[78-L] Discographic question

[Steven C. Barr]

From: <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
>
I used to post incessantly on this difference; some of my messages may still 
exist in various archives?
Suffice it to say that a CATALOG-based data file refers to a SPECIFIC set of 
records; as such it
will be only of direct interest to parties who have access to that 
particular group of phonorecords. As
such, it will contain any  information concerning the set of phonorecords 
which is being catalogued.

OTOH, a discographic database (i.e. "The Abrams Files") is...or SHOULD 
be...applicable to ALL
copies of the included phonorecords...! The file may (and probably DOES) 
derive from a group
of owned phonorecords...on the assumption that the viewed items represent 
all or most copies
of the records in question...?!

Our task as 78 collectors/accumulators is to work on compiling files of the 
latter variety!

Steven C. Barr