LordSputnik | 14 Sep 14:00 2014
Picon

Master and Performance entities

Just over a year ago now, we redefined the MusicBrainz recording entity.
Previously, it had mainly been seen as one of two different things,
depending on which editor you asked - either a "mix" or a "master".

This resulted in a lot of subjective decision making when merging or
splitting recordings, with arguments over whether the practically identical
recordings contained "unique audio". A lot of the time, decisions had to be
made based on listening to the track (not always possible) or looking at
AcoustID data (not always accurate).

So, recording was redefined to represent "distinct audio" prior to final
mastering (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/recording). In most cases (for songs,
anyway), this corresponds to the "mix".

This means that we're left with a gap in the MusicBrainz model, since there
is no entity to represent audio at the "master" level. Back when recordings
were redefined, it was agreed that masters should be implemented in some
form in the future, so I've made this thread to get some ideas on what form
they should take.

Additionally, it would be nice to hear thoughts on a Performance entity,
which was also discussed last year.

My own thoughts:
Master audio could be represented in one of two ways:
- 1. as an entity which groups releases with identical mastering.
- 2. as an entity which seamlessly fits between recordings and tracks, and
allows the grouping of tracks with shared mastering.

#1 seems the least complicated way of doing things, but #2 would allow for
(Continue reading)

caller#6 | 10 Sep 17:47 2014
Picon

RFV: STYLE-331"add 'composite reissue' relationship" (aka 'includes')

Hi all,

This proposal adds a relationship indicating that a release-group 
includes another release-group. For example, a box set might 'include' 
previous albums, EPs, or singles.

Changes based on discussion:
The original term 'composite reissue' was meant to be a placeholder, and 
was dropped.

Expected passage date is Saturday, 13 Sept, 2014, 00:00:00 UTC

Links:
     RFC:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-331-add-composite-reissue-relationship-tp4667196.html
     TIcket:
http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-331
     Wiki:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Caller_number_six/proposal/Relationship_Types/Release_Group-Release_Group/Includes
Tom Crocker | 5 Sep 10:23 2014
Picon

RFC-2: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

Same as before. Tell us what you think!

On 24 August 2014 22:15, Tom Crocker <tomcrockermail-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

Thanks :)

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Tom Crocker | 1 Sep 23:36 2014
Picon

RFV: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

RFC: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-STYLE-335-Add-Box-set-as-a-primary-type-of-Release-Group-tp4667641.html

The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

The proposal got +1. The only discussion was whether box set would be better as a secondary type, but that doesn't fit as well.

Thanks :)
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Rachel Dwight | 27 Aug 02:34 2014
Picon

Artist collectives/Japanese soundtrack style

This is a continuation of Staffan’s discussion on Various Artists credits.
In Japan, it is extremely common for composers to form loose groups with other composers. These groups are commonly called “collectives” among English-speaking J-Pop fans.  Usually these collectives consist of freelance composers, but many major video game developers (e.g. Nintendo, SEGA and Namco Bandai) will employ a group of composers and sound designers and organize them like a freelance collective.

The reason I bring this up is because there is currently some controversy over the legitimacy of collectives as artists, more specifically if a collective can be used as a release artist on a video game soundtrack. 
Firstly, http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Specific_types_of_releases/Soundtrack says to credit the artist listed on the cover. This is inapplicable as Japanese soundtrack releases almost never list the names of composers or performers on their cover art. The only place to find the composers is to look in the booklet, which our current guideline expressly prohibits.
Secondly, there’s http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Unknown_and_untitled/Special_purpose_artist, which states to use Various Artists if the release contains tracks by more than one artist. This is an extremely broad instruction and it ignores releases by collectives and other temporary groups (e.g. doujin circles).

It’s time we fix the style guidelines (either by appending Style/Language/Japanese or narrowing some definitions on the main style pages) to address this issue. It seems every time one of us attempts to add a Japanese soundtrack it becomes an uphill battle.

Here are the changes I propose:
- If a soundtrack does not list an artist on the cover, it may be acceptable to check the booklet.
- If the composers are listed as being part of a collective, use the collective as the release artist. If none exists or there are tracks contributed by outside artists, use Various Artists.

