Would You Go As Far As "Reinventing" The Standards?

 
  • Would You Go As Far As "Reinventing" The Standards?

    Hi guys, this is a weird question, but I have a project I want to work on, and I want your opinions on this.
    Would you guys go as far as reinventing your tagging standards, as long as you have a nice and neat library? For example, there is a lot of ambiguity regarding using "(live)" or "[live]" in live tags, and therefore a lot of songs are tagged in different ways and it's a mess.

    Personally, I would create my own tagging standards. Would you do it too? If you got together with a group of people, would you create an standarized way of tagging things?

    I know it's a weird question, but I want to build a music database and I want to nail down the tagging issue without creating a messy database. I would like your opinions on this.

    • ManDirky disse...
    • Usuário
    • Ago 11 2011, 18h29
    Yeah, I got my own tagging standarts.


    For remixes with features I always use:

    Artist A - Song Title (Remix) (Feat. Artist B)
    Artist A - Song Title (Remix) (Feat. Artist B & Artist C)
    Artist A - Song Title (Artist D Remix) (Feat. Artist B & Artist C)


    Live-Versions:

    Artist A - Song Title (live)



    I always do it like this when I got no album artwork. When I got one, I copy the tagging-way from the back of my CD. And I usually do a little research on last.fm before I start to scrobble my tracks first.

    • jankuca disse...
    • Usuário
    • Ago 18 2011, 18h51
    It would be best if the next version of ID3 tags had fields just for versioning (ie. Title = "Song title", Version="Live")

    I personally prefer square brackets. The round ones are for parts of the title such as Bloc Party – "Song For Clay (Disappear Here)"

  • yeah I have seen that square brackets are better used for denoting whether a track is live or another version. I prefer that notation too.

    I want to have strict coding standards for my music database, without making a mess.

    Oh yeah, we can always create our own ID3 tag... Main problem is that it wouldn't be supported by players unless we explicitly asked them to.

    • aerozol1 disse...
    • Usuário
    • Jan 2 2012, 4h07
    Interesting... What would you to differently to the current standards that various databases have? because as far as I know, this already exists in various forms (mainly Music Brainz, and other databases, like Discogs).

    unicorns
  • I am definatly interested in keeping my library all the same way. Wether i use [live] or (live) or when i have a (maxi)single i put the single name in the album tag with [Single] behind it because some singles have the same title.

    So i keep my own standards, but everyone feels different about what should be the standard.

    I actually just joined a group for promoting a standard way of tagging Featured artists:
    http://www.last.fm/group/I+keep+Featured+Artists+in+a+separate+Featuring+Tag

    It's about tagging the featured artist(s) in a separate tag. Not in Artist or Title.
    I really would love to make this the standard so last.fm (and other services) can better use our information.
    If this would be a standard tagfield, we wouldn't have the multiple artists and songtitles problem, because again with this everyone also feels different about where the featured artists should be tagged in, and i guess with the sulotion i use, everyone is happy.
    If you agree please join, maybe one day we could make this a standard!

    Editado por RRRRRicardo em Fev 21 2015, 10h54
    • [Usuário excluído] disse...
    • Usuário
    • Mar 3 2012, 11h47
    I've been thinking about this for some time now, and i agree with you, sub-data like "live", "feat." etc.. should have a separate tag
    and another thing that bugs me is about albums that have 2 or more discs
    i use (disc #) as a standard, but it'd be better if Last employed a solution for this, so that we wouldn't have to place the "(disc #)" on the album name just to separate it

  • Since there is a disc number ID3 field, I never used this "(Disc 2)" nonsense.

  • Yes that's what the discnumber tagfield is for. But i understand mikeedols, Last.FM doesn't read that tag out, so it just sees it as the same album.

    • Veinrot disse...
    • Usuário
    • Abr 14 2012, 8h53
    VolcanoColdplay said:
    Since there is a disc number ID3 field, I never used this "(Disc 2)" nonsense.

    I don't see why you would want to scrobble it as different albums. It is the same album, just split up into (often) two pieces of plastic.

    • in-mono disse...
    • Usuário
    • Nov 16 2014, 15h53
    Veinrot said:
    VolcanoColdplay said:
    Since there is a disc number ID3 field, I never used this "(Disc 2)" nonsense.

    I don't see why you would want to scrobble it as different albums. It is the same album, just split up into (often) two pieces of plastic.


    I can relate. I used to have Winamp as my player of choice until some months ago (when I made the switch to foobar2000) and things could become very messy if you rely only on the disc number tag. So while I agree it's wrong [to have 'Disc 1', 'Disc 2' and so on in the %album% field], I can also understand why people use it.

Usuários anônimos não podem postar mensagens. É preciso fazer login ou criar uma conta para postar nos fóruns.