/Rock is actually better for me. As these two genres blend into each other so much, I prefer to have them listed together when I browse. But I have them separated in the Style tag instead, in case I want to browse for Rock only.

I also struggled with Opera, which I saw as a genre before, but now degraded to a style. In the end I submitted to the fact that Opera is actually a sub-genre to Classical. The logic is better this way, even if my previous feeling didn't agree. My feeling has now matured, and agrees with my logic.

I don't know if Allmusic invented this list or if it's widely used, but I think it works well as "top domain" for every sub-genre (=style) that I can think of. It works for me since I have music from most of these genres, but if you only have pop, rock and jazz it wouldn't be practical of course.

One advantage with this list is that it's easy to "nail" the genre. I never think twice before populating this tag, so I always know that it's accurate. Not so easy with the Style tag, but I'm much less worried about accuracy there and use multiples if I'm uncertain.

Another thing I like is that I can browse Genre > Jazz > Style and be presented with a list of my jazz styles only.

Dear monsterjazzlick, I hope I haven't polluted your thread too much with this OT babble...

[monsterjazzlick]

Dear monsterjazzlick, I hope I haven't polluted your thread too much with this OT babble...

Evasv,

It's not really OT, thanks. Though you may want to start your own thread if the discussion begins to widen further.

Personally, I avoid AllMusic because I have found it has very little to offer and is highly inaccurate when the data is cross-referenced. However, I have only ripped my Jazz GENRE so far and so it may be different for other musics? I do refer to Discogs quite often for further information (esp. Release Dates).

Paul.

[Oggy]

These are my genres:

Avant-Garde
Blues
Children's
Classical
Comedy
Country
Easy Listening
Electronic
Ethnic
Folk
Holiday
International
Jazz
Latin
Miscellaneous
New Age
Pop/Rock
R&B
Rap
Reggae
Religious
Stage & Screen
Vocal


So it adds up to 23 genres, but I don't yet use all of them. Do you have more or less?

I took the genres from Allmusic.com, but I think I added Ethnic and Miscellaneous. The latter because I have some odd albums with bird songs and technical CD's for HiFi testing etc.

Allmusic don't separate Pop from Rock, and I struggled with this. I was used to separate them, but realized that Pop/Rock is actually better for me. As these two genres blend into each other so much, I prefer to have them listed together when I browse. But I have them separated in the Style tag instead, in case I want to browse for Rock only.

I also struggled with Opera, which I saw as a genre before, but now degraded to a style. In the end I submitted to the fact that Opera is actually a sub-genre to Classical. The logic is better this way, even if my previous feeling didn't agree. My feeling has now matured, and agrees with my logic.

I don't know if Allmusic invented this list or if it's widely used, but I think it works well as "top domain" for every sub-genre (=style) that I can think of. It works for me since I have music from most of these genres, but if you only have pop, rock and jazz it wouldn't be practical of course.

One advantage with this list is that it's easy to "nail" the genre. I never think twice before populating this tag, so I always know that it's accurate. Not so easy with the Style tag, but I'm much less worried about accuracy there and use multiples if I'm uncertain.

Another thing I like is that I can browse Genre > Jazz > Style and be presented with a list of my jazz styles only.

Dear monsterjazzlick, I hope I haven't polluted your thread too much with this OT babble...

Thanks for the reply, and Paul, sorry about going off tangent in your thread (and for the wrong Cool Notes link! :eek:).

The ultimate answer to my number of Genres?

42

Rather than muddle Paul's thread further, I will start a new one in General, titled, Genre / Style.

[monsterjazzlick]

Rather than muddle Paul's thread further, I will start a new one in General, titled, Genre / Style.

OK, cheers. Thanks a lot. Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

If you want to sort by surname, it has to come first. A Williams, Tony, Lifetime tag would work fine; adding The at the end is superfluous, as it doesn't change the sort order.

Hi JH,

I am ripping my Herbie Hancock CDs now. I wanted to check please, for his album 'Head Hunters':


https://www.discogs.com/Herbie-Hancock-Head-Hunters/release/31381

ALBUM = Head Hunters

ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Head Hunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Head Hunters

'Head Hunters' is the name of the band, and I would like the ARTIST SORT tag to sort via 'Hancock' (ie. his surname).

Thankfully there is no 'The' preceding the band name! Personally - grammatically speaking - I believe it should be: 'Herbie Hancock's Head Hunters' (ie. because it is belonging to).

Many thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi JH,

I am ripping my Herbie Hancock CDs now. I wanted to check please, for his album 'Head Hunters':


https://www.discogs.com/Herbie-Hancock-Head-Hunters/release/31381

ALBUM = Head Hunters

ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Head Hunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Head Hunters

'Head Hunters' is the name of the band, and I would like the ARTIST SORT tag to sort via 'Hancock' (ie. his surname).

Thankfully there is no 'The' preceding the band name! Personally - grammatically speaking - I believe it should be: 'Herbie Hancock's Head Hunters' (ie. because it is belonging to).

Many thanks,

Paul

Hi Paul,

Head Hunters is a great album!

Do you also use Album Artist = Herbie Hancock, and Sort = Hancock, Herbie, or do you not see this as a Herbie Hancock album?

[monsterjazzlick]

Head Hunters is a great album!

Do you also use Album Artist = Herbie Hancock, and Sort = Hancock, Herbie, or do you not see this as a Herbie Hancock album?

Hi Oggy,

Yes, it's a classic album! (Genre = Jazz; Style = Funk.)


ALBUM ARTIST = Herbie Hancock

ALBUM ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie

So my question really only applies to ARTIST and ARTIST SORT, please.

Thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi JH,

I am ripping my Herbie Hancock CDs now. I wanted to check please, for his album 'Head Hunters':


https://www.discogs.com/Herbie-Hancock-Head-Hunters/release/31381

ALBUM = Head Hunters

ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Head Hunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Head Hunters

'Head Hunters' is the name of the band, and I would like the ARTIST SORT tag to sort via 'Hancock' (ie. his surname).

Thankfully there is no 'The' preceding the band name! Personally - grammatically speaking - I believe it should be: 'Herbie Hancock's Head Hunters' (ie. because it is belonging to).

Many thanks,

Paul
Hi Paul,

Artist = Herbie Hancock, Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock Herbie, Headhunters

Is how I see it.

If it was The Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock, Herbie, Headhunters, The

[Jailhouse]

Hi JH,

I am ripping my Herbie Hancock CDs now. I wanted to check please, for his album 'Head Hunters':


https://www.discogs.com/Herbie-Hancock-Head-Hunters/release/31381

ALBUM = Head Hunters

ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Head Hunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Head Hunters

'Head Hunters' is the name of the band, and I would like the ARTIST SORT tag to sort via 'Hancock' (ie. his surname).

Thankfully there is no 'The' preceding the band name! Personally - grammatically speaking - I believe it should be: 'Herbie Hancock's Head Hunters' (ie. because it is belonging to).

Herbie Hancock is the artist, and the album name is "Head Hunters." In the accompanying CD booklet, the players (including Hancock) are listed under the header "The Herbie Hancock Group." Nowhere do I see any indication of a "Head Hunters" band name. Even the Discogs page you linked to gives the artist name as simply "Herbie Hancock."

[Oggy]

Hi Paul,

Artist = Herbie Hancock, Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock Herbie, Headhunters

Is how I see it.

If it was The Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock, Herbie, Headhunters, The


Herbie Hancock is the artist, and the album name is "Head Hunters." In the accompanying CD booklet, the players (including Hancock) are listed under the header "The Herbie Hancock Group." Nowhere do I see any indication of a "Head Hunters" band name. Even the Discogs page you linked to gives the artist name as simply "Herbie Hancock."

In Wikipedia the comments about the Head Hunter album read, "For the new album, Hancock assembled a new band, the Headhunters....."

This name may, or may not come about later.

I tagged mine simply as Herbie Hancock, BUT, unlike Paul, I am very much a casual jazz fan.

[monsterjazzlick]

Herbie Hancock is the artist, and the album name is "Head Hunters." In the accompanying CD booklet, the players (including Hancock) are listed under the header "The Herbie Hancock Group." Nowhere do I see any indication of a "Head Hunters" band name. Even the Discogs page you linked to gives the artist name as simply "Herbie Hancock."

Hi JH,

Technically you are absolutely correct. But, in the jazz world, everyone says Hancock's 'Headhunters' band.

In the 1970s, H.H. had three bands (you probably knew that already): and so - for the sake of convenience I suppose - when conversing people use 'Headhunters' to pinpoint exactly which unit they are talking about.

The other two bands he led during the 1970's were 'VSOP' and 'Mwandishi'; so by stating 'Headhunter's helps one to differentiate.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nO7iZM9E-qX9NDZZR1PXKjQ5lwruZOzs/view?usp=sharing

Thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

Hi JH,

Technically you are absolutely correct. But, in the jazz world, everyone says Hancock's 'Headhunters' band.

In the 1970s, H.H. had three bands (you probably knew that already): and so - for the sake of convenience I suppose - when conversing people use 'Headhunters' to pinpoint exactly which unit they are talking about.

The other two bands he led during the 1970's were 'VSOP' and 'Mwandishi'; so by stating 'Headhunter's helps one to differentiate.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nO7iZM9E-qX9NDZZR1PXKjQ5lwruZOzs/view?usp=sharing

Okay, I checked further. (Thanks for the link, Oggy!) According to Wikipedia, Hancock formed The Headhunters in 1973 to record the Head Hunters album. Given the liner notes, I'm guessing the idea to call the group 'The Headhunters' came after the album was released and sold roughly a bazillion copies, and they decided to record together again. I'm going to stick with the 'Herbie Hancock' tag. :)

Excerpts from Wikipedia:


In 1975, The Headhunters recorded Survival of the Fittest, their first album without Hancock. [...]

As the 1970s turned to the 1980s, Hancock drifted away from the band as he moved into his electro-oriented phase, and they ceased operation as a visible unit. The band reunited with Hancock for the 1998 album Return of the Headhunters.


So, for Hancock, The Headhunters was a sometimes thing. Not that he was the first, or last, to work that way; musicians in general, and jazz musicians in particular, are wont to be a rather flighty bunch.

Paul, thanks for the information about the other bands. I didn't know about them, as Head Hunters is the only Herbie Hancock release I own to date. I might, in time, add some of his 'electro-oriented' work.

[monsterjazzlick]

Okay, I checked further. (Thanks for the link, Oggy!) According to Wikipedia, Hancock formed The Headhunters in 1973 to record the Head Hunters album. Given the liner notes, I'm guessing the idea to call the group 'The Headhunters' came after the album was released and sold roughly a bazillion copies, and they decided to record together again. I'm going to stick with the 'Herbie Hancock' tag.

So, for Hancock, The Headhunters was a sometimes thing. Not that he was the first, or last, to work that way; musicians in general, and jazz musicians in particular, are wont to be a rather flighty bunch.

