Some of the dates labeled for "musical career begins" I know were wrong. For example: 1923 was the year Bessie Smith first made commercially issued recordings, but she'd been a professional singer for some years before that. 1922 was the year that Louis Armstrong moved to Chicago to join King Oliver's band, but he'd been a professional musician since 1919, but wouldn't record until '23.
Also, the Memphis Blues most certainly was
not the first Blues published ("I Got The Blues" for example predates it by some 5 years).
--
Infrogmation 18:14 Jan 18, 2003 (UTC)
There are now a lot of "X's musical career begins" or "Y forms" entries on the Years in Music pages. Should there be a separate heading for these type of entries? Group Beginnings perhaps or something similar? What say ye?
-
Tubby
- I think these fit fine under "events", but I could handle a separate section for "group beginnings" (I don't really like the name but can't think of anything better). It might be useful, but I don't think it would be worth the effort of changing the format for such little gain. Tokerboy
I've been finding lots of pop tunes in the
Hits section (for the years in the first half of the 20th century I've been working with) have in the credit of
by just the name of the lyricist but not the composer of the tune! Were these imported from some other list, but only the first name listed included?
Wondering simply, --
Infrogmation
- I never did get an answer on this, but have been bit by bit cleaning them up; much remains to be done. --Infrogmation
On checking, it seems that for years
1935 in music and before the "by" lists composers, and from
1936 in music on it lists the best known recording artists. Perhaps we should always use "composed by" and "recorded by", never simply the ambiguous "by". --
Infrogmation 23:36 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)
Uh, 64.175.250.205, why do you think those commercial links are relevent to this page?
Sorry but I changed the wording about
Pictures in 1874 - in general I don't think "releases" is the right word for a piece like this, it being a verb that sounds to me tied to the world of recordings. I can see it's a problem - for example you can't say "composes" because it might have taken him the previous 10 years to do that, you can't necessarily say "publishes" because that might not be precisely what happened. Maybe it needs checking - was it publication, 1st performance or what? - and maybe for the time being the way I have put it will have to do pending someone thinking of something better. I suppose it exposes a general problem with classical music dates where it is sometimes difficult to nail down precisely what the date is - if someone says
Bach's Foo Bars of 1721 it doesn't really tell you what it was that happened then, other than that it was a key "1st" of some kind for the pieces. Also this is not in any way to impugn the work of Dwheeler in adding another early event to the list, something I was delighted to see. :)
Nevilley 08:32 Feb 19, 2003 (UTC)
Just a note: I don't know what you guys are using for a source for these events but be careful if you are using
any online "history in review" webpages. I've found that many of these events are flat out wrong or at least very misleading or misplaced (this is a sytemic problem that I've seen with every one of these types of webpages). These websites seem to copy each other back and forth and mistakes accumulate (this is worse than playing telephone). So each day I check the accuracy of every event I would like to list that is on the day page of my source (OnThisDay.com). I do this by performing a Google search on the month name, year and the subject of the event. If I get a bunch of hits on non-"history in review" websites then I can be reasonably sure that the event and its date is correct. But much of the time the only hits I get are 'history in review' webpages. So I don't use those events. --
mav
Okay, replacing the sudden unexplained change of "Top Hits" changing from published sheet music to recordings in 1935, I gave all the years from
1916 in music through
1935 in music seperate "Top Hit Songs Printed" and "Top Hit Recordings" categories, which seems to reflect the gradual shift in the driving forces of the music industry. More work needs to be done, and I'd like to extend the "Hit Records" category back a few more years if I can find decent data. I'm still gradually cleaning up the categories. --
Infrogmation 20:29 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
All Wikipedia text
is available under the
terms of the GNU Free Documentation License