[mb-users] an album has to have bonus tracks to be a remaster?

[Chris Bransden]

On 03/10/06, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/10/3, Chris Bransden <chris at whenironsattack.com>:
> I agree we don't really know if the PUIDs would be different (if a MB user
> has both an original and a remaster, maybe she/he could tell). If they don't
> differ, then the distinction is meaningless. But if they are different, then
> it is important. If we merge the PUIDs now, we won't have any way to
> re-separate them when we enter NGS (we won't even know if an old-style MB
> release contains PUIDs from different masterings or not). But if we separate
> them now and later discover that the PUIDs are identical (and that the
> distinction can be considered as meaningless), then we sill still be able to
> merge the releases. Furthermore, it will be easy to track such "problems" by
> browsing the remaster ARs.

IMO the problem is non-fixable at this point. NGS will also allow for
seperate releases for each label's pressing (eg the UK pressing, the
US pressing, etc etc), and sometimes these have been seperately
mastered/cut differently such that the PUIDs/CDID would be different
(which is why most major releases have 5+ CD-IDs).

i think when/if it arrives we're all gonna be re-submitting our record
collections anyway.

to me (and i stress this is only my opinion!) it is more useful to
stick to what the current schema is good for (1 release = 1 tracklist)
and then worry about NGS when it arrives, which, will be some years(?)
yet!