Paul, thanks for the information about the other bands. I didn't know about them, as Head Hunters is the only Herbie Hancock release I own to date. I might, in time, add some of his 'electro-oriented' work.

Hi JH,

Thanks for your very informative reply. We all learn from each other; it's what makes the world (or even the www) go round!

If you want any recommendations on Hancock's material then I can advise what might be a good path (and path to avoid!). But of course You-Tube is your more immediate friend and I am sure you are blessed with a good set of ears!

I only knew that the H.H. band was called 'The Headhunters' from reading the Miles Davis biography. He mentions how he had to often play support band to The Headhunters in the 70s when he (Davis) was losing popularity. Not that he was offended, but rather that he was obviously used to being the main-act. Otherwise, I was like you in that I thought it was just the name of an album. Yes, it probably was a money spinner.

Very interestingly, and you have just made me notice this!, Chick Corea's FIRST 'Return To Forever' album was called 'Return To Forever'! And Corea took it a stage further and called the opening song 'Return To Forever'. More money/royalties for L.Ron Hubbard I guess!

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Artist = Herbie Hancock, Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock Herbie, Headhunters

Is how I see it.

If it was The Headhunters

Artist Sort = Hancock, Herbie, Headhunters, The

Hi Oggy,

I decided to lose the 'The'. Not sure if Hancock ever intended it to be there ever?; I don't think he did.

And so it is tagged as:


ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Headhunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Headhunters

I saw it a little different to yourself regarding the placement of the commas. This fits with how I have named bands of similar ilk (please see: 'Tony Williams Lifetime' post {earlier in this thread}).

Paul

[Jailhouse]

Hi Oggy,

I decided to lose the 'The'. Not sure if Hancock ever intended it to be there ever?; I don't think he did.

And so it is tagged as:


ARTIST = Herbie Hancock Headhunters

ARTIST SORT = Hancock, Herbie, Headhunters

I saw it a little different to yourself regarding the placement of the commas. This fits with how I have named bands of similar ilk (please see: 'Tony Williams Lifetime' post {earlier in this thread}).

For what it's worth, Wikipedia lists the band as The Headhunters.

I doubt that the lack of commas will negatively affect sorts very often. Even when it does happen, it would be easy to fix.

[monsterjazzlick]

I doubt that the lack of commas will negatively affect sorts very often. Even when it does happen, it would be easy to fix.

Hi JH,

Yes, that is correct. But, as you will of course know, Wiki is often wrong!; I am making corrections to the site on a daily basis!

Even CD liner notes are often inaccurate (esp. 60s/70s Miles Davis).

I am at the stage now where I sometimes twist things slightly in order to make them fit perfectly within my naming-scheme.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have an album which is a joint artist:


'Live At Carnegie Hall' - Dizzy Gillespie & Charlie Parker Quintet

I am really not sure, please, what would be the best approach here?

I don't want to create a tag:


Dizzy Gillespie & Charlie Parker Quintet

I would prefer there to be two ALBUM ARTISTS, so:


Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

And for ARTIST SORT:


Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

BUT, to include the ensemble-size '(Quintet)' - which I always place in brackets - would the best method be to tag as:


ARTIST = Dizzy Gillespie (Quintet); Charlie Parker (Quintet)

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy, (Quintet); Parker, Charlie, (Quintet)

ALBUM ARTIST= Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

Basically, I would be tagging the ARTIST as though it is two separate bandleaders. I believe this would be the best way for me to maintain consistency with my scheming to date.

Many thanks,

Paul

[mville]

I would prefer there to be two ALBUM ARTISTS, so:

Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

And for ARTIST SORT:

Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

Don't you mean ALBUM ARTIST SORT and not ARTIST SORT?

[monsterjazzlick]

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

Corrected typo:


ARTIST = Dizzy Gillespie (Quintet); Charlie Parker (Quintet)

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy, (Quintet); Parker, Charlie, (Quintet)

ALBUM ARTIST SORT= Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

[mville]

I don't want to create a tag:


Dizzy Gillespie & Charlie Parker Quintet

I would prefer there to be two ALBUM ARTISTS, so:


Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

And for ARTIST SORT:


Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

BUT, to include the ensemble-size '(Quintet)' - which I always place in brackets - would the best method be to tag as:


ARTIST = Dizzy Gillespie (Quintet); Charlie Parker (Quintet)

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy, (Quintet); Parker, Charlie, (Quintet)

ALBUM ARTIST= Dizzy Gillespie; Charlie Parker

ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy; Parker, Charlie

Basically, I would be tagging the ARTIST as though it is two separate bandleaders. I believe this would be the best way for me to maintain consistency with my scheming to date.

If you don't want Artist = Dizzy Gillespie & Charlie Parker Quintet, but 2 Artists, then:
Artist = Dizzy Gillespie (Quintet); Charlie Parker (Quintet) looks fine.

In this case, I would then have ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy (Quintet); Parker, Charlie (Quintet)

[monsterjazzlick]

If you don't want Artist = Dizzy Gillespie & Charlie Parker Quintet, but 2 Artists, then:
Artist = Dizzy Gillespie (Quintet); Charlie Parker (Quintet) looks fine.

In this case, I would then have ARTIST SORT = Gillespie, Dizzy (Quintet); Parker, Charlie (Quintet)

That's great, I will have a mess around. Many thanks.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I am finally down to ripping the last Artist (Weather Report) of the Jazz section in my CD collection.

Many of their albums (from 1970~1985) where recorded in different sessions. However, some spill over into the next year. And so, 'Mysterious Traveller' was recorded in: 1973 to 1974 (I don't ever bother with 'months'). The problem is that I am not able to source the year in which each individual track was recorded (I have searched high and low).

