John Croft
My feedback
7 results found
-
5 votesJohn Croft
supported this idea
·
-
16 votesJohn Croft
shared this idea
·
-
4 votesJohn Croft
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesJohn Croft
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesJohn Croft
supported this idea
·
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment John Croft
commented
Thanks, Dan. I agree that iTunes is not the serious collector's application of choice, but as you note this will be the case for downloads from Apple, even if you never use iTunes for listening. I'm normally a purist but to me this seems right, as it avoids potentially dozens of albums with the same title (e.g. "Piano Trios"). Also, as it's just the composer's surname, it gets around problems of sorting by composer field, which will often be, unhelpfully, by first name.
Derived tags could well be a solution - except that you wouldn't want it on, say, classical recital CDs (a random example would be the disc "Soleils de Nuit" with piano music by about ten different composers). So you wouldn't necessarily want to always *add* a composer; just to *allow* <composer name>: at the start if it's already there when checking.
John Croft
shared this idea
·
-
18 votesJohn Croft
supported this idea
·
As an aside with regard to polluting data, I note that Bliss often wants to *add* the composer to the Album Artist field - e.g. it wants to change the album artist for Bach 4 Orchestral Suites from Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra, Ton Koopman (correct) to "Bach; Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra..." I know you don't control the databases, so this might be impossible to fix... but if the composer is going to pollute anything, it seems that the album title would be the place (as people would normally refer to a disc as "Haydn Sonatas" rather than as the (meaningless) "Sonatas").