A thorough direct exploration of discovery tools begins with a consideration of features related to the system as a whole. This will place scrutiny of individual bibliographic records in context. Features that merit consideration include search options, facets, treatment of physical formats, the linking of controlled fields, available indexes, and display of the content of records and encoded information. Within these categories, certain features are of particular importance for music. Ideal functionality will also provide a direct benefit for nonmusical materials.

End users begin searching and refining results through basic and advanced search options, post–search facets, and lists of results. Familiarity with these features enriches understanding of the end-user experience. After examining search options, a large set of search results will enable investigation of additional characteristics of the discovery tool. To retrieve a large set of results, a blank search (without search terms) is ideal. Broad searches such as {history}, {Bach}, or {music} are also effective. A spot-check of individual results will give a general picture of layout, labels, navigation, facets, item details, and any other features of interest.

Records for music materials can include format information, multiple languages, genre/form and subject challenges, and the representation of multiple creators, contributors, works, and expressions. Bibliographic information in the following areas is discussed:

• creator and contributor names
• titles of works and expressions
• analytic entries
• relationships
• subject subdivisions and facets
• genre/form
• medium of performance
• physical description
• format options
• languages
• notes (language/notation, performer/cast, production, recording, contents)
• edition information
• numbers (publisher, music, or plate)
• diacritics, special characters, and stopwords

Each area is addressed, including general search and evaluation strategies. Specific questions for use in a checklist and detailed searches and examples are provided in the appendixes.

The need to accurately represent creators and contributors in a discovery tool is universal across subjects and formats. Challenges related to display and linking functionality are compounded in music records, where it is common for more than one creator or contributor to be associated with a resource. Records for scores may contain added access points for an editor of the music, who provides a substantial intellectual contribution, or for collaborators (such as librettists) for dramatic works. Records for music sound recordings present more complex challenges. For a single classical work, there will be an access point for the performer in addition to one for the musical work. In compilations, there may be multiple works by different composers, and different performers for each work. In all cases, the forms of names in access points do not necessarily match those in statements of responsibility or notes fields.

Post–search facets, lists of results that display following a search (henceforth referred to as “brief results”), displays of single records, and linking functionality on controlled access points are areas where a discovery tool’s treatment of name access points requires evaluation. The display of names in brief results and individual records has proved problematic in discovery tools. Default settings and customizations vary widely with products and instances. Faceted tools may not automatically include all traced creators or contributors under an author facet.

To determine whether or how corporate names appear under an author facet, one may conduct an author index search for all or part of an authorized access point for a prolific or locally represented musical group. If there is no author index option, one may substitute a general keyword search for the name limited to a sound or video recording format or with a format-related search term such as “disc.” In all-field keyword searches, a phrase search may be required in cases where individual elements of a name are likely to appear separately ({“Chicago Symphony”} to exclude results with “Chicago” in a location note and “symphony” somewhere else). Corporate names where a group is identified as a subordinate unit may be misrepresented in a facet. Only the parent body might display: “Bayerischer Rundfunk” versus “Bayerischer Rundfunk Orchester” (1102# $a Bayerischer Rundfunk. $b Orchester).

A list of brief results for records with multiple name access points will indicate where information from name access points is visible and how it is labeled. A brief results list can be retrieved with a simple search for a musical form, performer, or composer. In individual records, one should check the following: where names or portions of names from access points appear, whether they appear in separate locations within a record, how they are labeled, how they are grouped, and whether authorized name access points replace the statement of responsibility in MARC field 245 $c. Searches with elements of the authorized form of a name used as keywords will test indexing as well as display. The display of names where authorized access points are entered in direct order (a form other than “last name, first name”) should also be investigated.

All controlled access points serving as hyperlinks should function as intended. For names, this means referring to the correct individual or body. The challenge of precision can be most acute with common names (such as John Adams) or names based on given names (such as Hildegard of Bingen), where additional name access point elements beyond the information recorded in $a of name headings (dates, numeration, etc.) are needed to identify or link to the correct entity. Links should be tested both in facets and within records because some discovery tools generate different searches depending on what screen a user views.

