[Prev] Thread [Next]  |  [Prev] Date [Next]

Re: [mailing] [mb-style] What makes a release in Classical? Marco Sola Fri Sep 01 03:24:43 2006

Il Tuesday, May 09, 2006 10:03 AM
Frederic Da Vitoria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:

I had a feeling (but I may be wrong, since I couldn't find any written
confirmation about this) that in classical MB admitted entering
different releases (in terms of dates, country or publisher) as long
as the recordings were the same (same track listing, same performers,
same performance) and no "remixing" (i.e. no digital cleaning) was
done. So that if an editor re-issued a cheap edition of a previous
issue from a major editor, it could still be considered as the same
album (but the Sony digitally reworked releases of Glenn Gould should
be entered separately).

Don answered that:
The current definition of what exactly is a release in MusicBrainz
is a bit hazy. And the definition sems to move more and more
toward "A release is an edition of an album". If we continue with
this tendency we will need a grouping AdvancedEntity (like the
AlbumObject in the ObjectModel) pretty soon.

What do other classical-minded users feel?

There's nothing different than non-classical music: if a Release has the same tracklist and time is usually merged. Your doubt is because the matter about what a release is still not resolved. But since most of MB minds thinks more likely that a release is the event and not the printing, I agree thay have to be merged and different reissue dates reported in ReleaseDate.

Classical is just one time more a little more tricky since on re-release ReleaseTitle often change.

The matter is still open but I see no big problem nor urge about it since discid matches something proper.


MArco (ClutchEr2)

Musicbrainz-style mailing list