Probably to manipulate the search results.
Probably a typo or a copy/paste mistake. @CatQuest?
I think it was an attempt to stop it coming first, because people keep picking it wrongly even now. Of course, this way probably breaks translations, so it’s not ideal. But the problem does exist - maybe a rename to “drum (generic)” makes sense? (will also break translations, but at least it’s clear why it does, and it might make the choice simpler). It seems the disambiguation alone isn’t really helping enough.
Ok, results are pretty clear, so we’ll be moving them to drumset!
What do people think about drum -> drum (generic)?
Considering that ‘drum’ is a general description and not a specific instrument, I think that the naming should reflect that better.
Also I am guessing that ‘drum (generic)’ could be confused with what is commonly understood to be a generic drumset.
Therefore I think that something like ‘drum (unspecified)’ probably would fit the bill better.
I’m in for “drum” generic or “percussion” hyper-generic and let the user get as picky as they would like.
So are you renaming drum to drum (generic)? And didn’t learn from the pain of changing drums to membranophone?
I did have a funny one this week as I found a couple of references to “membranophone programming” which as clearly “drum machine programming”.
When the bot resets the membranophones to drums (drum set) can it have any “if” clauses added? Example being “if type = engineer programming then set to drum machine”. An example track being here: https://musicbrainz.org/recording/374a337d-8f8f-40ad-ba3f-a6b56c32abe3
We’re trying to figure out a name that will make people use it only for generic drums and not for drumsets, so that we won’t need to keep moving them with a bot. By looking at edits for “drum”, editors are still picking that over “drums (drum set)”, so clearly something clearer is needed.
I think CatQuest considered that already, and we’ll probably be doing that But thanks for the reminder!
Are there actually releases that originally have an artist credited as simply playing ‘drum’?
And is it possible to search MB for releases that have that specific credit?
I would have thought “drum” was as common as “drums” due to the simplicity of what is written on many cheaper music CDs. Changing those to “drum (generic)” should be more hit than miss.
Even seeing “drum (generic) machine programming” isn’t too odd.
Drum machine is not the only way to program drums.
Also computers, sequencers, keyboards, samplers, sound trackers, etc.
I would think that ‘drum’ should only be used for a single unspecified drum.
Not for a set of drums (e.g. congas), not for a drumset, and not for electronic drums.
Do the people responsible for instruments on MB present here agree with that idea?
There definitely are, I just edited one that was assigned to membranophone (singular). Knowing the artist, it probably was a single drum.
I would leave it as is. There are few credits for “drum” so there doesn’t really seem to be a problem with the current setup.
There are a fair number of “drum programming” credits, which seem less than ideal to me, but “drum (generic) programming” would be worse. (Like @IvanDobsky I would use “drum machine programming” for those.)
Please don’t turn all drum programming into drum machine.
I’m pretty sure I did add some of them and I know how to use drum machine when they say drum machine.
When I don’t use drum machine, I mean it.
The credit on the CD was “drum programming” - this is why I set to “programming drum machine” as it was closer than anything else available.
This is part of the problem that we have as consumers of the music trying to fill in this database accurately. If all we have are two printed words on a bit of paper it is hard\impossible to make the correct selection among exact instruments.
Not to get too far off on a tangent, but the description on the generic “drum” instrument specifically says:
Any kind of percussion with membranes, variously sized druⅿs. […] For programmed or “druⅿ-loops” use druⅿ machine.
While one might be doing “drum programming” on something that is, strictly speaking, not a “drum machine” - by the same token, that something isn’t a “drum” either.
I’ve just realised that you think I am editing your data. Or just combing around and hunting down things that look “wrong”. You can be safe in the knowledge that this is certainly not the case. The only instrument editing I do is based around works I own myself and have a CD booklet to work from.
I’ll then spread sideways within an artist to make sure other releases in the same release group are consistent. Again only where I am sure of my data and knowledge of the artist.
I never edit artists whom I don’t have in my own collection in some form. I certainly don’t wade into other areas of music where I have no first hand knowledge of and make “corrections”.
The snippet you quoted in your post was out of context. That is only relevant to the discussion about an automatic bot changing “drum” to “drum (generic)” and making sure it handles exceptions.
This is also stopping people from picking it correctly. I had to go back and revise a credit that I made to “membranophone” because drum wasn’t just further down list of options when I typed in “drum”, it wasn’t in the list at all. Fortunately, this time around I noticed that I could find it if I just typed “dru”.
Hère is why I was worry:
You earlier proposed the bot to replace them all.