The importance of consistent, controlled access points or identifiers for musical works cannot be overstated. They are essential for the indexing and collocation of musical works and expressions, even if end users do not use them as search terms or see them. Discovery tools vary widely in how these titles are displayed or utilized for linking or collocation. Some may completely suppress these fields by default, while others may provide partial or full display or linking.

The titles illustrated in this paper are the standard form used to consistently identify, differentiate, and collocate musical works and expressions. The term preferred title is used to reflect RDA terminology and is the successor to AACR2’s uniform title. In MARC bibliographic records, these titles are those found in access points in fields 130, 240, 730, and title subfields ($t with additions) in 700, 710, or 711. Functionality related to preferred titles includes indexing (title, keyword, or other), visibility in a record, fullness and accuracy of display, association with appropriate names, and any linking or collocation feature. Because treatment of preferred titles is so fundamental to determining the adequacy of a discovery tool for music, these titles are discussed in greater detail than are the remaining sections.

For preferred titles to function as unique identifiers for works and expressions, all elements within the title are important to ensure accurate identification and differentiation. For preferred title search strings to link precisely to a work or expression, every subfield, in order, is needed. If full titles are displayed to users, subfields should display in their proper order. Displayed titles for works that have creators (composers) integral to access points (titles in fields 240, 700, 710, and 711) must be associated with those names to be meaningful to users, and titles must be bound to those names to provide linking functionality based on works and expressions.

Music cataloging divides preferred titles into two categories: generic (a type of composition, such as “symphony”) and distinctive (those that are not generic). A typical configuration of a distinctive title in a name-title access point is in the format “Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus, $d 1756–1791. $t Zauberflöte.” To execute searches for distinctively titled works where the authorized form of the title and a transcribed or translated title are likely to differ, one may begin with the authorized form or a transcribed form. Searching by the authorized form—e.g., {Zauberflöte}—permits simultaneous evaluation of display and indexing, but requires knowledge of the authorized term. Searching by a transcribed or common English-language form—{Magic Flute}—requires careful scrutiny of the displayed record for the authorized form. Records for works with generic titles will be retrieved with keyword searches for the composer’s name plus known elements of the preferred title (i.e., form, medium, or opus number). In some cases, they can be retrieved with searches for the composer’s name plus the work’s commonly known name.

Titles in authorized access points for musical works may include additional elements for differentiation to indicate expression-level characteristics or to indicate whole–part relationships. A single access point can contain elements and subfields representing all of these categories. Subfields following $a (240, most commonly) or $t (7xx) indicate medium ($m), work or serial number ($n), and key ($r), with a typical configuration in the form “Beethoven, Ludwig van, $d 1770–1827. $t Sonatas, $m violin, piano, $n no. 5, op. 24, $r F major.” Preferred titles can also indicate whole–part relationships. Parts may be numbered ($n) or named ($p), and these subfields can be repeated to indicate named or numbered parts of parts. Additional complex configurations are possible. Expression-level characteristics that may be appended to preferred titles of works include language ($l), version ($s), and arrangement ($o). The use of “selections” ($k) is commonly used to indicate excerpts of a single work or selected works in a composer’s body of works.

When examining linking functionality of title access points with multiple subfields, it is necessary to explore what degree of linking a discovery tool offers. Some discovery tools may not provide links on title access points. Some generate links from the first subfield only ($a in 130/240/730 or $t in 700/710/711), while others generate bound links on the entire title-access-point string to the exact expression represented. Associated names may not be linked to titles by default, or only the names may be links.

The display, linking, and indexing of access points for preferred titles constructed without names should also be explored. Records for most motion picture soundtracks include an added access point for the preferred title for the film. A keyword search limited or narrowed to sound recordings for {motion picture music [film title]} should lead to records with the film title as an added access point in the MARC 730 field. Access points for musical works without names are less common.

