Seen live collection

i want to be able to tag events that i have been to so i eventually get a list of ALL the artists i saw live.

to problem is that this currenlty isn’t possible within the collections part. this is mainly because i can only create a collection based on events. but if i look at a festival, mainly festivals with multiple stages, i am not able to see ALL bands on ALL the stages since there wille be multiple bands playing together on different stages.

so what i actually need is a way to tag a band on a stage at an event.

eventually i want it a bit grouped per artist, so i can see how many times a saw a certain band, and then where i did see them.

is there a solution for this? or am i wanting something really far fetched?

2 Likes

For a more simple approach, you can tag all your artists with seen live tag, and then have a look at only yours.

BTW it’s easier this way to tag exactly which band members you’ve ever seen live, as well.

1 Like

If I understand correctly:
You go to a festival and see one band at a stage, and then move to another stage to see another band. So adding the whole ‘stage’ event to your collection is not accurate, it will show bands you missed?

I have had this problem as well, I don’t really attend festivals, but sometimes it feels like cheating if I missed all the bands at a show except for one, but they are all in my collection :lying_face:

I also don’t know a good solution. I have to say that thinking of possible UI & UX (that is easy to code and understand) to make this happen makes my head hurt. It is a bit complicated.

But, nothing is far fetched! You can even code the changes yourself, or get a friend/pay someone to do it. If that’s not an option I have to say that this probably wouldn’t be a priority for the core team right now, but the first step to getting someone else to possibly do this for you/us would be for you to make a ticket with exactly what you envision :slight_smile:

As a side note, once we have events in LB I really want this to be a feature! But I imagine it will also not have the complexity of tracking individual bands at events, just entire events.
(LB events are currently on hold until the OAuth project is completed)

1 Like

I don’t think it’s far fetched at all, it makes a lot of sense to want to keep track of exactly what you have and haven’t seen.

It’s been discussed if we should add every single performance as an event for this purpose. Logically this would make a lot of sense and it would allow you to select exactly all the performances you’ve seen. But practically it would be a ton of work, splitting festival into it’s different stages or venues is already quite a bit of work. This is currently not in the event style guide, which only mentions splitting festivals into days and venues.

A potential solution would be to not force but allow people to split the performances as separate events where they have a personal need for it. This doesn’t seem ideal because we would be storing data in 2 different ways, but it’s a solution that doesn’t need any code change so perhaps it could be an option until we come up with something better?

Another temporary solution, that requires less effort, is to edit your collection of events and put the missing info (exactly which performances you’ve seen) as text in the description field. Visually not the most pleasing solution, but you could just store it there waiting for future updates.

2 Likes

i’ve created a ticket.

3 Likes

I think festivals (stages) that are designed with the intent that people will come and go should be split into individual concerts.

On the other hand, if it’s a festival where you are not allowed to re-enter when you leave, and is designed to be seen as a whole, then I don’t think it should be split into individual concerts.

Even a festival where there is no re-entry is usually made up of multiple stages. I know when I go to a festival I never camp out at one stage. I go back and forth all over the place seeing different bands. Some planned, some accidental.

1 Like

also, when you don’t arrive at the festival when the doors open but after the first band has already played. even then you should be able to mark the bands that you did see and have the bands that you didn’t see unmarked.

Splitting a festival stage up into tens or hundreds of individual events causes more issues than it solves, imo. It also doesn’t solve the problem for other types of events where you might only watch some acts.

I think this is more of a UI/UX problem.

1 Like

to be honest, i’m also not a fan of splitting up the events. i already find it a lot of work now to add a 4 day 4 stage event by hand.

but i think having a list of all the acts you saw live with the location where you saw them should be something that is possible.

and i also think for future events you should be able to create a wish list.
so you have a list of the bands you want to see on that event. and when the event is finished you can mark which ones you actually saw.

maybe there should be an extra parameter when you mark it so it could be seen/partially seen to mark if you saw a part of the show and not the full show… like sometimes if there isn’t anything i planned to see at that time i just walk around te stages until i find something that sounds interesting, by then you have missed the beginning but did end up watching the rest. or if you start watching something but you have to go to a different stage for a band you more want to see, so you miss the end of the first thingy.

On the contrary, a single festival stage seems unmaintainable to me. There’s no way to group supporting musicians with the main performer (not just a UI issue) and setlists would also be hell. Having an individual concert linked to the festival stage as a “part” addresses those issues. The existing guidelines even say this should be done if certain prerequisites are met.

Can you explain how extracting logical components out of a festival stage “causes more issues than it solves”? I’m not seeing a single issue, let alone net gain, that merging all concerts on a stage would solve.

but there are a lot of other stuff that is missing now.

the same for ratings. the way it is now, you can only rate a stage, you can’t rate the artists performance. and since performance can change between different gigs.

if it where split up, then you would be able to rate the artist per performance, be able to collect them,…
but i understand that this would be a nightmare to set up and a lot of work to do.

it would be easier if there was a general event ui. where you could easily create different dates and have different stages and then add the artists, and it would AUTOMAGICALLY create all the separated events for you. maybe also have a mor grafically view similar to the schedule of a festival, like this Timetable 2024 - Jera On Air 2024 - June 27-28-29-30

1 Like

I also think splitting festivals into individual artist performances can make sense as an option, and perhaps even required in a couple situations. for example, Five Iron Frenzy’s first show at the Cornerstone Festival was performed unofficially at the skate park on the festival grounds

A lot of this “What if I only see part of the event?” discussion applies just as well to concerts as it does to festivals.
In the past, I’ve floated the idea that Musicbrainz could/should have a “Set” entity sometime in the future, where an event could be divided up into “sets”.

I just now created ticket MBS-13637 to have a reference point for this “set” discussion.

I don’t imagine that this will happen all that soon.

1 Like

Before I reply, I’m not sure if we are talking about the same thing -
Are you proposing to split festivals out into an event for stages (which is fine, and current practice), or to split festivals/stages into an event for each artist. e.g. festival with 100 artists = 100 events.

This is what would be required to solve OP’s problem, so I thought it was being proposed. If so, it makes more sense, to me, to instead code a feature and the UI to only mark certain acts in a event as seen.

p.s. Overall I do support the idea of having more granularity in events, e.g. adding ‘sets’ (just like we have release > recording). But also keeping the top level ‘event’ structure easy to add and edit (again, release > recording is a good example, where a beginner can add a release, without having to worry about the fact that [123] recordings are being created)

1 Like

I think adding sets is a wonderful idea. I agree with @aerozol that this type of solution is far preferable over a solution that makes adding events a lot more work.

I always imagine (hope) events eventually becoming part of LB, and LB providing an overview of concert attending stats as it does with regular music listening. So it could show that a user goes to x number of events per year, of which x% are of a certain genre, or x% is at the same venue and the user visited a certain number of different venues in total, and which artist the user has seen perform most often, etc.

Adding sets would be laying the groundwork for this potential future, because without it all stats would be wrong.

1 Like

The features OP describes here are implemented in my android app FestivalGuide. I hope it is okay to link it here.

The data will be stored locally in the app, but I plan to implement a backup/sync feature with MB collections. My approach was to have an artist collection per event.

is there also an ios version coming up? i don’t have an android and would love to test your app

Sorry, not in the near future. The app architecture is build on Jetpack Compose. Maybe Compose Multiplatform enables an easy migration, but I think it is not production ready. But when it is, I can think about other platforms than Android.