Wed 5 Dec 2007
Classical in a Digital Age
Posted by David O under Programming
[8] Comments
Music distribution has gone digital, and as with any move or paradigm in the music industry, the model is designed for pop music, not real music. Argh!! I couldn’t even make it through the first sentence without my true colors showing. That’s right, I listen to classical music and I’m not apologetic about it.
I have spent many a late night over the past few years obsessing about my digital music collection. Whether it’s ripped from an old CD or purchased download, I have to have it labeled correctly. But this is a losing battle. Virtually all players are designed for standard pop albums with the artist, album, and song model. That just doesn’t cut it for real music. (OK. I’ll be honest. It bugs the heck out me when Beethoven’s Opus 132 gets referred to as a song.)
Anyway, I got hooked on digital music files a few years ago because the computer had a bad cd-rom drive in it. I couldn’t play a CD on it, but it would read the data and could rip a CD. So I started slowly moving my CD collection over one disk at a time. Well, I didn’t start out with iTunes, I tried a variety of players but mostly used the ziff player. The big decision is what format to use. I chose .ogg. There was no real reason other that I used CDex to rip the same track in a couple of formats at 160 kbps and .ogg sounded the best. The files were smaller as well. The difference wasn’t much, but I felt the .ogg files sounded warmer, especially the string sound. There are no end of websites and blogs promoting one standard over the others, but I’m not going to go there. I just made the decision early on that ogg was the best for me. My collection is not that large, a few hundred CDs, and it took a few years to convert the collection. I wasn’t actively trying to rip everything, but whenever I played a CD if it was on the computer with the bad drive, I would rip it. I eventually had most of my disks ripped and for the most part tagged.
I’ll spare you my discussion on what I think is the best way to tag to your classical music files. Instead, check out the following pages (especially the second) to see how the debate rages on. And these guys just cover what to do with iTunes. I’m sure there are many others.
Tagging Classical Music
Taming iTunes for Classical Music
On Classical Music Tagging (ID3 tags) for iTunes and iPod
Each of these is quite individual and so naturally, I neither totally agree or disagree with any of them. I applaud their careful work, but each method suffers from the same agonizing flaw. All they do is try to make a broken system appear less broken. I don’t want to start down that road. (However, for another time, I have some advise for using iTunes with classical music. Anyone else out there used the iTunes COM for Windows SDK?)
Instead, I ask why are we so stuck on the primitive data model of a single track stored as a single row in a table? Relational database anyone? Authority records? We could even do something pretty good with a little XML.
I just randomly pulled a CD off my shelf. It is a Telarc disc of orchestral music by Barber performed by the ASO and Yoel Levi. When I stick this into iTunes, rather than have the Gracenote’s database give me a few choices for the CD and then fill in the rows with poorly formatted strings, it should just give me a link to an authority record (or some XML) for the CD. This would contain accurate information for composer, compositions, and performers etc. Then within the player, I could choose how to display this information for the CD. Does the Name column contain both the full piece name and the movement name or just the movement name? I could define this through some kind of options dialog in iTunes or just give it my own xsl translation.
I know, you’re wondering how are all these authority records created anyway? The same way they are now, by having users submit them. If I were to put in a CD that was not yet in the Gracenotes database, I would fill in the crucial data much like I do now in iTunes. For composer, I’d highlight the tracks on the CD by Barber and then iTunes and its database would give me a list of known composers to choose from. Pick another track, and it could provide a list of known compositions by Barber etc. Starting with a core database of a few hundred composer records, a few thousand composition records, and a similar number of ensemble and performer records, one could quickly create a new complete CD record for the database based on existing records. Of course, new records for composers and compositions could be submitted and vetted by the database. Most of the CDs would not need to submit any new data beyond what compositions and performers appear in the release.
If you think this data still would be too hard to create or put on-line, then check out ArkivMusic. Granted, ArkivMusic is a retailer and their database serves a different purpose, but they’ve done a whole lot of things correctly. At this site, I don’t never have to differentiate between Samuel Barber and Barber, Samuel, or between Atlanta Symphony Orchestra and Atl Sym Orch. Why can’t putting music in my digital music player work half this easily?
To be fair, I’m certainly not the only one out there grappling with these questions. Kirk McElhearn has started a project called The Well-Tempered Database, though it still seems to be getting off the ground. Of course, if you have the means (~$5,000) you could always get the Fortuna Maestro Classical Music Player and have someone else do your cataloging for you. Let me know about any other projects there may be.
