neveronfriday Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 Hi everyone, I was wondering if there's a comprehensive online resource anyone can recommend regarding the formatting of discographies/sessionographies, abbreviations used, lettering and numbering, etc. I haven't been able to find a decent site yet. Of course it's relatively easy to study several good online discographies/sessionographies, but for a larger project I'd like to have a site I can run to in case of questions. Thanks for your help. P.S.: If you know of any printed material you can recommend, please do do! Quote
mikeweil Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 That's a question for Michael Fitzgerald! Are you sing the BRIAN database for all the Basie stuff? Quote
mikeweil Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 This site might lead you further. Quote
couw Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 Are you sing the BRIAN database for all the Basie stuff? no, we're not. We had a HUGE hump of electronic data that could not be put into BRIAN other than typing it in again. We chose to go with a session based database of our own making, partly reinventing the wheel for sure. Deus wanted to work out a spiffy online search algorithm that would allow to search all the fields and throw up a listing of choice, all in real time. That turned out harder than it may have looked at first. So now for easy access I wrote some Makros to rework the dbase structure we have to session listings to be put online. I believe Mike when he tells me that BRIAN will get easier and less time consuming once you start typing, I am doing this on the side though and as it got us what we want quick and dirty, I'm happy for now. Surely putting it all into BRIAN would be a great next step, checking and correcting all the little mistakes that surely must still be in there. Maybe we can get this going one day, with the help of some type-monkees maybe. We're talking well over 600 sessions here. Quote
neveronfriday Posted December 2, 2004 Author Report Posted December 2, 2004 That's a question for Michael Fitzgerald! Are you sing the BRIAN database for all the Basie stuff? Besides the fact that Basie has been on hold for a while (life, the universe, etc.), no, we're not using Brian (yet). It's all Excel. But we were talking about making all the info available in different formats after having compiled it (also in Brian). Ask John. He's head honcho in the discography/sessionography department. We have most of the sessions down ... now we just need to put them online. Thanks for the link. I'll check it out. Cheers! Quote
neveronfriday Posted December 2, 2004 Author Report Posted December 2, 2004 Oops. John beat me to it. Quote
neveronfriday Posted December 2, 2004 Author Report Posted December 2, 2004 Thanks for the link. I'll check it out. Cheers! Duh, been there a million times. I didn't check the link before I said I would check it out. But thanks anyways. Cheers! Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 If you have a question, I'll be happy to give my take on it. (That take, of course, might be incomplete, false start, alternative, or master, depending.) Past the basics, there are a few formats out there that each have some benefits. The perfect one hasn't been found yet. It might never be found. But we should surely be striving to at LEAST give all the details included in Rust - and hopefully adding to the knowledge by adding personnel specifics, composers, track timings, issue titles and release dates, studios/concert halls, etc. Regarding abbreviations, you can see the list I use here: http://www.JazzDiscography.com/Artists/mf-axlist.htm I have my own rationale for those. Also for things like instrument sort order. Glad to expound if you'd like. 600 sessions is really not much in the scheme of things. I did fifteen sessions (including most of the research) in a couple hours the other night for the Bee Hive discography - mathematically, 600 would be 40 evenings work. Now, if I have all the info in front of me and it's just entry, that can zoom along. The boxed sets listed here were (all but maybe three or four) entered in the span of about a month. http://www.JazzDiscography.com/Temp/boxedsets.htm Mike Quote
neveronfriday Posted December 2, 2004 Author Report Posted December 2, 2004 Thanks a million, Michael! I've been to your site countless times, not only to check the sessionographies but also having a very close look at how you did things. I've also checked out Brian, but I'm thinking of duplicating (and enhancing it) in Access or the like. I'm used to a little more comfort which I'd like to put in there (just the basic handling of the prog .... the database is very good). I'll get back to you later when the first questions pop up. Cheers! Quote