Bibliographic records for sound recordings containing musical works (Western art music) by multiple composers or works of different types by a single composer typically contain analytic access points, which are access points for a work or expression contained completely in the resource described. Records with analytic authorized title access points are relatively easy to find, e.g., compact discs with works by more than one composer. Searches that are most likely to locate records with analytic entries include those for multiple composers’ names, one composer with two named or nicknamed works (Mozart’s “Haffner” and “Jupiter” symphonies), or titles frequently issued together (the operas Cavalleria and Pagliacci). A “sound recording” limit or facet creates a more manageable set of results, particularly with general keyword index searches.

The role of a person or corporate body is important for the identification and selection of music materials. This is particularly important for sound recordings, where composers and performers may be of equal importance to users, or where it needs to be clear that a single person is both the composer and performer. Roles can be indicated in notes, or can follow name access points in MARC relator codes ($4), optional in AACR2 records, or in relationship designators ($e) defined in RDA. Testing the use of codes is still necessary if codes in $4 remain unconverted to terms in $e. A decision about display of codes and terms may depend on how many records in a library’s database contain the codes and whether new records include codes or terms. If codes or terms have not been applied consistently, display and indexing in discovery tools will not accurately represent relationships potentially described in those subfields for all records.

The representation of work-to-work relationships as defined in FRBR and RDA are common with dramatic musical works (operas based on existing plays) and vocal works (preexisting texts or poems later set to music). Preferred titles of related works are typically included in bibliographic records for the newer work. Access points in AACR2 records cannot indicate the precise nature of the relationship, meaning the information is provided in a cataloger-supplied note. In RDA records, work-to-work relationships are indicated by preceding an access point with relationship information in $i in a MARC 7xx field. The access point “7001# $i Based on (work): $a Shakespeare, William, $d 1564–1616. $t Romeo and Juliet” would be present in records for the various inspired works by Bellini, Berlioz, Gounod, Lavrovskiĭ, Prokofiev, Rota, Tchaikovsky, and Zeffirelli. To confirm that contents of $i are not in author or title indexes, one would search for the relationship term in each index, avoiding terms that are identical to words used in name authorized access points, particularly in $c (e.g., instrumentalist). If $i in MARC 7xx name or title fields is in these indexes, there will be results from title or author index keyword searches for {based work} or {“based on work”}. Similar searches with {contains work} or {contains expression} will address the use of $i in analytic titles in the MARC 7xx field.

Current LCSH for notated or recorded music frequently employ form ($v) subdivisions (“Scores and parts”) or chronological ($y) subdivisions (“1991–2000”). Faceted discovery tools offer different default and customized arrangement and indexing of subject headings in facets. Topical subdivisions in a single subject heading may be separated within a subject facet, distributed among different facets, or suppressed from view. Topical headings and subdivisions typically appear under “subject” or “topic.” Form, chronological, and geographic subdivisions may appear in other facets such as “genre” or “era,” based on subfield coding, or they may be completely omitted from facets. Form subdivisions for notated music in LCSH and representation of notated music coded in the MARC LDR, 00x, or 336 fields can closely correlate (“Scores”) or be more precise (“Scores and parts”).²³ Because of this overlap, “Scores” may appear twice in facets, such as format and subject or format and genre. When investigating facets, apparent duplicates may be the result of separate coding or fields generating each term.

Preferred titles are rarely, if ever, included by default in subject facets. To investigate, one would search by the authorized form of title for works or groups of works by a composer likely to be the topic of book-length analysis, such as Wagner’s Ring opera cycle, or by keywords that include a composer’s name and subdivision terms such as {analysis appreciation} that imply topical treatment of a work. Distinctive titles are preferable for these searches. In some cases the initial element of a preferred title (“Requiems, D minor”) may be identical to the topical term (“Requiems”), making it difficult to differentiate subject keyword indexing of topical subjects from preferred titles as subjects. Linking functionality of subjects that are work titles requires similar evaluation to that for title access points coded as titles, e.g., titles in a MARC 700 field.

The dedicated genre/form MARC field (655) is currently used in records for music resources such as music-related films or radio programs because LCGFT has already been implemented for moving images and radio. Most genre/form information in records for music scores and recordings is represented in subject headings in the MARC 650 field, Subject Added Entry. Following implementation of the LCGFT for music, genre/form information for music will be recorded in the MARC 655 field, Index Term—Genre/Form. Libraries and vendors may have addressed treatment of genre headings in discovery tools in response to the implementation of other LCGFT projects, such as moving images. Faceted interfaces may also treat form subdivisions in subject headings ($v) as genres.

