[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
> 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?
> 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
>> relationships to that specific song (especially as they're often alternate
>> versions or other unusual songs which differ significantly from the rest
>> 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
Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
More information about the MusicBrainz-style