tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10632279.post112260720432362130..comments2024-03-18T08:34:43.169-04:00Comments on Inquiring Librarian: Music subject headingsJenn Rileyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02521865581380075952noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10632279.post-1122942615421994042005-08-01T19:30:00.000-05:002005-08-01T19:30:00.000-05:00Hi Dan, thanks for your comments. (Great rant on L...Hi Dan, thanks for your comments. (Great rant on LIS research on your site!)<BR/><BR/>I definitely agree the LCSH music headings (both for texts and for music) do have a lot of input from music librarians. Actually, on my bad days, I truly believe those same music librarians are the only ones to whom the headings make sense! And I can say that as a musician and a librarian, even though I currently don't work only with music, and they don't make sense to me sometimes.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for bringing up uniform titles. I consider these another expert-type search strategy. We can put out endless numbers of handouts describing how they're constructed next to OPAC terminals, host frequent BI sessions teaching same, and have an unparalled advocacy program, and still fail large numbers of our users who search for music with generic titles. One has to know to use the plural form of the form/genre in the search, oh, wait, except when the composer wrote only one of that form! Then it's singular. User-friendly, huh? Maybe the high recall provided by the uniform title is only needed by the experts that would know how to search for them, but I'd really like to make it easier.<BR/><BR/>I agree that hopefully even the most novice user would type more than just "symphony" into a catalog. I'd like to see an interface that helps them narrow down the results if they do happen to do that, however (faceting, anyone?). I also would like to see systems that could handle either "symphony" or "symphonies" equally as part of a multi-term query, and rely on other mechanisms to determine if works about or works of music are desired. Embedding this distinction in the terminology seems waaaaay to subtle for my taste.Jenn Rileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02521865581380075952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10632279.post-1122917716002065782005-08-01T12:35:00.000-05:002005-08-01T12:35:00.000-05:00As a former music librarian (and music cataloger),...As a former music librarian (and music cataloger), I'm seeing two different issues here. One is the lack of complete cataloging in the MARC record (no 550s). The other is the confusion of headings.<BR/><BR/>I do think music as a subject has had a huge amount of input from music librarians, virtually all of whom have some background in music (both performance and theory). And, as most classical work is known by an non-specific title (Nocturne, Symphony, Concerto in A, etc.) the combination of uniform titles and subject headings do more than just what keyword searching might do. <BR/><BR/>Yes, it can be confusing to the uninitiated, but I would hope, even in a record store catalog, that someone might try to delineate that search beyond just looking up "Symphony."<BR/><BR/>Much as I have an issue with some of LCSH, I think the uniformity of music headings has markedly improved in the last few decades. Check out some older LCSH's to see how bad it used to be!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10632279.post-1122639278144071762005-07-29T07:14:00.000-05:002005-07-29T07:14:00.000-05:00What's annoying also is that current practice is t...What's annoying also is that current practice is to delete 550s from many authority records that were entered (esp. those that are broader). It's almost like they're deconstructing the tree on which thesauri (even LCSH) are based, and are so useful.Thom Peasehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252175491329232519noreply@blogger.com