Therefore, my question is, please, what would you state in the YEAR field (this value would be for ALL tracks)?:


YEAR = 1973, 1974

YEAR = 1973 \ 1974

YEAR = 1973~1974

The punctuations I have used so far in my tagging scheme are:


, ; \ ~

Many Thanks,

Paul

[mville]

Many of their albums (from 1970~1985) where recorded in different sessions. However, some spill over into the next year. And so, 'Mysterious Traveller' was recorded in: 1973 to 1974 (I don't ever bother with 'months'). The problem is that I am not able to source the year in which each individual track was recorded (I have searched high and low).

Therefore, my question is, please, what would you state in the YEAR field (this value would be for ALL tracks)?:
YEAR = 1973, 1974

YEAR = 1973 \ 1974

YEAR = 1973~1974


Difficult to answer this, as your use of YEAR is non-standard. Most users will populate YEAR with the CD release data or the Original Album release date, which is a single year.

Also, I'm not sure what issues you will run into with software, which might expect a single date in the usual formats e.g. yyyy, yyyy-mm-dd, dd-mm-yyyy etc.

I think you'll have to experiment yourself and see what you get in your server/player software(s).

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi mville,

OK, I see.

What if I had all of the YEAR tags containing just one single entry (ie. the album was RELEASED [eg. 1968]); and then a self-created RECORDED tag containing the year(s) the album was RECORDED?

Knowing both the RELEASE and RECORDED YEARS are both important to me.

Thanks,

Paul

[garym]

Hi mville,

OK, I see.

What if I had all of the YEAR tags containing just one single entry (ie. the album was RELEASED [eg. 1968]); and then a self-created RECORDED tag containing the year(s) the album was RECORDED?

Knowing both the RELEASE and RECORDED YEARS are both important to me.

Thanks,

Paul


this makes more sense to me.

[monsterjazzlick]

this makes more sense to me.

Hi Gary,

Therefore, my question now is, please, what would you state in the self-created RECORDED field (this value would be for ALL tracks on a CD)?:


RECORDED = 1973, 1974

RECORDED = 1973 \ 1974

RECORDED = 1973~1974

The punctuations I have used so far in my tagging scheme are:


, ; \ ~

Thanks, a lot

Paul

[Jailhouse]

How about RECORDED = 1973-1974? That's a standard way of displaying a range of years.

[monsterjazzlick]

How about RECORDED = 1973-1974? That's a standard way of displaying a range of years.

Nice one JH,

I will settle for that!

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

How about RECORDED = 1973-1974? That's a standard way of displaying a range of years.


agree

[monsterjazzlick]

agree

Cheers Gary. I have gone with that. Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

For 95%+ of my CD rips I am content with knowing just the PRODUCER. However, with the band 'Weather Report', I am most interested in their production side of things:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Report

(Keyboardist) Joe Zawinul produced every album they made, but almost all of these albums had co-producers (who where always a band-member).

So, would you include the Co-Producers within the Producer field?:


PRODUCER = Joe Zawinul, Wayne Shorter, Jaco Pastorious

Or, would you create an exclusive tag here:


CO-PRODUCER = Wayne Shorter, Jaco Pastorious

As I say, this is only going to be for albums by 'Weather Report'.

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

[W]ould you include the Co-Producers within the Producer field?:


PRODUCER = Joe Zawinul, Wayne Shorter, Jaco Pastorious

Or, would you create an exclusive tag here:


CO-PRODUCER = Wayne Shorter, Jaco Pastorious

As I say, this is only going to be for albums by 'Weather Report'.

Unless you foresee using it for other than Weather Report, I wouldn't bother with creating a new tag. It wouldn't be difficult to add the tag later if you change your mind.

[monsterjazzlick]

Unless you foresee using it for other than Weather Report, I wouldn't bother with creating a new tag. It wouldn't be difficult to add the tag later if you change your mind.

Hi JH,

Correct, it would only be exclusively for this single band.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

How about RECORDED = 1973-1974? That's a standard way of displaying a range of years.

Hi JH,

I have made the adjustments.

Do you think searching by YEAR will be OK with this scheme? Foobar seems to be fine at least.

Cheers,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

a

[Jailhouse]

Do you think searching by YEAR will be OK with this scheme? Foobar seems to be fine at least.

I only considered the information, not searching on it.

A search of "1973" or "1974" or "1973-1974" should match RECORDED=1973-1974. "1973 1974" (note the space) should also match, as both of the query words are found in the tag. Searching with a query of "1973 1975" would fail as far as RECORDED is concerned because the tag doesn't include the second year.

This assumes that matches are found if all the words in the query are found in the data being searched. As an example, searching my foobar library for "Tom MP3" gives me a single result: the release on MP3 of Major Tom by Shiny Toy Guns. I don't get anything from Tom Grant or Tom Middleton, or Major Tom from David Bowie or Peter Schilling, because I don't have tracks in MP3 format for any of those artists.

[monsterjazzlick]

I only considered the information, not searching on it.

A search of "1973" or "1974" or "1973-1974" should match RECORDED=1973-1974. "1973 1974" (note the space) should also match, as both of the query words are found in the tag. Searching with a query of "1973 1975" would fail as far as RECORDED is concerned because the tag doesn't include the second year.

This assumes that matches are found if all the words in the query are found in the data being searched. As an example, searching my foobar library for "Tom MP3" gives me a single result: the release on MP3 of Major Tom by Shiny Toy Guns. I don't get anything from Tom Grant or Tom Middleton, or Major Tom from David Bowie or Peter Schilling, because I don't have tracks in MP3 format for any of those artists.

