Song Corrections Thread

[qqwref]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

I don't plan contacting any musician outside the website because it's very risky :

Although I understand what bmah's trying to say, I don't think a question like "I'm wondering, what's the real official name for this song? it isn't clear" could possibly be an issue.

Why ?

Because all that "Suite No. 2 in B minor, BWV 1067" is just lookup data that identifies the piece. Nobody outside of the classical music community is going to remember a song by that number. Having many songs with similar notation will only make things harder to find. It may be useful to have that information listed somewhere, but the name of the song is not the place - and if you absolutely need to put it there, it should be after the common name of the song, so people can actually find the thing in the song list.

[Crazyjayde]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

It may be useful to have that information listed somewhere, but the name of the song is not the place - and if you absolutely need to put it there, it should be after the common name of the song, so people can actually find the thing in the song list.

Thank qqwref for mentioning this. This is basically what we talked through chat tonight, and we settled that the standard for classical nomenclature could be the common name followed by the reference, like you are proposing. As an example: Humoresque Op.101, No.7 or "Black Key" Etude Op.10, No.5.
That way, it's a good compromise between accurate information and recognizable song names. It's also a nice idea to keep the common name at the beginning of the name since titles often do not appear completely.

I don't see why finding a song would be a problem though. Even if the name for the piece is two foot long, typing in the common name in the search query will isolate the corresponding value. But yeah, if you search songs according to genres, it could become a problem...

It's a shame there's no way of inputing a secondary title for a specified song like SM. It could have been of great use. :\

[noname219]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

Although I understand what bmah's trying to say, I don't think a question like "I'm wondering, what's the real official name for this song? it isn't clear" could possibly be an issue.

Anything could happen. And it's probably going to be case per case. For Charlotte Summer, I think I can figure it out without having to contact anybody, but that needs more research.
There's some other cases I really can't find what's going on, and we would have to contact some people outside FFR to get more information. We just have to be prudent on how to approach the artist.

Because all that "Suite No. 2 in B minor, BWV 1067" is just lookup data that identifies the piece. Nobody outside of the classical music community is going to remember a song by that number. Having many songs with similar notation will only make things harder to find. It may be useful to have that information listed somewhere, but the name of the song is not the place - and if you absolutely need to put it there, it should be after the common name of the song, so people can actually find the thing in the song list.

I had a conversation about this tonight with Crazyjayde and we were thinking on reworking on the classical music propositions... I think I've missed some few things in the process.
Anyway, as you said, it would be more convenient to have the common name first, then the "reference" name. Like this :
- "Moonlight Sonata" Piano Sonata no. 14, Op. 27, No. 2, Mov. 1
- "Badinerie" Suite No. 2 in B minor, BWV 1067
hi19hi19 did it this way on this thread, and we (Crazyjayde and me) thought it would be the best way to write them out (after a quite intense debate I should say ^^).

I would like to do the same thing with Japanese title, something like this for example :
- Border of Maximum (極限領域)
- Zephon (世音)
But, that would not be possible.

After we've gathered all the data and make the changes, I would like to set an extensive database (so we could have more information about everything concerning the songs and artists - something like the in-game song information thread). So far, I've set up this list, but the problem is that it's on another website. Probably like a wiki or something so people can add their own information. That would be cool.

edit : ninja'd

EDIT 2 : Thinking about : how are we going to write One Minute Waltz v2 ? Full name is Waltz in D flat major, Op. 64, No. 1. How are we going to tell the difference between the first version from the second if the search will cut out the last few characters ?
"Minute" Waltz, Op. 64, No. 1 v2 would be the correct way... What about "Minute Waltz v2", Waltz, Op. 64, No. 1 ?

[Crazyjayde]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

"Minute" Waltz, Op. 64, No. 1 v2 would be the correct way... What about "Minute Waltz v2", Waltz, Op. 64, No. 1 ?

Don't strain yourself with over-thinking. The latter is completely fine.

[qqwref]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

As an example: Humoresque Op.101, No.7 or "Black Key" Etude Op.10, No.5.
That way, it's a good compromise between accurate information and recognizable song names. It's also a nice idea to keep the common name at the beginning of the name since titles often do not appear completely.

Indeed. Also I would suggest not using quotation marks (ESPECIALLY when they are around the entire common name) because then the song will just appear at the bottom of the list, which negates the whole point of putting it where people would expect it to be in the song list.

Actually, idea: put the classical info in parentheses. Your second example would be Black Key Etude (Op.10, No.5). Then if we have a v2 we can just put it before the parentheses and it wont look weird at all.