You can tell if an artist belongs to a collective if his or her name is accompanied by the name of the collective, with either half in parentheses. Here is an example of the presentation of such a relationship: https://ia801501.us.archive.org/14/items/mbid-1089e82f-24a3-4642-8694-ddbb44365e82/mbid-1089e82f-24a3-4642-8694-ddbb44365e82-2227409943.jpg

I’m unsure about making a ticket, so I’ll leave this open to input for a while.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Staffan | 25 Aug 20:33 2014
Picon

When various artists releases aren't various artists releases

A series of my edits where I changed some releases to various artists releases since, well, they were various artists releases have been downvoted with no comment
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997572
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997569
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997567
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28997568

According to http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Unknown_and_untitled/Special_purpose_artist "

  • Various Artists - Used only for compilation-type releases or release groups containing tracks by multiple different artists."

So what's the deal here?

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Tom Crocker | 24 Aug 23:15 2014
Picon

RFC: STYLE-335: Add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group

The proposal is to add "Box set" as a primary type of Release Group, e.g. instead of Album. The rationale is that box sets are often substantially different in scope and scale from albums. They are often also sought in a way other compilations are not. It is a type that (at least in English) is familiar and well populated.

The text to be added to the Release Group/Type documentation is on the wiki page.

Thanks :)
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Daniel Sobey | 24 Aug 06:30 2014
Picon

Re: RFC: STYLE-331 "add 'composite reissue' relationship" -- compilation?

Would it make sense to include the medium?
Medium 1 is available as part of release group.


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Rachel Dwight | 18 Aug 17:53 2014
Picon

RFC STYLE-332: Even more new packaging types

As we are all aware, there are a plethora of packaging types that we have yet to account for in MB. Here are two big ones:

SnapPack - The classic 8cm CD packaging. A plastic frame with a cardboard outer cover (sometimes with an additional plastic outer shell), designed so it can fold ("snap") in half. Sometimes mistakenly called "snap case."
Image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_CD_single#mediaviewer/File:Japanese_CD_Single_6-by-3-in_cover,_opened.JPG

Library case - A box designed to hold a VHS tape. Usually made of hard plastic but some (usually tapes containing feature films) were made of vinyl with padding inside. May or may not have hubs inside to hold the tape spools in place. While this packaging was mainly used for VHS, smaller versions were sometimes used for audio cassettes. 
Image without hubs: http://ep.yimg.com/ay/ldb-cdpackaging/clear-vhs-library-case-video-case-full-sleeve-no-hub-psv14-100-pcs-9.gif 
Image with hubs: http://ep.yimg.com/ay/ldb-cdpackaging/100-pcs-vhs-library-case-with-hub-clear-full-sleeve-psv14hub-3.gif
Image of compact cassette-size case: http://auctions.c.yimg.jp/img339.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/users/0/4/8/5/teruakiteru_60-img553x600-1376211776swzxs741319.jpg


Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-332
Expected expiration date: 2014-8-24
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Rachel Dwight | 15 Aug 06:49 2014
Picon

Pre-RFC: Rename disambiguation field "Description"

https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Disambiguation_Comment states that disambiguation comments are intended to differentiate between/among 2 or more identically named artists/labels/entities. It explicitly states that the field is not to be used as a general description field, yet some editors are dead set on using it for this purpose. They claim it’s a pre-emptive strike, but I don’t buy it. If we’re going to abuse the disambiguation field in this manner, it should be renamed to better suit its purpose.

This thread is to only be used to discuss renaming the disambiguation field. If enough support is shown I will open a new thread to alter the disambiguation document to allow for similar or confusing names.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
caller#6 | 6 Aug 20:17 2014
Picon

RFC: STYLE-331 "add 'composite reissue' relationship"

Hi all,

This proposal would add a relationship linking original release-groups 
with what I'm calling 'composite reissues', (e.g. box sets, 2-in1s etc).

The purpose would be: to indicate that an earlier release-group is/was 
also availble as part of a later, larger release-group. This will become 
more important if 2-in-1s are reclassified as compilations (where they 
might become lost in a long list of "best of" titles).

The appropriate use for this relationship would be: when a composite 
reissue reproduces cover art, track lists and release titles from 
previous release-groups. So, merely including a single in a generic 
"best of" compilation would not be an appropriate use (since that is 
already clear when looking at the recording).

I'm not super-happy with the term 'composite reissue'. Please suggest 
something better!

(I'm not crazy about 'bundle' either, mostly because it implied (to me) 
several products bundled together at a reduced price)

Alex / caller#6

links:
     ticket:
         http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-331

     proposal to reclassify 2-in-1s as compilations:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-Make-2-on-1-or-generically-M-on-N-release-groups-Compilations-tp4667103.html

    relevant forum thread:
         http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22866#p22866

Gmane