It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Hi all,

With the recently added ability to edit the tune links on recordings here, a few people have taken considerable time to do so, including for those recordings submitted by others. (Shout-out to Kenny, Gonzo, NFLD Whistler, Ceolachan, and DonaldK, and I’m sure there are others I’ve forgotten to mentioned). However, if the actions of these people, along with my own experience with editing recordings, are anything to go by, then Jeremy’s claim that the tunes link correctly ninety-odd percent of the time simply cannot be accurate. I’ve seen, and thought of, too many cases where a name is used for multiple tunes, and the database gets suppremely confused.

Although I am aware that many who add recordings use this newish feature, I propose that we all make a special effort to do so. If everyone took the time to edit their own recordings, and new ones as they add them, we’d all get a share of the work on establishing the database’s accuracy, and we’d likely get more of it done more quickly. I’m not saying we should necessarily post every tune on every recording, but rather that we should make sure that the tunes already linked are done so correctly. I’m also very aware that I need to step up my own efforts to edit the recordings I add; most of the members I mentioned above have edited at least one of these at one time or another.

Someone pointed out (I don’t remember whom or on which thread) that although Alan Ng’s database is amazingly helpful, it contains a small fraction of the recordings we have here. Furthermore, so many of our listings sadly lack a comment. I know I often wonder about a certain tune on a certain recording that might not be on Alan Ng’s site, and I’m sure others do as well. Therefore, as we are crowdsourcing a trad music recordings index, and since we now have this brilliant feature, I think we should collectively use it much more,, so that if nothing else, others who come here looking will be able to find tunes quickly and efficiently. That’s what I love about Alan Ng’s database. Perhaps we can finally start to turn the “X recordings of a tune by this name” statement into “there are X recordings of this tune”, to some extent.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

I’m with you 100 percent here! I’ve also done some editing to get the tunes linked correctly.
Watch for these tunes have "the" in the beginning of the title: for example, the tune "Yellow Jolk" will automatically link, but if it’s "The Yellow Jolk", it will not unless you manually change it.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

This is a great website and I think we all share this responsibility as long as you’re sure what you’re doing is correct. I correct tune links for every one I come across.
The thing that gets murky for me is when the recording has blatantly misnamed tunes. The ones where you’re just sure that a certain artist could not possibly have not known the tune name was incorrect. On one hand I’d like to change the album tune names when they are obvious to a common name. On the other I feel like the album listing should reflect the original. I was changing the names for a short while and then decided to leave them be. I do link the incorrect tune names to the correct tune page though. This can be confusing too when your quickly going through and linking tunes without listening. Sometimes I’ll add notes. I asked Jeremy about this and he didn’t have a definitive answer.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

I’ll address each of these in turn. TheWanderer: you can solve that problem by adding "The Yellow Jolk" as an alternate name for that tune (you’ll find the "edit" link at the top of every tune page), and it will link without any issue.

@JWiseman: I usually leave the tune names as they are, except in a very specific case, namely, where the artist has omitted a name for a tune within a set. For example, if the set has one or two names but three tunes, I will be sure to put the other name in. My priority is that if a tune gets played on a recording, it gets listed, no matter what the names are. Alan Ng does this too; he documents the original name while changing the tune link to be correct. Unfortunately, because of the way our system works, we can’t do it exactly the same way. But I feel that this is our best alternative. I think as long as the tune links correctly, it’s probably better to keep the original name in most cases, as that is what people will see on the sleeve or the download or whatever.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

i feel like the track list could do with separate fields for the original track title and the actual tunes, for the very common case where the title on the official track list doesn’t include the tunes names (or, as mentioned, when they’re wrong). i agree that the database of recordings linked to actual tunes is a very valuable asset, but i do think preserving the original title would be a good idea, even if you can often cross-reference another site like discogs.com.

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

> for the very common case where the title on the official track list doesn’t include the tunes names

Ah yes, the "let’s name each track after a random word:

1. Keys
2. Hammer
3. Dreaming
4. Escape
5. Pingu
6. Rotation
7. Will this do?
8. No
9. Bulgarian

Flip through your Gaelic dictionary for a band name, take a brooding picture of the band in a landscape somewhere, and Bob’s your uncle.

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

> Flip through your Gaelic dictionary for a band name, take a brooding picture of the band in a landscape somewhere, and Bob’s your uncle.

or at least Kevin Crawford’s your flute player (!)

(meaning no disrespect to the excellent musicians in the band, of course, but it _is_ a rather silly trend - i wonder who started it?)

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Remember that the name of a tune in a set on a recording doesn’t have to match the name of the tune as listed in the tunes section. As Daniel points out, providing an alternative title for the tune in the tunes section is a way to get the best of both worlds.

