Opus Error | end of Original Title

On this imported non-edited TIDAL album:

…Chopin’s Nocturne No. 2 is erroneously tagged with a 27/2 opus number:

…which results in its incorrect linking with Nocturne No. 8:

I hope this can be corrected.

Hi @John_V,

We are looking into this. Can you confirm which this should be?

Nocturne No. 2 in E Flat Major, Op. 9 No. 2 or Nocturne No. 8 in D Flat Major, Op. 27 No. 2?

this one and a few more characters to satisfy the silly requirements for 10 characters which tends to make responses much longer than they need be.

Hi @John_V,

Apologies for the delay on this one. We’ve been in contact with our metadata provider regarding this and will keep you updated once they’ve confirmed this to be resolved.

1 Like

Hi @John_V,

We discussed this with our metadata provider and they confirmed that things are currently showing as intended here.

The only difference between the titles on AllMusic.com is that one says “No. 8” and the other says “No. 2.” The important part, is the “in D flat major, Op. 27/2.” The work and track title are communicating the same details, reorganized.

All of Chopin’s compositions are traditionally numbered consecutively as they were published through the Opus numbers for each work type (work title). However, we enter the track titles as they appear on the album (track listings). Not all liner note/tracklisting authors follow the above method for titling Chopin’s music and prefer to use a title that reflects the number of the piece within that opus. Here “Nocturne No. 2” in the track title means that it is the second nocturne of Op. 27, also abbreviated as Op. 27/2.

@dylan. BTW the Qobuz version of this album has no composers and no work titles. Not a single one. There is just a 117 long track album with no organising information of any description. All tracks have only their “part” information. That is “allegro”, “andante” etc. So it is not possible to search on anything or group compositions with other performances. I find this happens a lot with Qobuz. It is so consistently wrong in these cases, surely a fix must be possible? A different Qobuz->roon mapping maybe?

I edited this album manually within roon but that is very difficult because there is almost no editing support like in third party editors where it is possible to run batch edits and the only option is laboriously to edit of 117 tracks 1 by 1. If you want, then because the Nocturne is a single part work it is possible to specify it as No. 8 instead of No. 2. Roon actually specifies it as No. 8 in it’s composition editor so it is very disorienting to click on the 168 versions of this Nocturne in Qobuz and get a fairly random mixture of No. 8 and No. 2. So it might be better in these cases if roon’s composition title was something like No. 8 (also known as No. 2) . . . ., as this is not an isolated example.