Too Many Records , Too Little Time Member since Jan 2013 306 Points
Juke Jules wrote:
A nice distinction, TheJudge, as long as the record companies observed it the same
Do we have any evidence of Record Companies ( in lets say , western democracies ) being inconsistent on the same label ? Band Leaders were in most cases the paymaster for their bands , and not always the vocalist , or even lead musician in the band. As such the artist effectively is the economic unit that was entitled to the royalties from the product.
Too Many Records , Too Little Time Member since Jan 2013 306 Points
Just watching BBC4 'The Kings Of Rock ' n ' Roll' , and its got to Chuck Berry , looking up what we have so far ( limited ) the early Chess Records 78s are on the label , in the notes here , as Chuck Berry and His Combo. Seeing as I understand Chuck (alone ?) went into Chess , saying Muddy Waters sent him , the Combo I guess was in this instance the house band. I understand Leonard Chess added Bass Player and Maracas ( Wikipedia ), the Wikipedia page also mentions these were added to 'the Trio' , which looking up Johnnie (Clyde) Johnson was Johnnie Johnson on Piano and and Ebby Hardy on Drums, the three performed as The Sir John Trio in live clubs.
45cat has change "Maybellene" ( and others ) To Chuck Berry and His Combo , so really at least 78world should be consistent across the two formats.
An artist search for Harry James now shows the following:
Harry James 0 records
Harry James And The Boogie Woogie Trio 27
Harry James And His Orchestra 26
Harry James And The Quintet 26
Harry James And Paul Weston 2
Frank Sinatra And Harry James 1
Only 1 record is actually credited to The Boogie Woogie Trio - and the Quintet appear only on one B side (R.2988).
Too many psuedonyms have been put in, cos this search result doesn't look right to me.
I think Harry James should be the main artist - linking all of the variations together (and that could then include the duets) - and then links back to the main discog can be put on each artist page.
PS
I've just added one by Ambrose And His Orchestra - and notice there are now 6 credited to Ambrose And His Orchestra, and 7 credited to just Ambrose (though all the labels show And His Orchestra)
Looks like the linking and reporting back from the database is incorrect.
Since I think artists names should reflect , unless good reason , what is on the label, of the performers the numbers at present should be
Harry James And The Boogie Woogie Trio 2
Harry James And His Orchestra 26 (? I didnt actually count the number of tracks )
Harry James And The Quintet 1
Harry James And Paul Weston 2
Frank Sinatra And Harry James 1
Obviously we are nowhere near the full number of tracks recorded by Harry James and any other personnel.
Have you read the whole topic.
If not, please do, because this is a rather big issue.
Both for you and for me.
I've asked for some kind of solution on this task, but not recieved a final one yet.
It would be good to have one, so everyone do the same here.
Thanks.
Yes, I have read (and previously contributed to) this topic.
I'd just been pointing out a few examples of artists that perhaps need looking at by moderators.
When I wrote:
Quote:
I think Harry James should be the main artist - linking all of the variations together ...
I thought you'd perhaps come to agreement about the " and his orchestra" issue, and that's why no records are currently credited to just Harry James.
When you go to his artist page - Harry James - it shows numbers of records for each country (UK 11, USA 10, Netherlands 3, Canada 1, Denmark 1, Sweden 1, All Records 27)
along with "No records to show."
To me, I would agree that, e.g. "Fred Fargle with orchestra" should go under just "Fred Fargle", because it's an unspecified orchestra - the equivalent of a studio pick-up group. However, "Fred Fargle And His Orchestra" is very specific; it's His orchestra rather than anyone's or no-one's.
In this as in anything else, there will be inconsistencies, but we can link where necessary.
Here's my mea culpa at the end of this: the other night I reverted most of the Harry James ones mentioned in Dr.D's opening post to Harry James And His Orchestra in line with that - for want of a better word - reasoning. Feel free to change them back if you think it matters; I'll be a bit more circumspect about it in future.
I personally agree with this (I note that nobody did change them back!).
Which is why Harry James 0 appears , when an artist is entered into the cat , that artist name is held , if the artist name is changed , a new artist name ( if necessary ) is created or the record name entry is changed to the revised artist name , the old , 'incorrect' artist name though remains in the cat database of artists names. ( OK I am guessing but I think its reasonable on how the underlying database works , it seems logical ).
Tell me he's lazy, tell me he's slow Member since Jan 2011 4150 Points Moderator
This has got into a mess for Harry James. "Harry James" should be the main artist, under which all his other collaborations are listed, even though we have no records credited to HJ alone. Take a look again at Harry James and see if we are all happy now
Tell me he's lazy, tell me he's slow Member since Jan 2011 4150 Points Moderator
And speaking of orchestras, do we have any preferences regarding the terms "Orch", "Orch.", "Ork." etc? I would prefer that we do not use these abbreviations, although they often appear on labels to save space
If you were to write "A History Of The Orchestra And Orchestral Playing" I'm sure that Orch or Orch'al would never appear in 850 pages of print, even if you had used them in the manuscript, and in these Worlds we are not so short of space or energy that we need to perpetuate their use
So, unless someone can persuade me not to, I am quite likely to go around altering these abbreviations to the full words