[mb-users] Digitally (re-)master AR attribute

[Chris Bransden]

On 04/10/06, Age Bosma <agebosma at home.nl> wrote:
> Chris Bransden wrote:
> > On 03/10/06, Age Bosma <agebosma at home.nl> wrote:
> >> Chris Bransden wrote:
> >> > IMO it's always the same process. whether or not it's "digital" or not
> >> > depends on the time it was done (i imagine all CDs have to be
> >> > digitally mastered, no?), and they probably don't even bother
> >> > mentioning it for most current releases as it's pretty much a given.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That might go for CD releases yes. But as far as I know not for LP's.
> >> LP's are non-digitally mastered at some stage. A different person then
> >> goes digitally mastering it to put it on CD. A different process which
> >> is likely done by a different person.
> >> That's why I think it's important to make the distinction in case of an
> >> LP on CD release.
> >
> > but why do you need to specify if it was digital or not? CDs will
> > always have been been digitally mastered, vinyls analogue (actually
> > i'm sure at least some modern vinyls use digital technology during the
> > mastering but i've never seen one say so much on the cover),
> >
>
> You've got a point but we store CD's and LP's in MusicBrainz. If they
> are stored separately than there isn't really a need to specify the
> difference but what if they aren't separated in the db? In that case we
> might end up with two 'mastered by' ARs without being able to
> distinguish the two.
> To overcome the problem we might even need two attributes for the
> 'mastered' AR: 'digitally' and 'analogue'. It might not matter to
> specify it for a new CD release but it doesn't hurt to specify it either.

very good point :) this is a situation i could see you would need it
in, though i guess it would become redundant when vinyl/CD releases
are no longer merged (NGS).

still, in the mean time...