----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 8:15
AM
Subject: arsclist Cataloging
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