Author Topic: What constitutes Non-Library?  (Read 3122 times)

nidostar

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
What constitutes Non-Library?
« on: March 29, 2023, 09:08:32 AM »
May I ask what the boundaries are for The Non-Library section of this forum? Only, as Greta has pointed out in another post recently, this is essentially a Library Music Themes forum. Obviously it will attract those with a love for music but I'm just concerned that, if we're not careful, the Non-Library section could become a dumping ground for anything and everything. Could I, for example, share some Beatles albums? I think not but wouldn't they qualify? Who is to say what is and what is not Non-Library? Thoughts?

Greta

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
G.

Retronic

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2023, 10:22:31 AM »
Yes, I originally created that for library musicians commercial releases so they are very closely related to library.  It was never intended as a OST or funk forum. 

nidostar

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2023, 10:46:40 AM »
I hadn't seen the post that Greta referred to. Curious both @stack and I should mention The Beatles. Is it worth having a sticky post at the top of the section with a subject line saying what qualifies?

likedeeler

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2023, 01:52:23 PM »
Taking a look at the Non-Library section I get the distinct impression that it's not about to mutate into a Beatles dumping ground. Currently, the trend seems to go more in the direction of random sonic waste.

But is it a problem?

I don't really see it. But then again, I'm not a genuine collector of "library music".

And the term is a difficult one. Because "library music" does not denote a type of music at all. It is solely the mode of distribution which is meant by it.

I've (obviously) always understood the Non-Library section in terms of its subtitle, namely "Wonderful and strange music". This subtitle seems to be somewhat at odds with Retronic's statement that it was only ever meant to be a repository for works of composers from the "library" world that were directed at the general public as commercial releases.

I have posted a diverse selection of stuff there, ranging from video game music via TV soundtracks to musique concrète. Before posting I usually ask myself two questions: "(a) Could this actually have been published as a library record?", and (b) "Might this be -- music-wise -- of interest to the members of this forum?" (or simply "Is this strange and/or wonderful?") If the answer to either one is "yes", I go ahead. And, of course, it shouldn't be something that everyone most likely already has.

So, recently I posted the Baja Marimba Band, for example, because it's case (a), totally, and it seems that -- according to Slsk -- very few people have it, and the one rip that I saw wasn't lossless.

Apologies if I should have violated the terms and conditions now and then.

To be frank, I find the Non-Library section as worthwhile and inspiring as the classical library section (I'm not very much into the library stuff that has been published from the 1990s onwards). And particularly because of its wonderfulness and strangeness, regardless of the exact relation of a record to strictly defined "library music".

Would it perhaps make sense not wanting to be more catholic than the pope when it comes to eligibility as non-library?

(As indicated before, I was a bit surprised by some of the latest postings there, but I am inclined to assume that this storm can be weathered.)
« Last Edit: April 23, 2023, 04:35:41 PM by likedeeler »

Retronic

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2023, 02:24:36 PM »
I’m simply stating what it was at conception back in 2012.   For me, to be library music it will have been released by a library music label.  Adam West’s Wall of Sound has some of the same tracks as a library record as does the Mohawks stuff but I see them as library related and not strictly library music because of the publisher/ label.  It doesn’t matter if it has evolved over the years but originally this was what I had in mind on LMT-1
« Last Edit: March 29, 2023, 02:29:49 PM by Retronic »

Psyclon

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
  • Depressed devil...
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2023, 03:02:24 PM »
I think I kind of went the same with with the forum's goals personally. I started with only the big players in the library world: KPM, BRUTON, AV MUSIC PUBLISHERS, CAVENDISH. It was absolutely 100% crystal clear library.

But then, for example, I stumbled over the full stereo WAV file from a very well-known track: Title.wma. Title.wma or the "Windows Welcome Music" is used in WinXP during installation. Actually, that track is from 1996 and comissioned by Microsoft for the Internet Explorer infomercial disk. So: It is not released commercially but also not library, but... kind of as it's used as instrumental background music. (The 80 MByte WAV is available after registration.)

