Question for discographers: what is the title of a CD?

[David Ayers]

There is a Anthony Braxton CD on music and arts which famously has a different title on the cover on the spine on the back and on the disk itself. Four different titles. For discographical purposes which is the real title of the CD, which should be recorded in a discography?

[mjzee]

Why not ask Tri-Centric?

[David Ayers]

Well, I'm asking about the discographical principle.

[mjzee]

Tri-Centric would probably know the disc's "official" title.

[clifford_thornton]

I don't know which one you're referring to, but I would suspect that the front cover would have been the one Braxton signed off on and thus the most likely to be "correct."

[B. Clugston]

Is that the Yoshi's disc? Restructures.net calls it Twelve Compositions: Live at Yoshi's in Oakland, July 1993.

One of the Braxton House discs has differing titles on cover and spine: New York (Tentet) 1996 vs. Composition 193.

[mjazzg]

When I catalogued for public libraries years back I recall we took the title on the disc as the 'master' and referenced the others. Whether it's the same for discographies I don't know

[David Ayers]

With a book the catalogue title is the one that appears on the title page. From what mjazzg says it may be the disc that is used. However for a multi-disc set that might not work. Any discographers in the house?

[Rooster_Ties]

Is this the "the titles of Peter Gabriel's first four solo albums" problem -- only in reverse, and folded in on itself in terms of both space and time?

[miles65]

Is that the Yoshi's disc? Restructures.net calls it Twelve Compositions: Live at Yoshi's in Oakland, July 1993.

One of the Braxton House discs has differing titles on cover and spine: New York (Tentet) 1996 vs. Composition 193.

Tom Lord's Online Disco has this as: 12 Compositions, Live at Yoshi's Oakland (July 1993).

[alankin]

aka, aka, aka.

[David Ayers]

Is that the Yoshi's disc? Restructures.net calls it Twelve Compositions: Live at Yoshi's in Oakland, July 1993.

One of the Braxton House discs has differing titles on cover and spine: New York (Tentet) 1996 vs. Composition 193.

Tom Lord's Online Disco has this as: 12 Compositions, Live at Yoshi's Oakland (July 1993).

Amazingly, what Lord gives does not correspond to any of the four titles on the product. Is it possible that discographies are not constructed rigorously as are bibliographies?

[clifford_thornton]

Quite.

[Rooster_Ties]

Is that the Yoshi's disc? Restructures.net calls it Twelve Compositions: Live at Yoshi's in Oakland, July 1993.

One of the Braxton House discs has differing titles on cover and spine: New York (Tentet) 1996 vs. Composition 193.

Tom Lord's Online Disco has this as: 12 Compositions, Live at Yoshi's Oakland (July 1993). Amazingly, what Lord gives does not correspond to any of the four titles on the product. Is it possible that discographies are not constructed rigorously as are bibliographies?

If the release itself has four different titles (on the packaging itself), then why should we expect the actual title to be any of those four titles?

Full conceptual continuity would demand another further different title be the "real" one, no?

[Chuck Nessa]

There might be larger questions out there.

[mikeweil]

Well, I'm asking about the discographical principle.

When using the BRIAN database you would add a session footnote about it. Including album titles is optional as it is not a defining criterion for a session, especially with older material reissued in many differently compiled albums.

With album based discography, however, you have a problem .... I would list both: title A / title B

Things like this happen. While researching the Tjader disco I encountered one LP with different album titles on cover and label.

[David Ayers]

Well, there is just a spa

Well, I'm asking about the discographical principle.

When using the BRIAN database you would add a session footnote about it. Including album titles is optional as it is not a defining criterion for a session, especially with older material reissued in many differently compiled albums.

With album based discography, however, you have a problem .... I would list both: title A / title B

Things like this happen. While researching the Tjader disco I encountered one LP with different album titles on cover and label.

Ah! Thank you.

You wouldn't invent a new one though as Lord's did...

[mikeweil]

Amazingly, what Lord gives does not correspond to any of the four titles on the product. Is it possible that discographies are not constructed rigorously as are bibliographies?

The Lord disco, as useful as it is, brims with errors and inconsistencies of this type. It all depends on how careful you are when entering the data. One differening prefix letter in the order number of an album and you have another album in the database.

Yes, bibliographers are more rigorous. That's why I started using BRIAN for my discographies, as it forces you to be as rigorous.

The trouble starts with the term "discography", which refers to a disc, but it was introduced when there were only shellacs. In the course of history researchers had to face the fact that you have to return to the source where the music happened, the session, if you want to do it best. Imagine some music that was reissued in hundreds of formats, like a Miles Davis session. If you work album based, you have dozens of albums with redundant info. If working session based, it is much easier to oversee the whole situation. Look at http://jazzdiscography.com and you will get the idea.

[David Ayers]

Amazingly, what Lord gives does not correspond to any of the four titles on the product. Is it possible that discographies are not constructed rigorously as are bibliographies?

The Lord disco, as useful as it is, brims with errors and inconsistencies of this type. It all depends on how careful you are when entering the data. One differening prefix letter in the order number of an album and you have another album in the database.

Yes, bibliographers are more rigorous. That's why I started using BRIAN for my discographies, as it forces you to be as rigorous.

The trouble starts with the term "discography", which refers to a disc, but it was introduced when there were only shellacs. In the course of history researchers had to face the fact that you have to return to the source where the music happened, the session, if you want to do it best. Imagine some music that was reissued in hundreds of formats, like a Miles Davis session. If you work album based, you have dozens of albums with redundant info. If working session based, it is much easier to oversee the whole situation. Look at http://jazzdiscography.com and you will get the idea.

Thank you for the information and for the link. Much appreciated.

[paul secor]

Sounds like this LP:

"Pres" on the front cover, Lester Young in Washington, D.C. - on the back cover, "Lester"/Lester Young at Olivia Davis' Patio Lounge - on the spine, and Lester Young at Olivia Davis' Patio Lounge - Washington, District of Columbia, 1956 on the label.

At least Braxton is in good company.