Library Music Themes
General Sharing & Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Greta on March 20, 2024, 09:15:32 PM
-
Over time too many 100% library-unrelated posts have been made and we just can't let it go on again.
Many members have shown good will, others simply ignored the recommendations, but we thank everyone participating in that section in these last years.
Now it's getting a bit out of hand, and we don't want to transform this place in a clone of other all-in-one music sharing sites or peer-to-peer platforms.
It's very simple, at it's birth the non-library section was intended to be "library artists commercial releases", and in any case, somehow library-related at least.
As said previously, things took a strange drift and headed towards something that was not desired.
No metter now, whose fault it was or why. A matter of fact is that we need to put a stop to this and maintain the LIBRARY MUSIC THEMES a specialized forum on the subject.
From now on we'll also delete requests about music that's not library-related.
Thanks for your reading and understanding.
We hope you'll continue to enjoy this fantastic niche sector of music.
The LMT team.
-
That is totally understandable.
May I make just 1 recommendation, not sure if others will feel the same.
Rather than having:
Vintage Library Vinyl and CD rips
Modern Library Vinyl and CD rips - 1990s and Beyond
Could they be:
Vinyls
CDs
Sorry, I know this isn't a recommendation thread but thought I'd throw that out there, see if others feel the same? or could start a separate thread if needed?
-
This is nuts. The subforum guidelines are vaguely explained and users are literally blamed for following exactly what's on its name.
You could then change its name to Library-related to narrow its scope but it's still needed to define what are the actual limits.
Meanwhile the Track ID section is kinda of a hot mess of multiple posts per user...
-
Bronic, it’s not nuts to us and has happened over time. On initial set up it was just me and it didn’t need explaining- it was intended as library related and called non-library for ease. It matters now as it has gotten out of hand. I guess most library stuff has been shared so it is understandable but it he forum has a library identity we want to maintain.
-
May I make just 1 recommendation, not sure if others will feel the same.
Rather than having:
Vintage Library Vinyl and CD rips
Modern Library Vinyl and CD rips - 1990s and Beyond
Could they be:
Vinyls
CDs
Sorry, I know this isn't a recommendation thread but thought I'd throw that out there, see if others feel the same? or could start a separate thread if needed?
You make a valid point Craig though for me the format is less important than the period the library music comes from. Hence I'd counter-propose simply "Vintage Library pre 1990" and "Modern Library - 1990s And Beyond" and forget the vinyl/CD reference. Alternatively to satisfy both our preferences leave it as it is ha, ha, ha!!! :)
-
"literally blamed" sounds quite ridiculous to me.
Nobody was ever blamed, I think, but rather encouraged to keep the main road. We're in a themed forum, and politely telling someone he's off-topic is not blaming.
Or do you happen to complain about the lack of kindness by the admins? It would be useful to know.
"Library-related" could be a good change to avoid confusion, btw. I agree.
As for Craig's suggestion, our goal was exactly to separate the periods, without focusing on the medium format.
-
First of all, this is not my forum and it'd be ridiculous to get angry or furiously attack my host's wishes to what happens in their house.
But... what is library music? I know what it is, but I have tried to do some background checks on some random LP shares and nothing made it obvious these were library albums. The labels were not necessarily "library" (such as KPM, MUSIC HOUSE and equally well-known culprits). The composers were not "library composers" either - because that term is very difficult. So basically, except for very well-known names such as e.g. Warren Bennett, all these "not very clear" albums are supposed to go to the "Non-library section". Real "library shares" would be extremely rare.
I just randomly bring up this album. (https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=8146.0) Out of curiosity: How is that a library album? What "rules" must it trigger? Not asking in a snappy intention. Isn't it just a random LP? Is PAOLA RECORDS a library label or just "some label"? Is "The Kiddy" a library band/group? On Discogs, it's not even rated as "Stage & Screen" or "Theme". Because you can use ANY music as library, and if you license it, it turns into a soundtrack..
-
In its initial conception when I was expecting about 40-50 members it was intended for things like ‘All You Need Is Love’ by Keith Mansfield or the commercial releases by John Cameron or Brian Bennett: almost library music but on library labels. Just a bit of context.
-
I do totally see it and understood Greta's explanation of stackjackson's rule (oof, what a chain!).
It makes much sense. But what I meant is that a very large chunk of the "Library LP" shares are not really library. They are just random musicians doing their thing and happen to be picked up by a label.
With more and more actual libraries being shared in the past, almost all new entries are extremely iffy.
For example, when I posted the Detective Conan soundtracks, it was just something "Non-Library" that fits what you could hear in, let's say, a FLOWER release from 1972.
Effectively, it was a soundtrack, so not library as it was a paid commission. I do get that, as told in the thread.
