http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21464 <pre>I feel like even if this is possible to figure out easily, it will still fall apart when comparing to existing recordings (where this likely isn't listed very clearly). It may be possible to compare recordings you have, but the differences may be subtle. I know the main set I have mentions that the conductor (George Szell) tweaked the orchestration (as it mentions he does in Brahms works also) to balance the orchestra, but it's not described anywhere else which edition he's using. On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 4:07 AM, lorenz pressler &lt;lop&lt; at &gt;gmx.at&gt; wrote: _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> Andrew Conkling 2012-05-23T21:25:22 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21463 <pre> Great! That must be the fix that was released yesterday then. Nice :) </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-22T09:51:32 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21462 <pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote Hooray, both of these edits have now cleared - last night, at exactly the same time. -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Open-and-Expired-Edit-tp4634181p4634355.html Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> rafwuk 2012-05-22T09:49:38 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21461 <pre>2012/5/20 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren &lt;reosarevok&lt; at &gt;gmail.com&gt; I agree that there is no problem that the works &amp; tracks won't have the same tempo markings. It's like when you change keys &amp; instrumentation (what's worse IMO is that many editors want works titles = recording titles, which would mean that tracks &amp; recording titles won't match in this case, but that's for another discussion). As Nicolás said, you can create new works, but it's not really recommended unless the same arrangement is used on recordings by different performers. /symphonick _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> symphonick 2012-05-20T16:34:00 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21460 <pre>On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Georg Kretschmer &lt;georg.kretschmer&lt; at &gt;gmail.com&gt; wrote: Well, it would be an arrangement of the original in a different tempo, which is not so uncommon - and since the arranger credit is on the right recordings already, I don't think it would feel strange. You could create a second set of works for two pianos, but that's much more work for little gain if I'm not mistaken and the arrangement was made specifically for that recording. </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-20T14:27:59 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21459 <pre> Am 20.05.2012 um 14:56 schrieb Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren: That would mean that the tempi would differ between the arrangement for one or two pianos. Is that what you mean is the case? If that's the case we would need two create two sets of work list for this work but I have nowhere seen anything that supports this solution. And if I just rename the work list, than the ARs between recordings and work would look ridiculously like: the tempo on the recording would be "vivace" and on the work its would be "molto leggier". That seams no proper solution for me. Anything other we could do? Georg </pre> Georg Kretschmer 2012-05-20T14:23:55 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21458 <pre>On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Georg Kretschmer &lt;georg.kretschmer&lt; at &gt;gmail.com&gt; wrote: I added that release, I think - and the movement tempos probably change because of it being an arrangement for two pianos. Just change them to the standard ones on the works I guess. </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-20T12:56:58 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21457 <pre>MBz work list has a complete set of "J. Brahms Variations on a Theme of Paganini op. 35": http://musicbrainz.org/release/14b65335-57a1-4dbf-aa22-8a4d1dfe980d The track list of the CD in hand has a different naming of the variations/movements of this work: http://musicbrainz.org/release/e42822f3-f517-4830-9a21-fe24b8ecc35e This listing is in line with what we can find on Allmusic: http://allmusic.com/work/variations-28-on-a-theme-of-paganini-for-piano-in-a-minor-op-35-c129207/parts-movements and other like: http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/art/Johannes-Brahms-1833-1897-Paganini-Rhapsodien-op-35/hnum/5873410. The question I have is, what has to be done to make the correct ARs? If I just relate the variations the movements of the recordings and that of the works would not match! I will not do that. Who has a good advice on how I should proceed. Georg </pre> Georg Kretschmer 2012-05-20T12:53:30 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21456 <pre> Sadly, the only "solution" for these will probably be failing them as dependency problems and let people re-enter :( </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-18T14:23:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21455 <pre>http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17493248 Me too . Secondary types did not exist when I made the edit :) -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Open-and-Expired-Edit-tp4634181p4634189.html Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. </pre> rafwuk 2012-05-18T14:21:42 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21454 <pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote I've no strong feelings either way, I was just surprised. I suppose it's difficult to do too much damage with this (but I'm sure someone will manage it). "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - Ralph Waldo Emerson -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Vinyl-style-track-numbers-tp4634115p4634187.html Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> rafwuk 2012-05-18T14:18:47 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21453 <pre>On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jeff Christoffersen &lt;jeff&lt; at &gt;thechristoffersens.com&gt; wrote: It's a known bug - apparently there are some issues with merging release groups which have secondary types (like live). Should be fixed in next release, but until it is I don't think there's anything you can do but wait :/ </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-18T13:22:20 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21452 <pre>Can anyone provide any insight into what is going on with this edit? http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17490542 This is one I entered. It appears that it should have already been applied as it has reached the expiration time with only positive votes, but it is just sitting there. Is there something I can do or is this a bug of some kind? Thanks! Jeff (jdc0730) _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> Jeff Christoffersen 2012-05-18T12:58:08 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21451 <pre> Well, changing anything else in this way wouldn't be an autoedit, so I'd say what would need consensus is this *being* one... </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-18T10:54:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21450 <pre>Hello, On 17/05/12 12:22, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: Currently, from the POV of a developers this isn't bug, as there is no jira ticket to change the behaviour :). I just wanted to clarify that we're not currently planning to change this to not be an auto-edit. But if that's what you want, simply file a ticket in jira (though preferably after some discussion to make sure there is consensus on the changes you would be requesting). </pre> Kuno Woudt 2012-05-18T10:50:53 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21449 <pre>Am 10.05.2012, 04:47 Uhr, schrieb Andrew Conkling &lt;andrew&lt; at &gt;andrewski.net&gt;: i was just curious if anyone had an idea what different version there are out there. the 4th is present in two different states by schumann himself a (unknown?) first version from 1841 and the later revised from 1851. in letters from brahms to clara schumann, brahms states to her that he likes the first version much better than the latter one and urges to publish the first version also. i don't know if the first version is available now and if it it had been ever performed/recorded. for all 4 symphonies there exists apparently a version orchestrated by mahler [1] which i don't know anything about. and afair also brahms provided orchestration for some/all? symphonies. i just wanted to create all (worthy) works with proper annotations/disamb.comment but i'm a bit lost whats really out there and whats worth creating. best, lorenz. [1] http://musicbrainz.org/release/c8db532b-0753-4d66-8825-891cc7be5084 </pre> lorenz pressler 2012-05-18T08:07:13 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21448 <pre> I think it’s probably a bug, but I welcome it: MB needs more auto-edits! I’ll be taking advantage of it as much as possible before it’s fixed. </pre> Alex Mauer 2012-05-17T15:32:47 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21447 <pre> I think they're autoedits for everyone; I have no idea if that's a bug or a feature (I'd call it a bug, but I don't know what others think) About the message, that might have been coincidence - the message is known to be fickle. </pre> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren 2012-05-17T10:22:54 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21446 <pre>I gave this a try yesterday, http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17641282 here and http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17641283 here . I'm sure I un-ticked the auto-edit box, but the edit went straight through. Moreover, I did not see a message saying that my edit had been applied (or queued). Does this tally with other peoples' observations? -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz-mailing-lists.2986109.n2.nabble.com/Vinyl-style-track-numbers-tp7560524.html Sent from the User help mailing list archive at Nabble.com. </pre> rafwuk 2012-05-17T10:11:55 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21445 <pre> On May 16, 2012, at 11:28 AM, teknojnky wrote: Virtualization via Xen is exactly our plan. But, rather than re-use older servers, we're going to deploy one of the newer more powerful servers gathering dust in my office. :) -- --ruaok Robert Kaye -- rob&lt; at &gt;musicbrainz.org -- http://musicbrainz.org _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> Robert Kaye 2012-05-16T18:42:08 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user/21444 <pre> Has there been any consideration of virtualizing the ‘many different things’ installed on the server? that would help isolate the various components and perhaps forestall the need for a whole new server. From: Robert Kaye Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 1:01 PM To: MusicBrainz User Discussion Subject: Re: [mb-users] Status of the forum On May 14, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Maurits Meulenbelt wrote: Hi, The forum has been down for maintenance since yesterday. Is there an ETA for it to go back up? We have nothing firm at this point in time. We need to install a new server so we can properly solve this problem and isolate things like the forums from other things in order to make maintenance easier. The lack of maintenance, because so many different things installed on that machine that all interdepend, caused this problem in the first place. Now that the release is done, I am going to order the parts necessary to rack another server. I hope to get this server deployed on Friday. Maybe we can re-install the forums over the weekend, but no promises. -- --ruaok Robert Kaye -- rob&lt; at &gt;musicbrainz.org -- http://musicbrainz.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-users mailing list MusicBrainz-users&lt; at &gt;lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users</pre> teknojnky 2012-05-16T18:28:39 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user