Do You Commit Tagging Sins in the Name of Clean Tags?

 
  • Do You Commit Tagging Sins in the Name of Clean Tags?

    Now, I can get pretty obsessive about having correct tags. I check my tags against MusicBrainz every time I get a new album, but there's one thing that has always annoyed me. Tags that have "featuring" so and so in them. Frankly, I don't care who's in the song, that's something that should go in the album credits, not on the song title its self. It makes tags look messy and I just can't stand it. Sometimes I leave them in, sometimes it bugs me so much I just remove them.

    What's your opinion on this? Do you do anything similar? Have you ever disagreed with how MusicBrainz tags things?

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 31 Mar 2011, 12:58
    The way MusicBrainz deals with features (and some artist names, and box sets, and multi-CD albums, and other stuff) is often/always wrong.

  • Featuring artist(s) should be kept in separate tag field, not in the track name.

    • KryptoN said...
    • User
    • 1 Apr 2011, 21:51
    tape_rewinder said:
    Featuring artist(s) should be kept in separate tag field, not in the track name.

    I agree. This is pretty much the only major style rule on MusicBrainz that I think is completely retarded. I'm not sure if they're moving towards artist-to-track relations in this particular area, like they've done regularly (with performance credits etc.). It surely would make so much more sense that way.

    Latest ratings on RYM:
  • Yeah, I agree. Having them in a separate tag would work much better. It's pretty annoying on MusicBrainz how they include featuring artists when the top scrobbled and official playable track doesn't have it.

    • KryptoN said...
    • User
    • 2 Apr 2011, 22:04
    anubis2591 said:
    It's pretty annoying on MusicBrainz how they include featuring artists when the top scrobbled and official playable track doesn't have it.

    You can't compare last.fm playcounts to what appears on MusicBrainz since they are separate services. Last.fm tries to obey MB's system, not the other way around.

    Latest ratings on RYM:
  • No, I know that. It's just confusing when the songs on last.fm that are playable (which I assume means that the artist or label signed off on them in some way, which in my mind is pretty official) go against what is on MusicBrainz. It's the same anytime MusicBrainz goes against the official tagging of a track. Do you go with what the artist, label, and or general consensus says is right or what MusicBrainz says?

    For example take Phantom Pt. II by Justice. Every release and remix of the song has it tagged that way. Yet, MusicBrainz's policy for songs that are broken up into parts is to tag them like "Phantom, Part 2".

    • KryptoN said...
    • User
    • 4 Apr 2011, 10:04
    The MusicBrainz partstyle is a good thing because it unifies the way that parts are indicated, and yes I do use it. Every time a track title includes some kind of "part" thing, people will inevitably tag it differently (sometimes across different releases/issues of the same release even the artists themselves do this).

    When it comes to other stuff, I go by a case-by-case basis. Basically I go by what it says on the cover art, but I fix the capitalizations because it's rare that those are correct. Especially Finnish releases are plagued by incorrectly capitalized track lists (every word capitalized, which is wrong etc.). Sometimes the artist uses some weird-ass "artistic" capitalizations in which case it can be understood as artist intent so those I leave untouched. And then just overlay whatever other sensible MusicBrainz style rules would apply.

    Latest ratings on RYM:
  • Yes, I agree with that. That Justice song is the only "part" song that I keep tagged that way. Everything else I tag them using the MusicBrainz style.

    Yeah, I usually tag on a case by case basis as well.

    • liftarn said...
    • Wiki Moderator
    • 7 Apr 2011, 11:10
    I always go with MusicBrainz. With the exception of tags that are correct in my files, but where the change has not gone trough of MusicBrainz.
    I have even deleted some files because they were not on MusicBrainz and I couldn't find any real info on them so I could enter them into MusicBrainz.

    Please do yourself and Last.fm a favour and fix your tags. The easiest way is to use Musicbrainz Picard.
  • tape_rewinder said:
    Featuring artist(s) should be kept in separate tag field, not in the track name.

    That would make our tagfanaticlifes so much easier.
    Just a field for the featured artists should be implented in every player as a standard.
    MP4players, mediaplayers and even Windows, so when you right click on the mp3file and go to the details tab it should have featured artist tag in it aswel.

    I always put the featured artists in the artists tag, since it should not be in the title name imo, but i agree that it does fuck up playcounts and creates artistprofiles with only 1 song for instance..

    That's why i love your idea!

  • Ok, what i've done now is (in MP3Tag) just make a tagfield myself called FEATURING. And that's where i put the featured artist(s).
    But we should somehow make this the standard, but i don't know how to..
    Oh, and Last.FM should be able to read that field out and.. then show it properly on your profile and give credits to the right artists.

  • I'm in.

  • Cool, I see that my musicplayer (musicbee) is able to show the new FEATURING field in a column.
    What about your player?

    btw: This really cleans out my last.fm profile, nice!

    • KryptoN said...
    • User
    • 13 Apr 2011, 07:30
    Well, for years now I've used foobar2000 which I've set up to show multiple custom tags including tag fields for origin, transliteration, rating, original artist, bonus track, playcount (from last.fm), loved track (from last.fm) etc. It's nice since the GUI allows almost limitless customization. I haven't started using a feat. tag field yet, but it's a pretty good idea.