Since genre headings are already in use, it is easy to evaluate their indexing, display, facets, and linking functionality in a database that contains those headings. Recently cataloged video recordings are likely to include genre headings, and some libraries may have made retroactive changes to older records. A known-title search will reveal if headings appear under a genre facet and how headings display and function in individual records. A search for a genre term that is not also used in LCSH, such as {“classical music radio programs”}, will help in evaluating indexing and facets. Some genre/form terms contain elements that overlap with LCSH topical headings (“opera films”). Terms with identical forms in both LCGFT and LCSH (“field recordings”) may be useful as searches to determine whether the term appears more than once under a single facet or under multiple facets.

Medium of performance is currently recorded in controlled form in subject headings or in codes in an optional MARC 048 field, used only for music materials. RDA records may also record medium in the MARC 382 field, Medium of Performance. Following the implementation of the LCGFT and LCMPT, the medium of performance terms currently part of LCSH and recorded in the MARC 650 field will be recorded in the MARC 382 field in recognition that they are not genre/form or subject terms.²⁴ The eventual widespread use of the 382 field means that a medium index may be possible in discovery tools. Testing the treatment of the 382 field will require a critical mass of records that contain the field. The LCMPT has not yet been implemented.

Because music materials may be issued in multiple pieces or formats, physical description statements (MARC 300) may be more complex than for books. Discovery tools differ in display of subfields, particularly those following the first occurrence of $a. Scores and parts issued together are all of primary importance and are described with separate terms in subfield $a; parts are not considered or coded as accompanying material in $e. In some cases, primary materials may be of different dimensions, so the field becomes more complex, with subfields for extent ($a) and dimensions ($c) repeated.²⁵ Display in a public interface is likely of more use than indexing, since format facets/limits or subject subdivisions permit users to select format. To locate records to evaluate display of complex 300 fields it may be necessary to perform intermediate searches using a staff utility such as a cataloging module within an ILS if the field is indexed, or OCLC Connexion, which offers an index that searches extent (300 $a). Alternatively, one may search for known items.

Media that accompanies print formats may be indicated in a repeated MARC 300 field in RDA records or in subfield $e (accompanying material) in a 300 field in RDA or AACR2 records, and music catalogers will likely continue to use $e for recordings accompanying books or scores.²⁶ The Hal Leonard Play-Along and Jamey Aebersold Jazz series are issued as lead sheets (notated music) with accompanying CDs. These are usually cataloged on a single record with the score as the primary format (300 $a $b $c) and the CD as accompanying material (300 $e). These series and other score and CD sets usually contain series titles, subject headings, or notes that can be combined to identify records. Most music titles with an additional format indicated in $e will also include appropriate added 006 and 007 fields that can be used for limits, facets, icons, or labels.

Format is a general term that does not correspond exactly to RDA content, carrier, or media types. Specific format terms used in discovery tools may combine characteristics of content, carrier, and media. Different products and different libraries’ implementations of the same discovery tool may employ different terms and definitions. MARC leader (LDR) codes, at times combined with codes in fields 006 and 007, allow mapping to many precise formats that can be used in limits, facets, labels, or icons. Identifiable formats, which may be labeled with various terms, include book, cassette tape, compact disc, DVD, LP, manuscript, music recording, score, sound recording, spoken word recording, and video recording. MARC coding is sufficiently precise to identify additional formats, including 78 rpm discs, negative disc stampers, or wax cylinders, that could be of interest for specialized collections.²⁷ Libraries may wish to customize format options and labels to best reflect their collections and meet users’ needs.

