Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

[Proposal] Allow Performer indicator for classical pieces

posted
Total Posts
37
kadoen
25 posts
Joined August 2018
Topic Starter
kadoen
In classical music, the composer and the performer (musician) are two different individuals, and a single piece has many different interpretations and recordings by different people - both the composer and the performer are what builds a unique recording.

In current osu! convention however, the Artist field is just taken by the individual artist (example: beatmapsets/1187093#mania/2474006). This is confusing, as the actual composer is hidden in the tags. A parallel could be drawn to modern songs where a composer writes songs for an artist, and then the artist name (usually singer) is used in the Artist field (or Composer feat. Artist) - however I believe the classical situation is different enough to warrant a specific indicator, as the artist and the composer are completely separated and independent, a performance is not a "cover" as there isn't an "original recording" or "original release".

Proposal:

In recordings of classical pieces, the Artist field should indicate both the Composer and the Performer, using the standardized indicator "Composer (perf. Performer)". If the length of performer names exceeds the field character limit, "Various Performers" should be used.

Example: In the previously linked beatmap, the Artist field would be "Maurice Ravel (perf. Jean-Philippe Collard)".

This is not a common situation in osu! as there aren't many classical pieces being mapped due to their timing difficulty, but some examples do exist and I believe it would be good to include this standardization, as the current situation is not well handled by the existing Ranking Criteria.

EDIT after some discussion: Added "Various Performers" edge case.
Last edited by kadoen , edited 1 time in total.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
Joined July 2014
Quenlla
Absolutely vouch for this. With music like classical pieces or anything that is meant to be interpreted by numerous different individuals, there's an absolute need to have a mechanism to 1) not mislead players about who composed the song and 2) give proper and equal credit to performer and composer, which is one of the core ideas of interpretation.
moonpoint
311 posts
Joined January 2017
moonpoint
Sounds good.
RandomeLoL
Nomination Assessment Team
167 posts
Joined September 2015
RandomeLoL
While I still have my doubts on what would qualify for this convention as it is meant for classical music alone and a whole grey area might open up, I believe this is a proper standarization to properly credit the people who originally created a composition which, more often than not, will have a myriad of different interpretations.

So I vouch for the idea even if it might need to specify more stuff.
MJH
138 posts
Joined January 2013
MJH
neat.
Orca-
72 posts
Joined February 2016
Orca-
yeah
-mint-
646 posts
Joined September 2016
-mint-
this applies to stuff like covers as well
GoldenWolf
2,983 posts
Joined May 2012
GoldenWolf

PuigdemontLoL wrote:

While I still have my doubts on what would qualify for this convention as it is meant for classical music alone and a whole grey area might open up, I believe this is a proper standarization to properly credit the people who originally created a composition which, more often than not, will have a myriad of different interpretations.

So I vouch for the idea even if it might need to specify more stuff.
Speaking of specifying more stuff, what kind of "grey area" would this open up?
RandomeLoL
Nomination Assessment Team
167 posts
Joined September 2015
RandomeLoL
It was brought up in the mapping hub and even here with mint's words, but where do you draw the line between something being a mere performance and an entirely new work based on previous works? Even Midi performamces were brought up, and now covers as said by mint. What to do with those? Do we treat them under the same umbrella? Those are the questions to be answered to avoid the most confusion.

But do not misunderstand, I do fully back this idea due to how important should be to properly credit both the original composer and the respective performer.
GoldenWolf
2,983 posts
Joined May 2012
GoldenWolf

PuigdemontLoL wrote:

It was brought up in the mapping hub and even here with mint's words, but where do you draw the line between something being a mere performance and an entirely new work based on previous works? Even Midi performamces were brought up, and now covers as said by mint. What to do with those? Do we treat them under the same umbrella? Those are the questions to be answered to avoid the most confusion.

But do not misunderstand, I do fully back this idea due to how important should be to properly credit both the original composer and the respective performer.
I don't think this is much of a contention point personally;

Covers and arranges typically involve some form of re-writing of a previously commercially released song. Even if they are performed the same as the original song, they are still different from a classical composition being performed. Definitely not a legal expert by any means, but I think they are also considered differently on a copyright standpoint.

Think of it as a playwright & actors in theatre; Is the Macbeth written 4 centuries ago the same as the one played nowadays? As far as I'm aware, yes, though I suppose there is some differences of interpretation from one troupe to another when it is performed on stage. The same goes for composed classical pieces of yore; What Bach or Beethoven wrote hundreds of years ago is still what is being played today, even if there can be some interpretation based on the musicians/conductors performing the piece.


I'm curious as to what you mean exactly by "MIDI performances"? Depending on what you have in mind, this could go either way.
Ryu Sei
2,879 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
I'm thinking about MIDI performances are, something that you play on digital audio workstations (DAWs) by simply putting the MIDI and interpreting how the notes are played, how loud each notes are, and how the tempo would be like.