    A lot of the failtagging that makes its way to last.fm is at least partially caused by terrible media players that aren't capable of showing the data you want or the user simply not knowing how to use the player. This drives some people to add arbitrary crap to the wrong tag fields to force the data to show up for you. I know I used to do this when I was still using winamp many years ago (back when the last.fm site was still called audioscrobbler). In retrospect winamp has probably become one of the worst media players there is (if it hasn't been that forever), it just happens to be very popular (AFAIK it still can't even support utf-8 properly which is laughable, but maybe they've fixed it?).

    Latest ratings on RYM:
    • wjshaw2 said...
    • User
    • 27 Apr 2011, 16:21
    Count me in for a featured artists column. Might go and fiddle with MP3Tag just now to put my own one in.

    I've sometimes put featured artists in the artist column and then used auto-correct to try to direct my non-standard ideas onto the correctly tagged version. Best of both worlds then (but doesn't always work as not enough people vote for the re-direction).

    PS I've never found anything better than Winamp for organising and then finding my music (just don't use it to actually tag anything, it takes forever). But this isn't the place for that argument.

  • I love the idea of putting featuring artists in a separate tag. I really wish we could make this a standard somehow.

  • I'm actually madly obsessive with my track info as well. This is before Last.fm, which I've been on for like a week now, but I always put features into the track name, the reason being the artist level of my folders becomes messy otherwise. I don't need 22 versions of Timbaland ft. X, Timbaland ft. Y and Timbaland ft. Z in my artist list.

    शांति में, बहुत शक्ति है| अगर हम धैर्य रखते तो आचे हैं|
  • Well if I would differ greatly about this, I wouldn;t be in this group ;)

    However, getting the right tags for classical music is really a dilemma. I think something composed by Mozart should scrobble Mozart. But the artist(s) performing should have their credits as well...

    Luckily there is a difference in artist and album artist...

  • I always tag it with square brackets like [alternative artistname] when it's the same band with another name and [+ featuring artist] when it's a collaboration. It's just messy to tag this right, and this is my solution. 1 artist tag per artist. Collaborations, side-projects and such are just noted in the album or title tag. I sin, but at least I can find what I'm looking for within seconds.
    I also use a "Remove all fields except" function. Anything apart from album, artist, title, tracknumber, year, genre and cover art goes through the shredder. The things most media players don't use anyway.
    Another sin I commit is to put the year in the albumtag in a "2004 - A is for Accident" way. It's hard to find decent media players that sort and display it like this and I just want to have a chronological overview, to see how the artist progresses.

    And screw Musicbrainz. I like discogs better.

  • I think the main thing is that one can find their own music in their increasingly large libraries. However you do that best is your business, what I don't is where people have like 20/30K of songs only about 10 of which even HAVE TITLES, this is the kind of crazy disorganisation I don't get.

    शांति में, बहुत शक्ति है| अगर हम धैर्य रखते तो आचे हैं|
  • tgcephalopoid said:
    I always tag it with square brackets like [alternative artistname] when it's the same band with another name and [+ featuring artist] when it's a collaboration. It's just messy to tag this right, and this is my solution. 1 artist tag per artist. Collaborations, side-projects and such are just noted in the album or title tag. I sin, but at least I can find what I'm looking for within seconds.
    I also use a "Remove all fields except" function. Anything apart from album, artist, title, tracknumber, year, genre and cover art goes through the shredder. The things most media players don't use anyway.
    Another sin I commit is to put the year in the albumtag in a "2004 - A is for Accident" way. It's hard to find decent media players that sort and display it like this and I just want to have a chronological overview, to see how the artist progresses.

    And screw Musicbrainz. I like discogs better.
    Have you tried foobar2000? By naming your folders properly, you can easily get your albums sorted chronologically. Check my screenshot out: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/84b897823e.png
    It can be modified in many ways - from reorganizing the windows to adding various useful plugins, skins, etc.

    Anyway, your tagging system is wrong. I understand your point, but it's only helping you. Not the community. This site works better when most people use the same tagging system (mp3 tags). Discogs is a good site. If last.fm would choose Discogs as a reference source for their tags, we would all have to accept it. But at the moment MusicBrainz is what they consider best (although it has its flaws). Peace.

  • I find it slightly funny that you can just pop on here and tell someone their tagging system is wrong. Unfortunately, a person's music collection also exists outside last.fm, and to expect all users to use 1 system at source when they will have loads of different considerations in the manner they wish to organise it (Artist-centric; Album-centric, etc) is at best slightly unrealistic.

    The unification has to happen on the site, where it would make much more sense if users had the option of matching their scrobbles to a track when it is sent up.

    शांति में, बहुत शक्ति है| अगर हम धैर्य रखते तो आचे हैं|
  • I may have been a bit fanatic in my previous post, but I don't see a sense of community. The people on soulseek with 500GB of music don't tag and sort, often you see directories categorising in broad genres and they just throw new albums in there like they're recycling bins for paper, glass and plastic. The 8000 subscribers to this group aren't a whole lot either, IMO. I did my tags neatly, so the last.fm personnel just needs to release one regular expression on my scrobbles and it's all right again, and so it is when you happen to "borrow an album from me". Collaborations are just messy though. I don't want to make directories for artists that collaborated on one or two tracks. They'll get their credit when they release an album or EP themselves, if I bother to listen to them.

    Good idea though, that last thing Owl said.

  • Tgcephalopoid, if you're too disabled to find software/ a setup that displays album artist > albums in chronological order (or however you want to view it) without re-tagging everything, you really have no right to rip on music brainz or anyones system.

    unicorns
Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.