But if we are real, a real "library" release requires a catalogue or somet other "structure" where it's being promoted to be ready for licensing. In the end, a library is nothing but a catalogue of music to pick from by anyone. If it's NOT a library album but the composer is involved in any library label in the past - then it fits in the "Non-Library section", as you just explained on-point. And that is almost never the case with the recent shares of the past years even. I mean, there might be the odd share, but much of the stuff I got from here is just some random italo disco album with zero relation, yet it passed the test.
-
... nothing made it obvious these were library albums.
Library labels, production companies. Pretty clear. You can view a long list of library labels here => https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=477.0 (https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=477.0)
"Library" is not a genre category, this is obvious. But using that as an argument in this discussion is disingenuous.
-
I didn't mean to say the Discog's genres are a full reason what is library and what not. And it is clear that I didn't say so. But then, I also think people buying and tagging those records are well-aware if they actually bought a library release (or not) and tagged it accordingly on Discogs. Also, that list is a great thing!
But what makes Paola a library label (just to stick to my example from above)?
It just kind of says "A label from Italy". I can trust Mr. and his awesome information, but I'd like to be able to fully understand and not just on a "Trust me bro" basis.
If we stick to that very list in Mr.'s post, we are 100% clear and everyone can CTRL+F and we are set and the whole matter can be settled basically.
Everything not in that you linked list is basically now subject to go into the "Non-Library" if one of the musicians noted are involved in other library-related releases (which can be a very difficult task but in doubt > Don't share)
If nothing of that applies, the stuff has to be deleted off LMT?
That is basically the ruleset if I am not mistaken now and that list is a great helper (and a very nice inspiration)!
-
This is not a "science." We are discussing a category with conventional definitions and a long history of real-world, professional use.
The Italian labels are quite unique, and would require a deep dive into the history of the Italian production/film industry before engaging them as a test case for establishing definitions.
-
The Italian labels are quite unique, and would require a deep dive into the history of the Italian production/film industry before engaging them as a test case for establishing definitions.
Indeed. That is the very problem. So it is not "science", but requires a "deep history lesson on music production for the film industry". Researching Italian film music production to fully establish if a label or a composer as library artist is a task that goes probably beyond the will of almost all users here, especially with trustworthy sources to back that up..
But yes, I am satisfied with the answers - especially that list which is a great waypoint for me and many others.
Cheers.
-
I do totally see it and understood Greta's explanation of stackjackson's rule (oof, what a chain!).
It makes much sense. But what I meant is that a very large chunk of the "Library LP" shares are not really library. They are just random musicians doing their thing and happen to be picked up by a label.
With more and more actual libraries being shared in the past, almost all new entries are extremely iffy.
For example, when I posted the Detective Conan soundtracks, it was just something "Non-Library" that fits what you could hear in, let's say, a FLOWER release from 1972.
Effectively, it was a soundtrack, so not library as it was a paid commission. I do get that, as told in the thread.
But if we are real, a real "library" release requires a catalogue or somet other "structure" where it's being promoted to be ready for licensing. In the end, a library is nothing but a catalogue of music to pick from by anyone. If it's NOT a library album but the composer is involved in any library label in the past - then it fits in the "Non-Library section", as you just explained on-point. And that is almost never the case with the recent shares of the past years even. I mean, there might be the odd share, but much of the stuff I got from here is just some random italo disco album with zero relation, yet it passed the test.
Detective Conan?
I don't know if you're talking about that Japanese anime.
He's famous in my country too.
The soundtrack is great too.
-
I suppose DIY Comps and Other Musical Creations section of the forum could also be suitable for albums related to library music or something similar in spirit, but difficult to classify, if someone still wants to share such things, right?
-
Not really as this was designed to be library music compilations. I used to make comps for films they never had a release on my old blog like the ones on Digga’s current thread.
-
It seems that what I'm hearing is that, compared to a year ago, there is an appetite among admins to return the section to being strictly library-related?
I didn't get a sense of that in the discussion a year ago, there was mention of the fact that that was the original intention of the section but largely there seemed to be acceptance of that https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=6152.0
Personally, speaking only for me, I always found it puzzling whenever I saw someone being asked "what has this got to do with library music?" in the non-library section, because for me, speaking only personally, the subtitle "wonderful & strange music" very much implies things like "easy listening and it doesn't matter if the guy never worked for KPM or anything".
This doesn't require a reply, and of course the admins must do what they're comfortable with, and I very much appreciate all they do for us, I just wanted to set down my thoughts.
-
Hi everyone, as an occasional visitor I do enjoy delving into the non-library posts but I fully understand the need to preserve the site's identity.
One possible way out of this 'to be (library) or not to be (library)' impasse would be to create an embedded C-Box like they have at the exystence site. You register a name & you can post short links to files. The posts disappear every 3 or 4 weeks to make way for new ones (no idea if you can set the duration or not).