Thanks JH,

That's very interesting.

I had not thought of a scenario where one might search for an album spanning a 2 year period, but with the query only including one of the years.

Also, I had not considered searching for a file-format; although I only have FLACs in my collection to date, and it is fairly likely to remain that way as far as I foresee.

Cheers,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

I had not considered searching for a file-format; although I only have FLACs in my collection to date, and it is fairly likely to remain that way as far as I foresee.

Foobar searches all the metadata. (Maybe there is an exception, but I don't know of any.) I knew I had a version of Major Tom in MP3 and could count on it being the only result of a "Tom MP3" search, making it an excellent example.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

If one has a track which is a MEDLEY of multiple songs and multiple composers, then what would be the best way to tag this, please?

Let's say it's a film-score medley:


Track 1 - The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King

Elton John; Eminem; Bruce Springsteen; Pharrell;Elton John

As you can see, the opening and closing tracks are composed by Elton John.

And so, would you list the COMPOSER tag as:


Elton John; Eminem; Bruce Springsteen; Pharrell; Elton John

or,


Elton John; Eminem; Bruce Springsteen; Pharrell

The latter omits the second contribution by EJ.

Many thanks,

Paul

[Jailhouse]

By omitting the second Elton John mention, the list of songs and composers don't match up. That could be confusing, as one can't infer who wrote the last song of the medley, or even that the last song is the one missing its composer.

If knowing who composed each song isn't important, leaving out the duplicate name isn't a problem.

[mville]

By omitting the second Elton John mention, the list of songs and composers don't match up. That could be confusing, as one can't infer who wrote the last song of the medley, or even that the last song is the one missing its composer.

If knowing who composed each song isn't important, leaving out the duplicate name isn't a problem.

... and if a song has more than one composer, you won't know for sure, which composer wrote which song anyway, so I just list all composers, with no duplicates.

[monsterjazzlick]

By omitting the second Elton John mention, the list of songs and composers don't match up. That could be confusing, as one can't infer who wrote the last song of the medley, or even that the last song is the one missing its composer.

If knowing who composed each song isn't important, leaving out the duplicate name isn't a problem.

Cheers JH,

Well the real problem arises when the duplicate composer has composer two of the middle-placed songs! Then it gets really confusing!

But I wanted to check what someone else's opinion (like yourself) was before typing everything in. With Miles Davis and Weather Report, much of their LIVE repertoire consisted of MEDLEYS, so your advice is helpful.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

... and if a song has more than one composer, you won't know for sure, which composer wrote which song anyway, so I just list all composers, with no duplicates.

Hi mville,

I was just concerned about the COMPOSER list being too long; hence trying to economise on real estate.

Cheers,

Paul

[garym]

Hi mville,

I was just concerned about the COMPOSER list being too long; hence trying to economise on real estate.

Cheers,

Paul

why does it matter how long it is? it is mostly there as a basis for searches in your database.

[monsterjazzlick]

why does it matter how long it is? it is mostly there as a basis for searches in your database.

Hi Gary,

Because I noticed when I first started ripping that there seemed to be a maximum amount of characters for certain fields? I think it was for the folder-name/file-path though, now I think back?

Paul

[garym]

Hi Gary,

Because I noticed when I first started ripping that there seemed to be a maximum amount of characters for certain fields? I think it was for the folder-name/file-path though, now I think back?

Paul

file names and path may be limited to something like 254. But the limit (if any) for tag data should be WAY higher. So you can have lots more info in tags. File length in windows files and tag metadata are two very different things.

[monsterjazzlick]

file names and path may be limited to something like 254. But the limit (if any) for tag data should be WAY higher. So you can have lots more info in tags. File length in windows files and tag metadata are two very different things.

Gary,

Yes, I think it was the '254' we increased it to a few months back.

Maybe it was Windoze that chopped of some of the longer names in my titles/artists.

If you have a MEDLEY (lets use the same model as earlier):


TITLE: The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King

COMPOSER: Elton John; Eminem; Bruce Springsteen; Pharrell; Elton John

... and you ran a search for (say) 'Pharrell'. Then would the result be the ENTIRE medley (ie. The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King)? I mean, it is not going to decipher the buried track "Happy" is it?

Thanks,

Paul

[garym]

. and you ran a search for (say) 'Pharrell'. Then would the result be the ENTIRE medley (ie. The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King)? I mean, it is not going to decipher the buried track "Happy" is it?

Thanks,

Paul

yes. Correct. But if I search for songs named happy, it would find this medley.

[monsterjazzlick]

yes. Correct. But if I search for songs named happy, it would find this medley.

OK, gotcha. Cheers.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

If the composer of all of the songs which form the MEDLEY is the same, then I assume there is no point in listing him/her multiple times? eg:


TITLE: Don't Let The Sun~Rocket Man~Don't Go Breaking My Heart~Song For Guy

COMPOSER: Elton John; Elton John; Elton John; Elton John

Thanks,

Paul

[garym]

Hi,

If the composer of all of the songs which form the MEDLEY is the same, then I assume there is no point in listing him/her multiple times? eg:

TITLE: Don't Let The Sun~Rocket Man~Don't Go Breaking My Heart~Song For Guy

COMPOSER: Elton John; Elton John; Elton John; Elton John

Thanks,

Paul

If you list multiple times in this case, I think we should send the OCD police to your house to have you committed. :eek:

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have a boxset consisting entirely of UNISSUED material by 'Weather Report':


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legendary_Live_Tapes:_1978%E2%80%931981

One of the tracks (Track 3, CD 2) is a Drum-Solo but the location is unknown. The liner notes state:


"either Long Beach, Santa Monica, Berkeley or Phoenix (24, 25, 26, 28 November)"

Therefore, what should I state in my VENUE tag, please? (I am not bothered with the dates.)

