[mb-style] RFC: Style for compilation recordings

Frederic Da Vitoria davitofrg at gmail.com
Fri Jul 8 08:00:10 UTC 2011


2011/7/8, Johannes Weißl <jargon at molb.org>:
> Hello Davi,
>
> the paragraph is from http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Standalone_Recording
> Though I overlooked a little info on top of the page:
> "This page has not been reviewed by our documentation team"
>
> I also think it is useful to say something different about two obviously
> different recordings, that happen to be on the same track. Currently
> this is only possible by adding them as standalone recordings (since
> adding Pseudo/Bootleg releases with split tracks was rejected by the
> community).
>
> If this is consensus, I would suggest to change that paragraph into
> allowing them as standalone recordings, but *only* if they are linked to
> the combined recording through the right ARs ("compilation of").
>
> What do you/others think?
>
>
> Johannes
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 07:56:19PM -0300, Davi Figueiredo wrote:
>> I couldn't find the text saying that hidden tracks cannot be standalone
>> recordings; where does it come from?
>>
>> I don't see why such a recording shouldn't be allowed; even if it doesn't
>> appear as a separate track, it still makes sense to record credits and
>> other
>> relationships to that specific song (especially as they're often alternate
>> versions or other unusual songs which differ significantly from the rest
>> of
>> the album).
>>
>> 2011/7/7 Johannes Weißl <jargon at molb.org>
>>
>> > Hello Michael,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 10:34:29PM -0500, Michael Wiencek wrote:
>> > > > I just found this section:
>> > > > "Hidden tracks where a single (very long) track has music, then a
>> > > > long silence (or noise), followed by one or more (different) pieces
>> > > > of
>> > > > music should be entered as a single track following the guidelines
>> > > > for
>> > > > multiple titles. If the title of the hidden song is not known, see
>> > > > the
>> > > > guidelines for unknown track titles. These tracks are not allowed as
>> > > > standalone recordings."
>> > > >
>> > > > This would mean that your split-compilation-tracks plugin for Picard
>> > > > is
>> > > > essentially useless :-( ?
>> > >
>> > > Not in all cases, but probably in the one it describes. :(
>> > >
>> > > I think adding standalone recordings is better than entire "bootleg"
>> > > releases with those tracks split (which I disagree with adding). The
>> > > separate recordings would also be useful for holding relationships
>> > > that
>> > > differ from the other parts.
>> >
>> > Well, so what do you/others suggest? Change the guideline? I fear I have
>> > to remove the standalone recordings for hidden tracks again... it
>> > doesn't feel right if the guideline forbids it.
>> >
>> > Maybe it is better to link the combined recording to two works, and let
>> > the plugin be based on that?

If what you suggest is that one track which obviously contains 2
recordings (in the common sense of the word) should be linked to 2
Recordings (in the MB sense), then I agree for several reasons. First,
as Davi pointed out, the ARs could be different. But also, these are
probably two recordings which happened to be joined into one track.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
http://www.april.org



More information about the MusicBrainz-style mailing list