Tagging classical music

[Alpina_Lux]

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Leaving aside Simon's suggestion that the quoted text in Alpina_Lux's long posts be replaced with links (a suggestion with which I very much agree), there are points to be made about the material itself, which seems to me to sit uncomfortably with much of what has said elsewhere in this thread.

I have converted the posts into links, even though - as stated in my previous post - I don't agree with the claim that this makes it any easier. I think we should have more confidence in the attention span of the readers on this forum.

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Firstly, while I cannot claim to have absorbed completely all the material in these very long posts, its very length and obvious complexity creates the danger that beginners will be put off the whole tagging process. I have already argued that we should not allow tagging schemes to become over complex, or routinely enter data that will not be used either in the browsing process or displayed by the control point. Those points seem relevant here.

Why would this forum or thread be aimed at beginners? And why would beginners be put off by explaining the intricacies that may be inherent to the tagging process? In my view the forum is about an open discussion in relation to these things, and not excluding something simply because it takes a bit longer to read and absorb.

Also, please read the information I posted in its context: MusiCHI is a program that automatises tagging to a large extent, which is supposed to make it very easy to tag a large amount of files. The blog-posts were aimed (at least that is my understanding) at illustrating on how to approach tagging and what the pitfalls but also opportunities are in it. No ones is obviously obliged to agree with that.

The whole point of the blog-posts were that all the metadata can indeed be used in the browsing process, and serves at being able to get around in a very large music library.

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Second, the use of the word 'Zen' in the titles of the quoted material suggests that there is some sort of 'perfect' or ultimate tagging scheme. Along with others who have posted here, I just do not believe that this is the case. I hope that much of the value of this hobby, for others as it has been for me, lies in finding new ways of exploring one's music collection; that implies that tagging schemes may evolve over time, and there are many enjoyable paths one can follow. Maybe aiming from the outset for a complex, quasi-academic 'Zen' scheme suits some people; if so, well and good. But others who have posted here have made it clear that this is not the only way to go.

I think you over-interpret the title. If you care to read through all the material, it is written in a rather light tone including quite a few jokes throughout it. They simply wanted a catchy title for their posts - and create a connection to the term "chi" in their product name.

I haven't found any claim in the whole blog-posts that their way is the only way. It is simply a write-up of their experience with this process, and explanations how certain problems with computer audio can be solved. Insinuating that somehow they claim a Sauron throne in the field of classical music tagging is I think unwarranted.

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Thirdly, what we have come to call (for want of a better term) 'classical' music resolutely defies the kind of tightly drawn system of classification outlined in the quoted material, which is based (perhaps unsurprisingly, given its origins) on the received canon of German and German-influenced music from, say, 1770 to 1940. For different reasons, many other strands of the classical repertoire (think Buxtehude, Chopin or Villa-Lobos) fit uncomfortably or not at all into that scheme. When it comes to tagging schemes, systems of categorisation and sub-categorisation are perhaps better avoided, especially by new users of networked music systems.

I cannot see that at all in those blog-posts. Where did you get that impression from?

Undoubtetly much of what a majority would consider the core of classical music is probably of germanophone origin, but what does this have to do with the tagging process? Chopin was even quoted in the blog-post as an example, as well as several French and Russian examples. The tagging advice given in there applies to all kinds of classical music, whatever its origin or time. Of course you have to adapt the tagging scheme to each composer (and an example of that was given in the posts - e.g. with some composers you have opus numbers, with others you don't), if you want to find their works in your collection again.

Also, the guy who actually created MusiCHI is French. So why this comment about "its origins"? I really think you're on a false trail here...

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Finally, the determined (and, dare one say, sniffily arrogant)

Oh come on, don't get personal...relax! No one's attacking you here, we're just discussing options and I don't see where you get that negative attitude from.

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  ...rejection in the quoted material of the file system as a means of organising and accessing music files fails to take account of certain realities. The file system is always there; it is all that is available when metadata is not present. The file system has to be used to access files for metadata editing. And file and folder names are, in themselves, another form of metadata, albeit one that is somewhat differently entered and accessed from 'normal' metadata.

That is absolutely true. But we're talking about tagging and how the metadata created in the tagging process can help us with our music collections. The folder view might work with someone who has a hundred albums or so, beyond that - and this is what the blog-posts were discussing - it's almost entirely useless.

(11-04-2014 15:21)DavidHB Wrote:  Personally, I think that folder view is a very good way for beginners to access their music libraries, especially when folders are organised in a way with which the user is already familiar. If my own experience is anything to go by, users will tend to move away from folder view to more index-based browsing as more of their files are tagged. But we should not regard the file system and tagging/indexing as substitutes for each other; they are, of necessity, complementary.

David

In a first stage they are, I agree with you. But when you're one of those with a very large collection (in the thousands of CDs), I think that your time is much better invested in creating a good tagging system than trying to sort your CDs with the file structure. I believe that much is obvious.