Thanks,

Paul

(EDIT: fixed LINK.)

[evasv]

I would write Unknown in the VENUE tag and write additional info in the COMMENT tag.

Or maybe, instead of Long Beach/Santa Monica/Berkeley/Phoenix you could use something wider, like USA.

[monsterjazzlick]

I would write Unknown (or maybe something wider like USA) in the VENUE tag and write additional info in the COMMENT tag

Hi evasv,

I have chosen to not use the COMMENTS field a while back; so I would prefer to not break consistency here if possible, thanks.

I was thinking something like:


Long Beach / Santa Monica / Berkeley / Phoenix

... but theoretically - of course - this is not correct as it implies the track was recorded (LIVE!) in FOUR locations!

Perhaps I may be better off with: 'UNKNOWN'.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

If you list multiple times in this case, I think we should send the OCD police to your house to have you committed. :eek:

Ha ha. Maybe I am taking it all a bit too seriously!

[evasv]

Maybe "Long Beach or Santa Monica or Berkeley or Phoenix" ?

Doesn't look cool but at least it contains all the info.

[monsterjazzlick]

Maybe "Long Beach or Santa Monica or Berkeley or Phoenix" ?

Doesn't look cool but at least it contains all the info.

Hi evasv,

Will this interfere with searches?

Paul

[evasv]

Well the real problem arises when the duplicate composer has composer two of the middle-placed songs! Then it gets really confusing!


If you have a MEDLEY (lets use the same model as earlier):


TITLE: The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King

COMPOSER: Elton John; Eminem; Bruce Springsteen; Pharrell; Elton John

... and you ran a search for (say) 'Pharrell'. Then would the result be the ENTIRE medley (ie. The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King)? I mean, it is not going to decipher the buried track "Happy" is it?


I'm not sure you realize that if you tag like that in the software, it would be written like this in the metadata:

TITLE=The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King
COMPOSER=Elton John
COMPOSER=Eminem
COMPOSER=Bruce Springsteen
COMPOSER=Pharrell
COMPOSER=Elton John

The duplication of Elton John is unnecessary though, and the order in which the composers are written doesn't matter since they all relate to the whole title, not the medley parts.

The tagging software, and also the server and the player, doesn't know that this is a medley. It's just one title with four separate composers.

[evasv]

Hi evasv,

Will this interfere with searches?

Paul

No, I think it will be ok to search for e.g. Berkeley (if you can search within the VENUE tag in the software).

[monsterjazzlick]

I'm not sure you realize that if you tag like that in the software, it would be written like this in the metadata:

TITLE=The Muse~Lose Yourself~The Wrestler~Happy~The Lion King
COMPOSER=Elton John
COMPOSER=Eminem
COMPOSER=Bruce Springsteen
COMPOSER=Pharrell
COMPOSER=Elton John

The duplication of Elton John is unnecessary though, and the order in which the composers are written doesn't matter since they all relate to the whole title, not the medley parts.

The tagging software, and also the server and the player, doesn't know that this is a medley. It's just one title with four separate composers.

Thanks a lot evasv,

I thought that something like that would be how the metadata was handled, but seeing it written down - as you have done - has really helped me to visualise it.

On my new Sony Walkman (which was faulty and recently returned/refunded), I am sure it listed all of the COMPOSERS of a MEDLEY, and in the same ORDER I had typed them in (ie. as per above MEDLEY example); which is why I have been maintaining the order of COMPOSER/SONG.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

No, I think it will be ok to search for e.g. Berkeley (if you can search within the VENUE tag in the software).

Foobar lets me search for 'Berkeley' (location) and comes up with the correct track; so that's good!

[evasv]

On my new Sony Walkman (which was faulty and recently returned/refunded), I am sure it listed all of the COMPOSERS of a MEDLEY, and in the same ORDER I had typed them in (ie. as per above MEDLEY example); which is why I have been maintaining the order of COMPOSER/SONG.


Every tag value has a place in the metadata, so you could say that there is the first placed composer and the second placed composer and so on. When listed, the could appear in that place order, or alphabetically. But the order doesn't relate to a certain part of the title/track.

The place order could also be changed if you edit the tags or if you are using more than one tagging software (the metadata could be rewritten by the second software).

[monsterjazzlick]

Every tag value has a place in the metadata, so you could say that there is the first placed composer and the second placed composer and so on. When listed, the could appear in that place order, or alphabetically. But the order doesn't relate to a certain part of the title/track.

OK, I see. That's great, thanks.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I have a CD by Tony Bennett called "Duets":


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duets_II_(Tony_Bennett_album)

I am not sure how to tag the ARTIST SORT for the shared track with vocalist K. D. Lang, please?

I have:


ARTIST: Tony Bennett; K. D. Lang

But for ARTIST SORT, what do I state for the latter, please?:


ARTIST SORT: Bennett, Tony; Lang ...

Many thanks,

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi,

I have a CD by Tony Bennett called "Duets":


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duets_II_(Tony_Bennett_album)

I am not sure how to tag the ARTIST SORT for the shared track with vocalist K. D. Lang, please?

I have:


ARTIST: Tony Bennett; K. D. Lang

But for ARTIST SORT, what do I state for the latter, please?:


ARTIST SORT: Bennett, Tony; Lang ...