Regardless, I'm agree with this proposal.
CatzerTM
273 posts
Joined January 2018
CatzerTM
Definitely agree for the most part given how vast interpretation can be for classical pieces that sometimes don't get as much credit as they should.
Last edited by CatzerTM , edited 1 time in total.
Nao Tomori
Nomination Assessment Team
3,089 posts
Joined December 2014
Nao Tomori
why only classical and not all utaite type things
Ryu Sei
2,879 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei

Nao Tomori wrote:

why only classical and not all utaite type things
That's because utaite songs are covers. If the instrument and the backing sound is literally the same, it's simply just a cover. This is not a case for live-performed songs (or rather, in this case, pieces), because it may be interpreted differently than what it would be by the composer.
See this reply instead for the better explanation: community/forums/posts/8496904
SaltyLucario
1,308 posts
Joined June 2015
SaltyLucario
what if cover has new instrumental as well? those also happen
Ryu Sei
2,879 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
A case-by-case examination is needed if it's difficult to interpret.
kadoen
25 posts
Joined August 2018
Topic Starter
kadoen
Yes, covers are already covered in the current RC - the tagging is what the cover artist uses. I agree it can be misleading sometimes, but what should be used is what the artist intends to, as other parts of metadata. In case of classical music, it is convention that both the performer and the composer are prominently featured in every release - this makes metadata for it challenging not only in osu!, but in a lot of music platforms. This proposal is a solution for osu! to this common problem in music tagging.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
Joined July 2014
Quenlla
I think covers are on a completely diferent spectrum than what this rule is intended to address. Something being a "cover" implies there was an original release by the original artist, whereas in classical music there simply isn't. This means there's no way the composer could ever get any Artist credit even across thousands of ranked performances of the same song, and what makes having a mechanism like this so important.

In that sense, we could be wording it something something like:

Proposed RC wrote:

If the song's original release isn't the recording by the original artist (such as classical music pieces), both Artist and Performer must be creddited with a `Artist (Perf. Performer)` notation in the Artist field.
Last edited by Quenlla , edited 2 times in total.
Hivie
osu!taiko Paragon
902 posts
Joined March 2019
Hivie
+1
TheKingHenry
1,666 posts
Joined October 2014
TheKingHenry
I'm down for some improvements to the handling of classical music
epic man 2
476 posts
Joined May 2019
epic man 2
i am going to cover la campanella
[Ping]
498 posts
Joined April 2015
[Ping]
I was writing something, but it looked dumb. Basically, I agree with this proposal since it helps clarifies who the composer is better than having them in the tags.
Furryswan
Elite Nominator
325 posts
Joined January 2017
Furryswan
Sounds good
Shoegazer
osu!mania Paragon
528 posts
Joined April 2013
Shoegazer
No issues with the initial proposal after discussing a few edge cases like having multiple performers to the point where we can't fill the artist field with every performer. I wasn't sure about what the metadata of MIDI recordings of classical music was going to be either, but I think that was clarified quickly; the MIDI creator becomes the performer.

That said:

Proposed RC wrote:

If the song's original release isn't the recording by the original artist (such as classical music pieces), both Artist and Performer must be creddited with a `Artist (Perf. Performer)` notation in the Artist field.
I wouldn't be in support of this, mostly because there are many composers who perform their own music and the original release often times include the composer themselves as the performer alongside many others.

Quick examples but obviously far from exhaustive:
https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/terry-riley/in-c/
https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/philip-glass/glassworks/
https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/michael-tilson-thomas-ralph-grierson-steve-reich-roger-kellaway-tom-raney/three-dances-and-four-organs/

That said, there are also cases that I intuitively think using just the composer is correct if the performer and composer are the same (https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/max-richter/the-blue-notebooks/ ), so maybe it's better to look at this on a case-by-case basis.

There are also cases where the composer/songwriters and the performers don't overlap in music either (I think pop music does this more often), and I don't think it's necessary to credit non-classical music a la Artist (perf. Performer) because the song was intended to be performed in the way that the songwriters intended, while classical pieces have some sort of improvisation. Song covers aren't part of the discussion because there's an existing song that the cover was based on in the first place.
Last edited by Shoegazer , edited 4 times in total.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
Joined July 2014
Quenlla
My main issue with using "classical pieces" to word the rule is that it can have a bit unclear boundary as to when to stop using the marker or when to start doing so. Is there any other possible wording we can come up that makes it a bit more clear? (or at least a "case-by case basis" clause, as well as a clause that forbids song covers from using this marker as you say, which is necessary)
Last edited by Quenlla , edited 1 time in total.
Ephemeral
Inland Empire
3,936 posts
Joined April 2009
Ephemeral
Do other services have a standard or generally consistent way of using this kind of performer-composer notation? We should probably try to use that if at all possible.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 37