Format facets and icons may be explored with a blank or broad search. Searching a known item and reviewing resulting icons, labels, or facets can also indicate completeness and accuracy of indexing. Considerations include the following: Does a limit or facet selection of a format lead to results that include all properly coded records for that format? Are additional formats included that are not implied by the term? With scores, incomplete results can occur with the format option “manuscript,” which is often mapped only to text (LDR/06 “t”), even though a code is available to indicate manuscript music (LDR/06 “d”). To determine whether music is included in the “manuscript” format, one may search for a known music manuscript and look for results with “manuscript” as a format facet option, label, or icon. A subject or keyword search for {manuscript} or {manuscripts} will not be accurate because “manuscripts” is used in subject headings, and “manuscript” is a common keyword. In other cases, formats retrieved may be broader than a term implies. A discovery tool may offer “moving image” as a format option, but items like slides or filmstrips may also be included if a broader mapping is used (LDR/06 “g” Projected Medium). Testing for instances like this can be difficult, and may best be accomplished with a search for a known item.

For those records where multiple formats are reflected in a single record, searches and examples similar to those for physical description/accompanying materials will also test facets or icons, provided the associated MARC 006 (additional material characteristics) or 007 (physical description) fixed fields are present in bibliographic records. A search for a known title issued with accompanying material of a different format will indicate if added formats are offered in facet options or represented with icons or labels in brief results or individual records. For the same title, a pre–search limit for the accompanying format will indicate whether that format is indexed. Searches for the customary AACR2 note phrase {“accompanying compact disc”} should indicate the relative numbers of print materials and recordings under a format facet.

Content, media, and carrier (MARC fields 336–338) will be present in all RDA records. Assuming a library retains these fields in its local catalog, any RDA record can be used to evaluate display. Terms in the vocabularies for each are not necessarily unique to those fields, so known-item searches may be best to use to determining indexing. The number of records containing the MARC 344–347 fields (sound, moving image, video, and digital file characteristics) should increase as RDA is gradually adopted. One may use terms in the relevant RDA instructions in chapters 3.16–3.19 as search terms to retrieve records to evaluate display and explore indexing. If indexing of these fields in a discovery tool has not yet been defined, terms in these fields are indexed as entity attributes in OCLC Connexion and FirstSearch and as general keywords in the freely available WorldCat.org.²⁸

Bibliographic records for instrumental music contain the MARC language code for “no linguistic content” (“zxx”); this code is also used for models, realia, and other items that do not provide language characteristics. Limits, displays, and language facet options vary among discovery tools. Terms generated from “zxx” (“music,” “no language,” or “no linguistic content”) might be offered as language choices in an advanced search. A search for orchestral music or symphonies narrowed to scores should allow sufficient expansion of a language facet to determine whether a term representing code “zxx” appears, or a record for an instrumental work can be examined to determine whether a term is included. The code is only used if all works in a compilation lack linguistic content, so a limit to scores increases the likelihood of retrieving instrumental-only works.

For items with multiple primary languages, there is no coding distinction between a single work in multiple languages and a compilation of works each in different languages. Records likely to contain codes for multiple primary languages (041 $a or $d) include compilation sound recordings of vocal works, particularly if they are compiled based on performer rather than composer, and score anthologies of arias or art songs. When testing items with multiple languages coded in the same subfield, the MARC record should be checked for current practice, which uses the granular subfield coding that some systems require to identify languages (041 $a eng $a fre $a ger instead of the older $a engfreger).

If searching for translations of musical material, vocal scores of operas with parallel texts are among the most common instances of musical materials with both the original language and a translation. Uniform titles in AACR2 may employ “polyglot” to indicate three or more languages, representing at least two translations, making the search {polyglot scores} useful until the term—obsolete in RDA—is no longer represented in a sufficient number of catalog records for an effective search. Subtitles in the language sung and translations are standard in opera DVDs. A video recording or “visual material” search for {operas subtitles} or {filmed operas subtitles} should be sufficient to yield results that indicate how subtitles are treated.