I don't see why finding a song would be a problem though. Even if the name for the piece is two foot long, typing in the common name in the search query will isolate the corresponding value.

Personally, I only use the search bar when I'm looking for a specific file. Otherwise I turn off my AAAs and then just sort it by name. So in that case it would be a problem to have like twenty Op. <number> things, because I'd have no idea which is which.

I would like to do the same thing with Japanese title, something like this for example :
- Border of Maximum (極限領域)
- Zephon (世音)

Why? If you can't read the language it's unreadable clutter, and if you can it's the same thing written twice. I don't see any benefit.

It's a good argument to add a "secondary title" or something... we could put classical info, original language titles, and even album data there. Less clutter for people looking for songs to play, but anyone who wants to can look it up.

[noname219]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

Actually, idea: put the classical info in parentheses. Your second example would be Black Key Etude (Op.10, No.5). Then if we have a v2 we can just put it before the parentheses and it wont look weird at all.

I like that idea. +1

Why? If you can't read the language it's unreadable clutter, and if you can it's the same thing written twice. I don't see any benefit.

If it was only me, I would go further and only use the Japanese title, only because it's the correct title. But frankly, it's not something we should plan in the realm of possibilities : too much confusion and the game would suffer. Hence the reason why a romanized title, or at least a translated one must stay.
Having the real title in parenthesis after the common known title (similar to the classical proposition) is something that, imo, could work. We wouldn't have to rely on a separate database see the real name.
Of course, a better solution is a secondary title.

[EzExZeRo7497]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

Of course, a better solution is a secondary title.

That idea sounds great haha.
On another note, Arrogant Cobbler is mislabeled I think. It's supposed to be Arrogant Cobbler (Nero's Day At Disneyland - Rock Rock Rock Remix), basically it's a remix of Rock Rock Rock by DJ Donna Summer but it's named as Arrogant Cobbler. The title is too long though, a secondary title would definitely suffice.

http://www.discogs.com/DJ-Donna-Summ...elease/1486707

[noname219]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

That idea sounds great haha.
On another note, Arrogant Cobbler is mislabeled I think. It's supposed to be Arrogant Cobbler (Nero's Day At Disneyland - Rock Rock Rock Remix), basically it's a remix of Rock Rock Rock by DJ Donna Summer but it's named as Arrogant Cobbler. The title is too long though, a secondary title would definitely suffice.

http://www.discogs.com/DJ-Donna-Summ...elease/1486707

Hard to tell for this one.
I know I've proposed the artist name "DJ Donna Summer remixed by Nero's Day At Disneyland", but I wasn't sure for the title track. Was it really intended to put the title like this, or it was to indicate who made the remix ?
It's a digital album, so it can be downloaded.



So, I think you're right. Looks like the name is really Arrogant Cobbler (Nero's Day At Disneyland - Rock Rock Rock Remix)

[EzExZeRo7497]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

The artist should be just DJ Donna Summer. Seeing that Nero's Day At Disneyland is already mentioned in the title, the "remixed by Nero's Day At Disneyland" part would be redundant.

Same goes for the other Rock Rock Rock remix on FFR, the artist should be just DJ Donna Summer, instead of "DJ Donna Summer feat. t+pazolite".

[noname219]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

I don't know about the rules concerning this (or if there are any), but I don't think the song name should have an impact on the artist name. They're both different things. I see the remix as a work of both DJ Donna Summer and Nero's Day At Disneyland, I believe both should be listed. Even if it's redundant with the title, it's more homogenous with other remixes (less exceptions)...

About t+pazolite, it should be "remixed by", not "feat." right?

[EzExZeRo7497]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

Yes, it would be DJ Donna Summer remixed by t+pazolite if that's the case.

[igotrhythm]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

I dunno if anybody remembers the super old FF7 Battle that got disabled due to permission issues with The Black Mages.

Well, today I found out that the FFR version of the song was from the video game's OST, not from the Black Mages themselves.

By way of comparison, here's the original:

And here's the Black Mages' rendition:

This is assuming that SilentWeaponsIII has his sources correct, of course.

[Coolboyrulez0]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

Correct we used OST version, same with Chrono Trigger.

Black Mages battle rendition was never stepped but should be given that we do have permission.

[One Winged Angel]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

@noname, if you can compile and sort the list of songs in order of largest time difference (I'd rather get the big ones out of the way first as opposed to < 5 sec differences), I'll fix the entire list over time

[noname219]

Re: Song Corrections Thread

I think you're on the spreadsheet atm, I've changed the last column and the songs are ranked by their time difference.

(https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...aTXlHNGc#gid=0)