Many thanks,

Paul

Hi Paul,

Bennett, Tony; Lang, K.D.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi Paul,

Bennett, Tony; Lang, K.D.

That's great Oggy.

Will sort it now ...

[monsterjazzlick]

Maybe "Long Beach or Santa Monica or Berkeley or Phoenix" ?

Doesn't look cool but at least it contains all the info.

Hi,

I have the same question with Tony Bennett's "Duets', please:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duets_II_(Tony_Bennett_album)

Obviously the Mariah Carey and Andrea Bocelli tracks were recorded in their respective studios:


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x6m0hbsrTWeYk3ANQrZikUK4xAOL0CdD/view?usp=sharing

But for the remainder of tracks (all 15!), I think I will have to list the VENUE tag similar to that of the 'Weather Report' CD (above evasv quote).

Thanks,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

... which would look something like!:


VENUE = Abbey Road Studios, London or Avatar Studios, New York or Bennett Studios, New Jersey or Ben's Studio, Nashville or Capitol Studios, Hollywood or Henson Recording Studios, Hollywood

[evasv]

That looks ok (but you are missing some studios which you probably are aware of).

Maybe replacing "or" with "??" for better readability?

Abbey Road Studios, London ?? Avatar Studios, New York ?? Bennett Studios, New Jersey ?? Ben's Studio, Nashville ?? ...


But to be honest, that's an awful lot of studios in one tag. With so many uncertain entries, you'll get many inaccurate search results.

Personally, I'd settle for "Unknown" until I could verify the studios. Your choice though.

[garym]

Will you ever be searching on studio name? There's lots of stuff you may want to know about an album/recording. In some cases (particularly lots of unreleased live shows I have), I simply have a *.txt file that is saved in the same subdirectory of the album audio tracks. This txt file has information about the show, guest artists, venue info, info on who recorded it, etc. I can't search in my player on info in the txt file, but if I want to know something about the album, I can open this and read it. See for example,
https://ia902309.us.archive.org/35/items/Alejandro_Escovedo2014-08-09.AlejandroEscovedo2014-08-09/AlejandroEscovedo2014-08-09CactusCafeAustinTxMatrixInfo.txt

[Jailhouse]

All those possible studios, but no definitive information; it could be any of them, or none. If you really feel the need to list them all in a tag, you might want to use "Unknown" as suggested by evasv and list the studios in parentheses, prepended with "Possible:" or "Possibly" or something similar. And maybe use the pipe character to separate them. Like so...


Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London | Avatar Studios, New York | Bennett Studios, New Jersey | Ben's Studio, Nashville)

This way, you can see immediately that whatever information is there is only speculation.

[monsterjazzlick]

Will you ever be searching on studio name? There's lots of stuff you may want to know about an album/recording. In some cases (particularly lots of unreleased live shows I have), I simply have a *.txt file that is saved in the same subdirectory of the album audio tracks. This txt file has information about the show, guest artists, venue info, info on who recorded it, etc. I can't search in my player on info in the txt file, but if I want to know something about the album, I can open this and read it. See for example,
https://ia902309.us.archive.org/35/items/Alejandro_Escovedo2014-08-09.AlejandroEscovedo2014-08-09/AlejandroEscovedo2014-08-09CactusCafeAustinTxMatrixInfo.txt

Hi Gary,

Well for most of my 'artists;' the studio/location is something I am very interested in.

As I said a few months back, I do miss the sleeve-notes and LP covers which you could read like a book! So your *.txt file idea is excellent. But I don't think I would have the time and energy to compile such docs for my library; as I would like to have this *.txt file for ALL CDs. I am aged 50 next year; but if I was (say) 20, then I would definitely have created these because I would probably have another 50 years listening left!

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

That looks ok (but you are missing some studios which you probably are aware of).

Maybe replacing "or" with "??" for better readability?

Abbey Road Studios, London ?? Avatar Studios, New York ?? Bennett Studios, New Jersey ?? Ben's Studio, Nashville ?? ...


But to be honest, that's an awful lot of studios in one tag. With so many uncertain entries, you'll get many inaccurate search results.

Personally, I'd settle for "Unknown" until I could verify the studios. Your choice though.

Evasv,

Yes, I agree it's a lot of info in a single tag!

I would prefer to not use the "??" if possible, thanks.

I will consider the "unknown" option if I am not able to arrive at something more suitable.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

All those possible studios, but no definitive information; it could be any of them, or none. If you really feel the need to list them all in a tag, you might want to use "Unknown" as suggested by evasv and list the studios in parentheses, prepended with "Possible:" or "Possibly" or something similar. And maybe use the pipe character to separate them. Like so...


Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London | Avatar Studios, New York | Bennett Studios, New Jersey | Ben's Studio, Nashville)

This way, you can see immediately that whatever information is there is only speculation.

Thanks JH,

I think your suggestion is the closest to what I am looking for as an all time solution, thanks.

How about if I tweaked it and made it:


Possibly: Abbey Road Studios, London / Avatar Studios, New York / Bennett Studios, New Jersey / Ben's Studio, Nashville

I have used the '/' instead of the pipe throughout my VENUE/LOCATION and RECORD-LABEL tags.

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London | Avatar Studios, New York | Bennett Studios, New Jersey | Ben's Studio, Nashville)

This way, you can see immediately that whatever information is there is only speculation.