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Coming back here just to ask one more question. What happens if a recording has fewer tunes than are listed? I got confused and thought that one track on a recording I added had 5 tunes, when in reality it only had 4 and the first of them was just the name of the set. I tried to get rid of the information for the mistaken tune in the first text box, but it says I need to fill it out.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

What I do is delete the name of the set, or else put it in parentheses.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Hi, what do you mean by "delete the set?" Since I inputted 5 tunes on the track, there are 5 text boxes that need to be filled with some information. Are you saying you’d put parentheses in the mistaken tune name? Sorry, I’m just confused!

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Just caught Calum’s "Bulgarian" reference, and I’m laughing far more than I should.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

@TheWanderer, what I’m saying is, only input the tune names, and leave out the set names. Anyone who has the album can figure out which set is on which track. Not so with the tunes.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Tunes in sets are separated by a forward slash, and it’s possible to missing tunes this way.

If the number of tracks is wrong, only Jeremy can help:
https://thesession.org/contact

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Speaking of the number of tracks, why is that the only thing about a recording we can’t edit? Jeremy?

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

You can edit it Daniel, the option is a button on the top right for any posted album/recording. There are three there, "Your Profile", "Edit", and "Share".

This also allows you to add additional tunes to a set if the number originally was not enough, or to Wanderers’ question, remove some if there were initially too many. Hope that helps!

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Nfld Whistler, I’m telling you, when you enter a recording’s edit page you cannot edit the number of tracks. Try it sometime.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

"I asked Jeremy about this and he didn’t have a definitive answer."
Been there.

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

You’re right Daniel, I was mistaken. In this case you might want to ask Jeremy to do so.

Not a huge fan of that comment AB.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Yeah Ab, Nfld’s right. This stuff is not easy. I don’t like people bashing Jeremy, he’s clearly gone above and beyond. If I ask him to make something more accessible here, he gets back to me right away and more often than not fixes it very quickly.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Fair play. I can definitely say the webmaster has provided me with definitive answers ninety-odd per cent of the time.

Ben

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Jeremy has always been great. In my case I would interpret his non-definitive answer as a simple matter of fact that this is part of the site structure is a bit of a puzzle.
Daniel Parker - Yes - I pretty much agree with everything you’ve said. I definitely list all the tune of a set and usually feel like I should leave the original sleeve titles alone.
I kind of hate the over-usage of AKAs. I hate looking up a tune and getting ten results only because that name was used a bunch of times for different tunes. I understand that there are tons of AKAs but it also seems to me that a significant portion of them are so uncommon that you have to begin to wonder if they are simply generated from mistakes from incorrect album listings. It slows things down sometimes. The world is not perfect - so I cry about it. This is a great website. labeling and defining trad music is simply difficult. Pondering a better system though is probably a worthwhile discussion I think.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

There isn’t a facility for editing the total number of tracks on an already-submitted recording because it’s a very rare occurrence. The time it would take to build that UI element would add up to a lot more than me doing it by hand on request on the few occasions it’s needed.

Hope that clears things up!

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

It does, Jeremy. Thanks.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

"Jeremy has always been great. In my case I would interpret his non-definitive answer as a simple matter of fact that this is part of the site structure is a bit of a puzzle."
Again…I’ve *been there*.

;)

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Again, let us praise Jeremy and this website he’s has made and worked on.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Susan K, Jeremy is praiseworthy for his hard work in making this site and sustaining it all these years.
I think Daniel Parker’s call to action in his original post is for All contributing members to take on some of
the work and help the webmaster keep the doors open and the wheels turning. Is that correct, Mr. Parker?

Posted by .

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

Ben, the answer to your question is yes, to some extent. But that’s not the only reason. I really think that with such a large number of recordings that have been crowdsourced here over the years, we ought to make sure the listings are accurate as possible for anyone, including one of us, who goes looking. What’s the point of indexing recordings if they aren’t accurate? We might not be able to establish Alan Ng’s level of accuracy, but with a larger library and contributor list than his, I don’t see why we shouldn’t be able to make the listings reflect the tunes that are heard on recordings.

Re: It’s Here, and We Ought to Use It: A call to All members

I hear you Daniel. I appreciate the goal/concept (accuracy in cross-referencing) though on this site what I mostly use are the comments. Indexing Irish tunes is inevitably challenging in itself largely due to the naming conventions, or lack of. For instance most people here will know what you mean by Morrison’s (or Morrison’s jig). Yet it’s not so easy to find a polka bearing his name w/out reading a few comments.
https://thesession.org/recordings/2408#comment835215

Posted by .