|
As Phil Hirsh pointed out, library cataloging
is a grafting job of which Luther Burbank would have been ashamed. To
the tree of book cataloging it grafts music as almost-books and recordings as
almost-music. Dubbings of other recordings are
almost-records.
In addition the needs of libraries and private
collectors overlap but, past the part of the circles that overlap, are vastly
different.
Most available databases so far brought to the
attention of this list are ones that follow library rules.
For classical music, I've been using the format set
out in the World Encyclopedia of Recorded Music for 40 years now, with changes
(Clough & Cuming, after all, followed the rules for library cataloging in
1948 with alterations.)
The objective of my own databases has been to
create a screen or page that looks like their entries, but in the order I
choose. There's was, in part, based on retail availabilty of the listed
items, hardly a consideration today.
C&C, in turn, built their system on that of the
Gramophone Shop Encyclopedias designed, I believe, by R.D. Darrell.
Classical music is far more complex to catalog than
popular music, and any system shoud be designed from the most difficult to the
least, not the other way around. That's the basic weakness in professional
library cataloging rules.
A system should be designed to put the right
information in the right place in the right way, whatever that may
be. There is very useful information in library cataloging rules and
some clever solutions to vexing problems- uniform titles for works appearing in
various editions as Symphony No. 1, First Symphony, Erste Symphonie,
etc.
In the beginning is the title. There have
been various attempts at complete works lists by composers- All-Music Guide
offers some very good ones. But for those of us wanting access to our
collections at the item-level, there is not enough detail. Many Russian
composers do not have titles worked out for every song they wrote, only their
greater and lesser hits. Individual piano pieces need more detail.
But it's a potentially great resource.
Another issue. How much time are you willing
to spend cataloging your items? Would you pay money to avoid having to put
in that time, or most of it?
Would you buy cataloging, as with OCLC who sells
their cataloging to libraries, only in a more consumer-friendly form? Is
there a business for someone doing this out thee, perhaps in conjunction with a
preexisting business who have developed the materials we need and would mostly
have to alter, expand and shuffle data they already have?
ARSC's present efforts at putting together
everyone's 78 lists suffers from a lack of standards applied uniformly by the
various contributors. Ross Laird's "Brunswick Records" is terrible
when it comes to identifying classical music.
If ARSC is to have a hand in cataloging issues
as they relate to private collectors, perhaps in conduction with one of the
pre-existing cataloging services, this should be addresses both on this list
and, perhaps, at the forthcoming conference.
For those who feel that a dollar spent on
cataloging is a record not bought, this is not for you.
Steve Smolian
|