Hi JH,

I have abbreviated the US states in the Tony Bennett VENUE tag:


Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London / Avatar Studios, NY / Bennett Studios, NJ / Ben's Studio, TN / Capitol Studios, CA / Henson Recording Studios, CA)

Paul

[Jailhouse]

How about if I tweaked it and made it:


Possibly: Abbey Road Studios, London / Avatar Studios, New York / Bennett Studios, New Jersey / Ben's Studio, Nashville

Looks good to me.

[Jailhouse]

I have abbreviated the US states in the Tony Bennett VENUE tag:


Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London / Avatar Studios, NY / Bennett Studios, NJ / Ben's Studio, TN / Capitol Studios, CA / Henson Recording Studios, CA)

Even better!

[monsterjazzlick]

Looks good to me.

Cheers JH.

[evasv]

I have abbreviated the US states in the Tony Bennett VENUE tag:


Unknown (Possible: Abbey Road Studios, London / Avatar Studios, NY / Bennett Studios, NJ / Ben's Studio, TN / Capitol Studios, CA / Henson Recording Studios, CA)


I think Jailhouse's idea is a great solution for you, since you want to tag unverified data. If you want to update/verify the tags later on, you can search for "Unknown" to have a list of candidates.

Your latest syntax with US states looks neater, but you won't be able to search for e.g. studios in Nashville (if required).

[monsterjazzlick]

I think Jailhouse's idea is a great solution for you, since you want to tag unverified data. If you want to update/verify the tags later on, you can search for "Unknown" to have a list of candidates.

Your latest syntax with US states looks neater, but you won't be able to search for e.g. studios in Nashville (if required).

Thanks evasv,

The Tony Bennett CD is not one which I am adamant about ultra-specifics; so the abbreviations are fine here. But if it was (say) a Miles Davis CD then I would list everything!

In any event, I doubt there will be many CDs which contain such a long tag in this respect. Hopefully not anyway!

Yes, I have taken JHs naming scheme in the end.

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

I am ripping a CD which has one track by the:


Melody Maker's Competition Band

But I am not sure what would be the best ARTIST SORT here, please?

Many thanks,

Paul

[garym]

Hi,

I am ripping a CD which has one track by the:

Melody Maker's Competition Band

But I am not sure what would be the best ARTIST SORT here, please?

Many thanks,

Paul

I'd use:
Melody Maker's Competition Band

Keep in mind that artist sort is simply to make it show up in any list in your music library in the right place in alphabet. and for this, I'd want it in the "M" category.
(you woudn't use "Stones, The Rolling" as an artist sort. You might use, "Rolling Stones, The". I don't have to worry about "the" as my library automatically ignores "The" and would put "The Rolling Stones" in "R".

You wouldn't use, "Floyd, Pink" as sort for "Pink Floyd". You'd want Pink Floyd to sort under "P".

[monsterjazzlick]

I'd use:
Melody Maker's Competition Band

Keep in mind that artist sort is simply to make it show up in any list in your music library in the right place in alphabet. and for this, I'd want it in the "M" category.
(you woudn't use "Stones, The Rolling" as an artist sort. You might use, "Rolling Stones, The". I don't have to worry about "the" as my library automatically ignores "The" and would put "The Rolling Stones" in "R".

You wouldn't use, "Floyd, Pink" as sort for "Pink Floyd". You'd want Pink Floyd to sort under "P".

Thanks Gary,

That's great.

Someone else said to think of it as how you would like to see the ALBUM ARTIST catalogued (in the shelves) in a record store; which is also quite a good formula.

I do still get confused now and again though with certain band-names, as you can see.

Cheers,

Paul

[schmidj]

Well, I'd never put Pink Floyd as Floyd, Pink as the artist either. The name is of a band, not a person?

[garym]

Well, I'd never put Pink Floyd as Floyd, Pink as the artist either. The name is of a band, not a person?

correct. But some of monsterjazzlick's tagging questions are that obvious/odd to me. :eek:

[schmidj]

Gary, just pulling your leg a little...

[garym]

;)


Gary, just pulling your leg a little...

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi,

For Carole King's track (From 'Tapestry') "A Natural Woman":


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(You_Make_Me_Feel_Like)_A_Natural_Woman

would you place the bracketed wording before or after the un-bracketed, please? So:


A Natural Woman (You Make Me Feel Like)

(You Make Me Feel Like) A Natural Woman

I am asking from the perspective of which would be best for searching etc.

Paul

[Oggy]

Hi,

For Carole King's track (From 'Tapestry') "A Natural Woman":


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(You_Make_Me_Feel_Like)_A_Natural_Woman

would you place the bracketed wording before or after the un-bracketed, please? So:


A Natural Woman (You Make Me Feel Like)

(You Make Me Feel Like) A Natural Woman

I am asking from the perspective of which would be best for searching etc.

Paul

Hi Paul,

Before, simply because that's how it was written. It should come up in search, whichever way you write it.

KISS!!

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi Paul,

Before, simply because that's how it was written. It should come up in search, whichever way you write it.

KISS!!

Thanks Oggy.

I still don't understand the KISS reference/joke?

Paul

[Oggy]

Thanks Oggy.

I still don't understand the KISS reference/joke?

Paul

Hi Paul,

Keep it simple, stupid. No offence meant to anyone, just one of those expressions that suggests that sometimes the easiest solution may be the best: no need to overthink.

[monsterjazzlick]

Hi Paul,

Keep it simple, stupid. No offence meant to anyone, just one of those expressions that suggests that sometimes the easiest solution may be the best: no need to overthink.

OK, thanks.

I just never heard that expression before?! No worries.

Paul

[Dat Ei]

Even I understand the phrase KISS and I'm far from being a native speaker...


Dat Ei