[78-L] Discographic question

[goldenbough at arcor.de]

Yes, indeed, there's a difference between a private database for a collection and a discography. 
However, personally I would list under the 'recording' anyway. Because this is what I would be 
looking for (to play).  

As far as a discography is concerned, I see the record itself as the main object of interest and as 
the basis of information. 

This is why I plan to make the LABEL LISTINGS the basis for everything in my discography. 
In these numerical listings for 400+ different labels, everything will be AS ON THE LABELS, 
while the artists and titles indexes will contain many, many cross references to the MAIN ENTRIES 
within the alphabetical titles and artists indexes. 

These 'main entries' will then contain all the output by, say, CHOATES, HARRY (with the misspelling 
referring to the right listing). And the same for the titles. There will be the obvious, like

- Allons a Lafayette -  see LAFAYETTE 
- Two-Step de Lafayette - see LAFAYETTE 

but, like Mike Biel suggested with his example of the Gregorian Chants, also the historical 'original, 
historical title' must find its way into the alphabetical index:  

- Jeunes Gens de la Campagne - see LAFAYETTE  

I think that this way I can cover EVERYTHING - the 'misspelling as on the label', the 'intuitive correct' 
spelling that you would use to find a title or artist entry, all the output by one artist, all artists that 
recorded one specific song, AND the complete label output (of that musical genre) - which has been 
neglected in discographies so far ( a VERY important, historical information!).   

As I said, any comments, suggestions highly appreciated. 

Benno