I’ll also take this opportunity to put in a plug for eMusic. Here is the other side of the coin. They have incorporated classical music into their business model just as they did for noise downloads (pop music), one price per track. Their standard fee for 30 downloads is $9.99/month, or ~33 cents per track. Good price for your average 3 minutes noise track, but what a bargain if you go for a big piece of real music like Beethoven’s Ninth. The four tracks cost you $1.33 and you get 65 minutes of music at a higher quality than the standard iTunes download. That’s a steal! The drawback is that it is a subscription service. Ten dollars a month with a use it or lose it policy.
So I admit that I am a classical music snob, but it’s mostly in good humor. I don’t care what you listen to as long as I can listen to what I want to. As proof I offer this recent photo of me playing jazz/rock violin with the band Fujiyama Roll. (Sorry for the low image quality.) I really am a hip guy who can get down to some funky music. Far out, man!
Rock star David O
December 6th, 2007 at 11:59 am
And if the picture isn’t enough to prove it, I, being privileged to know you in person, can attest to the fact that you are a cool funky guy, despite your musical arrogance
A refreshing and enjoyable article!
December 6th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
What you want is foobar2000 and its custom title formatting.
Extend the idv2 tags to include any missing information and display it how you like.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
http://musicbrainz.org
December 7th, 2007 at 3:41 am
> Why can’t putting music in my digital music
> player work half this easily?
Well, playing classical music on a PC can be much like using ArkivMusic.
- My music files are in Flac format which allows me to define the tags I want to use:
Composer = Composer, Artist = performer Monteux_LSO), Work name = the work name(Symphony No. 1), and track name = movement
- I use the J. River media center 12 player to rip, tag and play my classical music collection. I can add the tags I want when I rip CDs. I have view schemes for classical and other genres. The classical view scheme has iTunes like panes for sub-genre, Composer, Work name, Artist and version to select the music files to be displayed. I can sort the displayed files based on up to 4 tags at a time.
- I usually select a composer, then a work, then an artist. If I have several performances (say mono and stereo or different remasterings), I pick a versions too.)
I got what I needed without painful compromises. I don’t yet use a portable player like an iPod and I know that some compromises may be required.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:38 am
Perhaps I should look at J. River again. It’s been a few years since I tried it. However, you mention the main problem. I have an old iPod and so the tug to use iTunes is quite strong. Plus, I’ve been seduced by their CoverFlow eye candy. Just when I thought that I could give up iTunes, they pull me back in.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:17 am
Actually, I wonder sometimes why we have to tag the music files anyway. One could argue that the tag data should stand alone and just include a link to a digital music file. Building a versatile cataloger and music browser would be easier if the data did not just reside in tags in the files. Some apps may be doing this. Please let me know.
iTunes does really do this, in a way. If you use ogg files in iTunes, which iTunes can not manipulate directly, iTunes does store this separately in the iTunesLibrary.itl file. (Your aac file data is here too.) You can see an xml version of this by looking at the accompanying iTunesLibrary.xml file or by exporting a playlist to xml.
Unfortunately, iTunes does not allow you much flexibility. Editting the iTunesLibrary.xml file directly (in an editor like SlickEdit), doesn’t change anything. iTunes really just uses the proprietary format iTunesLibary.itl file and mirrors its contents to iTunesLibrary.itl. You could edit the iTunesLibrary.xml file, save it with another name, clear your library (or create a new one) and then import that xml file. Not very convenient, and you still can’t specify coverflow artwork unless the art in embedded in each digital music file. Or you can program your own tools with the iTunes COM for Windows SDK, but your still limited to just the fields iTunes understands. Not much help for doing intelligent classical music cataloging.
December 7th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Great article, David, and thanks for mentioning ArkivMusic. President Eric Feidner and his founding partners understand classical music, databases and the Internet, and it’s refreshing to have a drilldown search tool that is so simple and effective for classical music. I don’t know if you know that ArkivMusic also imports the iTunes catalog so you can search for works to download on iTunes more efficiently via ArkivMusic. Happy listening!
December 7th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
ArkivMusic was a good example of doing it right when I figured out how I wanted to do things.
> Building a versatile cataloger and music
> browser would be easier if the data did
> not just reside in tags in the files.
J. River MC 12 maintains a database with standard fields and custom fields you define. Fields can have changes their values stored in file tags or not.
MC 12 has iPod sync capabilities too. Lots of people use them.
You clearly want more than iTunes provides. I went through a thought process like yours and decided that iTunes wasn’t good enough then (ver. 4.7) and wasn’t likely to get better. Life got much better after I gave up on it.
J. River has released a free version of MC 12 called Media Jukebox 12. It doesn’t have the image and video features of MC 12. There is also a 30 day trial version of MC 12. If you try it, just realize that there is a lot of functionality and it won’t all be obvious to you right away.
The J. River forums are a first rate resource:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php
(I’m “Listener” on those forums.) I’ve posted on using MC 11 and 12 for classical music and on secure ripping.