Rooster_Ties Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 I have my own rationale for those. Also for things like instrument sort order. Glad to expound if you'd like. I'd be curious to hear more about the instrument "sort-order" norms for discogs. I'm assuming this is refering to the order in which instruments are usual presented in static (printed) discography entries. Quote
couw Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 just a teaser from the Basie site: session listing click Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 Sort order means the sequence in which you list the players of the different instruments. If you have a trio, do you list Paul Motian (d), Bill Evans (p), Scott LaFaro (b) or do you list it (p, b, d) or (b, p, d) or (p, d, b) - that idea. It goes back to how composers write scores and is called "score order" - certain instruments go at the top of the page, and certain ones go at the bottom. There's a general agreement on most of these things, although there are variations out there. Orchestral music, for example, starts with the woodwinds: piccolo, flutes, oboes, bassoon, clarinet, bass clarinet, alto saxophones, tenor saxophones, baritone saxophones, trumpets, horns, trombones, tuba, percussion, THEN strings (violins, violas, cellos, basses) at the bottom. Of course some works use more or fewer instruments. A typical 17-piece big band score is written: alto 1, alto 2, tenor 1, tenor 2, baritone, trumpet 1, trumpet 2, trumpet 3, trumpet 4, trombone 1, trombone 2, trombone 3, bass trombone, guitar, piano, bass, drums. (So for the initial example, we always do p, b, d.) So, when doing a discography, the sort order (see the second half of the mf-axlist.htm page I listed above) should mirror the score order. What is tricky is things within the section - often it is impossible to know or impractical to use the order of players on trumpet 1, trumpet 2, trumpet 3, trumpet 4. So the BRIAN program lists the players alphabetically by last name. Another area is doubling - when one person plays two different instruments. The program is set up to use the highest sorting instrument as the one it sorts by. So someone who plays flute AND tenor saxophone will sort before someone who only plays alto saxophone. A last tricky area is the idea of a violin player who isn't a member of a strings section, but is more a "horn" player. At this point, BRIAN just keeps all violins after the rhythm section. The traditional score order is at odds with a number of jazz discographies as they treat a big band as "brass and reeds" - trumpets and trombones before saxophones, then rhythm. But it's my feeling this is just because someone arbitrarily decided on it without being aware of the hundreds of years of established tradition that exist in musical scores. The score order that I use has the support of that tradition (even if there are a few things in uncharted territory, like do you sort kora before or after oud? - most times you don't need to worry about them being on the same session). Whew - well, you asked...... Mike Quote
Quincy Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 I have my own rationale for those. Also for things like instrument sort order. Glad to expound if you'd like. I'd be curious to hear more about the instrument "sort-order" norms for discogs. I'm assuming this is refering to the order in which instruments are usual presented in static (printed) discography entries. The Brian database is a pretty light download, so you can download it (then download the Brian data.) Open Brian, then open Brian.vdb. Now go to Windows > Instruments. Now you'll see the sort order used in the program. I love this stretch: Kazoo Clarinet Hot Fountain Pen Goofus/Cuesnophone Sopranino Clarinet Hot Fountain Pen sounds dangerous. (Time to Google it.) Quote
Michael Fitzgerald Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 (edited) I think you want this: http://www.normanfield.fsnet.co.uk/rollini.htm Mike P.S. - and having actually *thought* for once about the goofus, I have changed its sort order (so the axlist link is now updated). Not that it matters much - I never ever have needed to include it in a discography, and chances are exceedingly slim that I ever will. Edited December 2, 2004 by Michael Fitzgerald Quote
Quincy Posted December 2, 2004 Report Posted December 2, 2004 I think you want this: http://www.normanfield.fsnet.co.uk/rollini.htm Mike Indeed I do, thank you! I actually got lucky and found that one right afterwards. I've kept the page open in a tab just so I just don't bookmark it and forget about it. I think I need to look over some of my Bix liner notes more carefully tonight, just to admire the instrument selection of the day. Quote
EKE BBB Posted December 3, 2004 Report Posted December 3, 2004 I love this stretch: Kazoo ... Very useful instructions... Quote
Brad Posted December 5, 2004 Report Posted December 5, 2004 I've just started using Brian for the Uptown project. Since I will probably be done soon I'm glad to help out if you decide to use Brian. Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.