It does satisfy the urge to share something with the community but there's no permanent record of posts and rather than be on the front page of LMT like it is at exystence it could be embedded in the existing non-library page.
Just an aside, all credit to Retronic and his fellow travellers for being here in 2024. It's hard to believe when the library music blogs first started, many combined library and non-library music simply because there weren't enough library rips to go around as it was a relatively small band of generous souls like Retronic who allowed the rest of us access to the library music universe.
How far it has come in the space of nearly 20 years.
-
Perhaps the non-library section could become the library-related section, with a pinned post at the top to remind users of what goes in there.
-
hello friends!
i am pleased maestro rustichelli’s work on ‘una donna alla finestra’ is the last post on the frozen sub-forum. some lovely music from the golden age, and in my opinion a good test case for the question at hand.
yes, the non-library sub-forum was a bit of a dumpster fire. administratively speaking, it might make sense to cut it loose and tighten LMT’s identity. but I rarely frequent the section and have little at stake; other users should weigh in.
in defense of the NL sub posters' intentions, someone mentioned the dearth of new, authentic library music that can be contributed as a possible explanation for the frenetic posting. i empathize. if, for example, you collect golden age italian library gems, enter rocco. rocco is the only user sharing new italian library music. new music, not 'lossless ugrade' music.
in defense of the rustichelli score, maybe outright banishing film scores isn’t the best way forward. I recall a little record called atmosfera that still hasn’t physically surfaced on the market, despite the respectable four flies lp rerelease in 2017 and subsequent digital drop. An invaluable library grail in 2016, yet just another non-library reissued soundtrack in 2017?
now, speaking against the rustichelli score, maestro Carlo appears to have exclusively taken paid career gigs. I don’t see any library credits to his name, whereas many of his peers have numerous. I believe this may be one critical distinction, as someone also mentioned above.
library music? take for example the CAM label we know and love so much. CAM's soundtrack label branched into a bonafide “library” record label project, envisioned and executed by italian creatives, academics, and producers with the goal of educating future generations of fledgling musical artists on “genre, organico, e carattere e possibilita di applicazione.” instructional records for public libraries: the social production of "materiel educatif" (note: the KPM merger and the early green records w/ "remarks" in 1966, which predate the CAM genre/instruments/applications).
on education, i would say rocco's descriptions often delve into music theory. the associated artists are almost always academic theorists as well as teachers, composers, and performers. if you read italian, many of these composers and their compatriots have penned essays that may elucidate some of their post-war theoretical approaches to musical composition. 'i suoni della guerra,' for example, my speciality.
:)
geo
-
Just a note for all the LMT members.
Today I started removing posts in the "requests" section, more precisely what's not library-related.
If you don't find your requests posts anymore, this is the reason why.
A warning that this was going to happen has been given in the very first post I've made in this thread.
Please, try to follow the pointers and not make the administrators' job too complicated.
Thanks all.
-
Okay, thank you very much for being clear and direct from the beginning Greta :)
I understand that it can be overwhelming for administrators to explain over and over again what things can or cannot be done in the forum.
I have too many tapes that I would have liked to share here but they are not related to the library, I plan to soon create a website to upload the rips of said cassettes, for those who are interested. :)
Without further ado, I think you have made it very clear what the true purpose of this forum is.
P.S. I apologize for mistakes I made in the past, such as sharing personal compilations where one of the songs was by "The Doors." Hello? Does this have to do with the library?
-
I have too many tapes that I would have liked to share here but they are not related to the library, I plan to soon create a website to upload the rips of said cassettes, for those who are interested. :)
@DTML Count me in!
-
Over time too many 100% library-unrelated posts have been made and we just can't let it go on again.
Many members have shown good will, others simply ignored the recommendations, but we thank everyone participating in that section in these last years.
Now it's getting a bit out of hand, and we don't want to transform this place in a clone of other all-in-one music sharing sites or peer-to-peer platforms.
It's very simple, at it's birth the non-library section was intended to be "library artists commercial releases", and in any case, somehow library-related at least.
As said previously, things took a strange drift and headed towards something that was not desired.
No metter now, whose fault it was or why. A matter of fact is that we need to put a stop to this and maintain the LIBRARY MUSIC THEMES a specialized forum on the subject.
From now on we'll also delete requests about music that's not library-related.
Thanks for your reading and understanding.
We hope you'll continue to enjoy this fantastic niche sector of music.
The LMT team.
Honestly while I see what your intention was, I don't agree with it and think it will overall hurt things.
"It's very simple, at it's birth the non-library section was intended to be "library artists commercial releases", and in any case, somehow library-related at least."
This is the main crux for me. This was never explicitly stated anywhere; it's not in the subforum description. How are people supposed to know that?
