Tagging Grateful Dead tracks with ">" or "->"

I have been looking at Grateful Dead recordings that have a “>” or “->” after them in “Dicks Picks”. I suspect “recording > recording” or “recording → recording” is just another way of saying medley or maybe jamming from one song to another, I just do not know. Then there are the tracks that have “>” or “->” at the end, does that mean the next track is part of that medley or jam and they were just broken into two recordings?

Hope that makes sense, not sure how to ask it.

It certainly means one seeing flows into the next one, cross-fade or medley.

If it’s just no-gap, there should not be any special largo, like this.

Grateful Dead recording (or track) titles containing “>”


Yes, it’s because the songs jam out and segue together. It’s very common for archived releases for the GD catalog,both SBD and official albums.

Like Help > Slip > Franklin etc.


Within the same documentation and maybe release I may see “>” between a set of songs which I assume is a medley and I will also see “->” on other tracks, is there a difference in meaning? Also some of the tracks may have spaces before and after, I am not sure that is by mistake or means something. The following are the permutations:
song > song > song
song → song → song

Same thing. It just means segue jam → into > jam :slight_smile:

Some folks who release SBD shows have their own system of shorthand but generally, it all means the same thing.

Scarlet → Fire
Estimated > Franklin’s Tower


The usual notation, though, is to separate titles by space slash space. And we don’t put a trailing slash when the next title is on next track.
MultipleTitleStyle, even for medleys.

Okay, I will go with that. I am working on the “30 days of the dead” series for a friend and trying to get things correct. Naming and tagging are all over the place. First time I have really used Picard, the “Swiss Army Knife” of taggers, I have a lot to learn, but love the file renaming.

1 Like

I’d say that this is probably one of those situations where it’s okay to deviate from our guidelines due to the conventions of where the music information is coming from. If the “official” track lists uses > or -> to denote a special kind of transition, IMHO I think I’d expect to keep that when it’s entered into MusicBrainz.

I’d be perfectly fine with either keeping as-is or changing to / in this situation. If there was a clear consensus for this kind of thing in the bootleg scene then I’d say go for it, since there doesn’t seem to be then I’m not sure!

using ‘>’ is common practice for jam band live recordings

Release “On the Road: Austin, TX: 04-15-17” by The String Cheese Incident - MusicBrainz (pdf track listing uses ‘>’)

another example (archived phish.com page) From The Road – Phish

I was not looking at editing the MB track lists, I think what is represented in MB is correct since I have found no real standardization in all the “dead” documentation I have gone through. Even for the same event you may see different documented representation for the tracks. The only exception to this are releases like “Dick Picks” which have seek points to tracks that break up a jam or medley and use “>” at the end of the track name to denote that the medley continues on the next track. I will need to go back and listen to some of the “Dick Picks” I have and listen to what those transitions sounds like.