Same with Opus No1", the hold music for the CISCO telephones. I kind of "attached" those tracks to the idea of "library music" and I eventually renamed my folder on my PC from "Production Music Library" to "Rare Grooves and Production Music" to be more precise and to have a reason to still put these tracks next to the KPMs and BRUTONs. While actually not library.

I created that folder to create a bigger difference to "chart"/"commercial music".

This is, of course, the way I see it and not what the admins thought, but I can only imagine that is the same way this forum went: Nice music that "kind of" belong here, so let's snap those albums to LM like a magnet; a "side-business". The tracks I found in Bronic's links are commercially available, but instrumental synthesizer tunes without high(er) recognition, so they kind of fit. Usually, as soon as someone starts to sing, it's over anyways (even though I have a few vocal tracks, but these are DeWolfe and KPM - obviously library tracks).
« Last Edit: March 29, 2023, 03:22:16 PM by Psyclon »

likedeeler

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #7 on: March 29, 2023, 04:24:15 PM »
... It doesn’t matter if it has evolved over the years but originally this was what I had in mind on LMT-1

Ah! Now I understand what you mean.

nidostar

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #8 on: March 29, 2023, 04:33:12 PM »
I wasn't out to accuse anyone of violating our terms and conditions nor seeking an apology from anyone. It was just that I seem to recall a new member recently posted a link to what I would classify as a commercial easy listening album. That member was then challenged whether the post was appropriate for a library music forum. I don't think that was wrong but I felt a little awkward for the new member who, although they didn't respond, must have wondered why posting a non-library album in the Non-Library section was a problem. I just feel that we ought make it clearer to members what the purpose of the Non-Library section is to avoid embarrassing challenges in the future.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2023, 04:37:37 PM by nidostar »

stackjackson

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2234
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #9 on: March 29, 2023, 06:05:39 PM »
I hadn't seen the post that Greta referred to. Curious both @stack and I should mention The Beatles. Is it worth having a sticky post at the top of the section with a subject line saying what qualifies?

That message is actually posted as a "sticky" at the top of the Non-Library section.

In my mind at least, "wonderful & strange music" was originally meant to refer generally to what used to be called "mood" music (c. 1950-1980) and includes (but not limited to) easy listening, "lounge" music, b-movie film scores, etc. etc., all of which were largely neglected by "serious music critics". Something like the subjects of the old Re/Search series -- Incredibly Strange Music -- but also "library-related" composers, musicians, etc.

| Stack |

nidostar

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #10 on: March 29, 2023, 07:43:54 PM »
I hadn't seen the post that Greta referred to. Curious both @stack and I should mention The Beatles. Is it worth having a sticky post at the top of the section with a subject line saying what qualifies?

That message is actually posted as a "sticky" at the top of the Non-Library section.

In my mind at least, "wonderful & strange music" was originally meant to refer generally to what used to be called "mood" music (c. 1950-1980) and includes (but not limited to) easy listening, "lounge" music, b-movie film scores, etc. etc., all of which were largely neglected by "serious music critics". Something like the subjects of the old Re/Search series -- Incredibly Strange Music -- but also "library-related" composers, musicians, etc.


I was thinking maybe expand the subject line of the sticky so people don't have to click on it to find out what's acceptable. But thanks for that stack that's helpful.

Nobody

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2023, 04:59:13 PM »
Jazz Funk, Easy Listening, Soundtracks, Exotica, Psychedelic, World Music
« Last Edit: April 09, 2023, 05:57:19 PM by stackjackson »

stackjackson

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2234
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #12 on: April 09, 2023, 05:58:16 PM »
Jazz Funk, Easy Listening, Soundtracks, Exotica, Psychedelic, World Music

Most of this, minus the jazz/funk. There are other forums for that ;)
| Stack |

Nobody

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2023, 12:32:44 PM »
Jazz Funk, Easy Listening, Soundtracks, Exotica, Psychedelic, World Music

Most of this, minus the jazz/funk. There are other forums for that ;)
;)

bummbrotha

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
Re: What constitutes Non-Library?
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2023, 04:58:07 AM »
I think lossless obscure music that is known only to crate diggers is what the mods originally had in mind for this place. After all, the reason why most of us our here is because we are trying to earn a copy of rare material we can't find anywhere else.