I don't think there's anything wrong with having a purely non-library side section for people to share other music related interests/hobbies they enjoy. Or with this edict is General Discussion now allowed for people to do this? If so, can it please be included in the subforum descritption?
-
It was clearer at the start and got lost with new iterations of the forum. You’ll have to accept it because if we continue as we are it’s just a music forum and Soul Seek is there to get similar styles of music.
I do understand that detail is important to some people - I've done a lot of group training and experience people with differently learning styles and I learned that I am not a detail person and just want to get on but some people need the detail before their brain is satisfied so I used to include lots of detail at the start of any group work or training, so they didn't got stuck seeking the detail because they would ask lots of questions which non-detail people experienced as nit picking or disruption. So I get detail is important to some. In reality this isn't a subscription site and has been free for almost 12 years. It's free to members but not to us and admin do pay a fee to run it.
-
This was never explicitly stated anywhere; it's not in the subforum description. How are people supposed to know that?
Never explicitly stated anywhere?
This is the sticky post from Stack the day we introduced the non-library section at our re-opening with LMT v.7
https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=683.0 (https://librarymusicthemes.com/index.php?topic=683.0)
Although the title and description of the subforum could have been clearer (and I honestly already admitted it), the pointers were there.
If some don't even bother to read then it's a different matter.
As I said already, we don't want to point out who might have been to blame but we just want to go on with the original focus in mind.
Many music sites are out there, each one with its identity or focus.
Just library and occasionally library-related is how we want to keep this forum.
How it is possible not to understand something this simple continues to amaze me.
If one doesn't like a book he just doesn't read it, he doesn't complain to the writer about how he would have liked him to write it.
-
"It's very simple, at it's birth the non-library section was intended to be "library artists commercial releases", and in any case, somehow library-related at least."
This is the main crux for me. This was never explicitly stated anywhere; it's not in the subforum description. How are people supposed to know that?
I believe that the founders of this forum have a single vision of the utility of this forum while the users see the other parts equally (non-library, Track IDs, etc). Themselves being responsible for its conception, makes more sense to them to understand the Non-library as an extension of original purpose of the forum unlike new users take the "Non" aspect literally.
Yet it's a steep crackdown on a popular and harmless subsections of the forum. It's not like Michael Jackson's (Bruton Music's owner) discography would ever be posted there.
-
I would encourage anyone who remains confused about this to go back and spend some time perusing the earliest few pages of the "Non-Library" section here on LMT 7 -- start with page 12 and work your way backward. This should give folks some idea of the original spirit of that section, which only very recently began to deteriorate (for some odd reason) into "anything-and-everything not library."
-
I would encourage anyone who remains confused about this to go back and spend some time perusing the earliest few pages of the "Non-Library" section here on LMT 7 -- start with page 12 and work your way backward. This should give folks some idea of the original spirit of that section, which only very recently began to deteriorate (for some odd reason) into "anything-and-everything not library."
Though having looked at the earliest page or so of topics the Non-Library section seemed to be suffering from identity issues from the outset with posts including Jazz, Jazzanova, rare Soundtracks, Easy Listening and obscure Soviet era stuff with the occasional smattering of commercial library compilations. Whilst they didn't exactly fit with Retro's original vision it seems from the responses we all appeared to enjoy listening to the offerings. To be honest I couldn't actually pin down a point where the section started going off the rails. Even the first screen of most recent contributions seems to follow much the same themes as the oldest - minus the Soviet music of course!!.
-
This message board does support premoderation, doesn't it? Would'n it be an option for the Non-Library section?
-
... To be honest I couldn't actually pin down a point where the section started going off the rails. Even the first screen of most recent contributions seems to follow much the same themes as the oldest - minus the Soviet music of course!!.
That's because we removed all those latest posts, which included standard R&B/Funk groups, mainstream jazz records, unrelated soundtracks, etc.
-
I believe that the founders of this forum have a single vision of the utility of this forum while the users see the other parts equally (non-library, Track IDs, etc).
I don't know if it's my comprehension of the English idiom or not, so I'm not sure I exactly got what you mean Bronic, but I'll point out this:
The single vision of the forum includes every single one of the sub-forums sections. I mean, "General Discussion", "Blogs", "DIY", "Requests", "Reissues", "Tracks ID's"Film, TV and Radio Cues", "Labels", "Composers and Artists"...
every single one has born with the same focus of the forum itself, each one of them was conceived referring to the world of library music.
We also see "the other parts equally", but certainly not in the same misrepresented way in which many see it.
Yet it's a steep crackdown on a popular and harmless subsections of the forum. It's not like Michael Jackson's (Bruton Music's owner) discography would ever be posted there.
Popular? Probably
Harmless? Not for us