For the purposes of coding language content, even written material included in a music resource may be considered “accompanying material.” Scores frequently contain editor’s introductions or written performance instructions, but only the language of vocal text within the notated music itself is considered “primary.” Searches for sound recordings (limit/facet) are likely to locate records containing codes for accompanying materials in one or more languages. Many commercially issued sound recordings are issued with program notes that include multiple translations or with printed vocal texts and translations. A search designed to retrieve records for instrumental music (without linguistic content) that retrieves numerous records labeled as being in a language such as English indicates that accompanying materials are indexed as a language. Records for scores often refer to “critical commentary” or a “critical report,” and some series are issued with extensive introductory material or editorial notes. Searches such as {critical commentary scores} should retrieve records for scores with significant accompanying material.

Notes relevant to music materials include those for language or notation, recording information, production credits, performers, and contents; general notes also contain important information. Most notes contain information needed for users to identify or select a resource, and any suppression of notes fields should be a deliberate choice.

Edition information for music materials recorded in the MARC 250 field, Edition Statement, may provide significant information, including the editor of the music or transcribed information about vocal range. In RDA, edition information recorded in this field also includes details related to arrangement, currently recorded in the statement of responsibility (245 $c), or related to score format, previously recorded in the 254 field, Musical Presentation Statement, obsolete in RDA.³⁰ Both fields will coexist in a database that contains AACR2 and RDA records.

The potential redundancy of terms in the MARC 250 and 254 fields with information elsewhere in a record makes it difficult to use a search to differentiate types of indexing. Some discovery tools may not index the musical presentation statement, making searching within this field impossible. Currently, the 254 field cannot be searched in any of the WorldCat indexes.³¹ Display may best be evaluated using records known to contain these fields.

Music materials typically lack ISBNs, and may include publisher, issue, or plate numbers. Publishers’ numbers for scores and issue numbers for recordings are used similarly to ISBNs for ordering, searching, and identification. They are recorded in the MARC 028 field, Publisher Number. Discovery tools offer different capabilities related to the indexing of numbers in 028 $a and the indexing of the publisher in 028 $b. Bibliographic records for recordings and publications by jazz label Mosaic Records and classical score reprint publisher Recital Publications frequently include multiple occurrences of the 028 field, recording both original and reissue or reprint information in subfields $a and $b. Determining indexing of numbers in the 028 field requires a publisher number index and a known item; CD box sets are typically suitable. The display of subfield $q, Qualifying Information, defined in 2012, may evaluated by identifying newer records for music resources, particularly CD boxed sets, that contain the subfield.

Musical sharps and flats are essential to the musical key element in preferred titles and may be present in transcribed titles.³² Diacritics are common in records for music materials, which frequently include works, imprints, and access points in languages other than English. How all of these are searched and displayed is important. There are abundant instances of access points that contain sharps, flats, and diacritics. Searching using the flat (♭) and sharp (♯) symbols may require copying the symbols from another source. It is possible that the pound sign (#) functions as a sharp sign, but it should be noted that some discovery tools use the symbol (#) as a wildcard character.³³ Search capability can be explored with pairs or sets of searches using the correct symbol, the equivalent word, and (for sharps) the pound sign. Czech, German, and Russian names and titles frequently include many diacritics; special characters (i.e., degree signs and superscripts) are not common in music records but can appear in titles of contemporary works. Evaluation using known items may be the most effective strategy in such cases.

RDA introduces a new display concern for sound recordings. Instructions on recording copyright dates require a phonogram date to be preceded by the phonogram symbol (℗) if it can be reproduced when the data are recorded.³⁴ This is a change from AACR2 practice where the symbol was recorded as “p.” The phonogram or copyright symbols may display incorrectly when a system is unable to accommodate them. The phonogram symbol is common in sound recording records, and display can be determined by retrieving an RDA record that contains the symbol.

Usually a stopword, “a” is meaningful when part of musical key. Without a way to force “a” into a phrase search, users searching for a musical form plus {“A major”} (intending the musical key A major) will retrieve other terms with “major,” leading to erroneously broad results for musical works (musical keys C major, D major, A major, etc.). Another common element of transcribed and preferred titles that needs to be searched as a meaningful term is “no.” (abbreviation for number), which may function as a Boolean operator in some tools. Testing of phrases versus stopwords or operators requires only a search for the same terms with and without quotes, followed by a comparison of the number of results.