Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

[Oggy]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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

(scroll down.)

For Al Jarreau:

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

For Chick Corea's 'The Mad Hatter':

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

(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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

Hi JH,

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

Cheers,

Paul

[monsterjazzlick]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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]

Re: Tags, Tags, and more Tags ...

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.