Issue 1959: wrong title #6

New issue submitted

Assigned changed to »anselm« (previously »None«)
Disposition changed to »Needs help« (previously »New«)

Thanks for reporting this. However when I tried searching the web to see if the tunes for track 6 were listed anywhere I found http://www.beltona.co.uk/scots-dance-bands-david-cunningham-junior-p-753.html which suggests that track 6 is an encore of track 5 with different tunes, the first tune being called The Moving Cloud.

However track 6 does not have the lead tune for the dance St Andrews of Brampton so Im not sure what is intended. And the other big web music sites (apple, spotify) agree with google in calling track 6 The Moving Cloud.

From the editing history Anselm added this recording so in the hope he has the CD and a definitive opinion Im assigning the issue to him.

So I think actually the SCDDB entry is correct, though I will add “(encore)” to the title of the second one to make it clearer it really is a repeat.

Iain Boyd reports by email:

I have just checked the CD I have.

On the rear cover, track six is described as “4x32 Bar Reel”!

However, in the CD ‘booklet’ which lists the tunes, it is described as “Alternative Set For Above” (referring to track 5)!

Re tracks 2, 3 and 9 -

In both the rear cover and the ‘booklet’ they are described as follows -

track 2 is described as “8x40 Bar Jig” rather than just ‘Jig’ (as in the database entry)

track 3 is described as “8x32 Bar Strathspey” rather than just ‘Strathspey’

and

track 9 is described as “8x32 Bar Reel” rather than just “Reel”!

Disposition changed to »Fixed« (previously »Needs help«)

I think we can close this issue, nothing more to do here. If the booklet says “alternative set for the above”, then it is perfectly fine IMHO to duplicate the name for track 6. The nameless recordings of Jigs, Reels and Strathspeys have already been specified in the “type” section, so their title/name can stay as generic as is. No need to add this to the title when the type defines it already; it is after all not a real “name”, just a description of a generic recording.

Just checked that these generic recordings were finetuned AFTER Iains last mail, so most likely Murrough specified the types there. Just don’t want to give the impression that Iain’s comments were not valid or obsolete.