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

[Kerensky97]

I agree with sticking to the current standard of mergeing the releases when
the tracklistings are identical, and wait till NGS is a bit closer before
dealing with this.  If we split off the remaster editions, limited editions
and LP versions would have to be split too.  How many beatles releases have
disc IDs and a release date in the 1960's?  Each one of those would be split
into the modern CD release and the old LPs; and every n00b that comes on
trying to merge identical albums will have to be told they have to research
if it ever had a remaster version of it made.  And that could turn potential
editor/voters away.

I don't think we need to be needlessly complicating the process now by
adding another rule when we don't even know when or how exactly NGS will be
setup to accomodate that rule.


Gecks wrote:
> 
> 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!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/an-album-has-to-have-bonus-tracks-to-be-a-remaster--tf2371954s2885.html#a6628304
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.