solution seems simple to me - we need to be able to add multiple attributes to releases, not either/or for live/EP/album/etc. i'm sure this has been suggested before.
isn't this going to be part of NGS? 2009/11/3 yoursvivek <[email protected]>: > > I always find it nagging that some of live compilation releases/RGs have > their type as live while others have compilation. We should follow a clear > cut filter like model decide which category a release should belong to. > > Same is true for live bootlegs. Bar a few artists where bootlegs are really > abundant e.g. Grateful Dead, live bootlegs go to live type releases. I think > selection procedure should be chalked out and included in guidelines. My > take would be as follows. > > For Releases. > 1. If a release is first official issue of a studio album/single/EP, > subsequent official reissue with or without extra bonus tracks (previously > unreleased or otherwise), it will have a type "album". Two-fer releases are > of type 'album'. > 2. If a studio release is later remixed to changed the theme of album as a > whole it's remix > 3. Live EP is EP; Live Single is a single. (I've never seen these but I'm > sure the world is really weird, they must be existing somewhere). Soundtrack > is Soundtrack, Spokenwords are spokenwords, audio book is audiobook, > interview is interview. (I think this part never overlaps and is easiest to > deal with.) > > *the rest below is a real jabberwocky, but I am trying to be descrete* > 4. If a release is live, official, bootleg or otherwise (like release from > labels but without permission there by actually illegal and unofficial); > from a single show or compilation from various live shows (like most Live at > the BBC), various artist live compilations like Live at Monterey Pop, etc. > it will have release type of "live." > 5. If a official release is retrospective collection of studio works from > multiple sessions, with or without some live tracks, it belongs to > compilation. > 6. A bootleg compilation with tracks from various sessions is a compilation. > 7. A bootleg with tracks from a single set of sessions is *duh!* I think > this is where we should select "Other" and not for anything from the first 6 > categories (points 1-6 above) > 8. If something filters out right though 1-7 above is of type Others. > > Now we have some even more complicated cases in RGs (as they are defined > now) > > RGs genereally club together reissues of same album or multi-disc > compilation, so all the above rules are applicable. Now here is the bummer. > What about Led Zeppelin "The Complete Studio Collections" box set? Here is > what I think should be done with these. > RGs should be of type "Compilation" as most of them on MB are listed right > now; but the individual discs, like "The Complete Studio Recordings (disc 3: > Led Zeppelin III)" release as we call it, why should this be listed as > 'compilation'? Since we have type data separately stored for RGs and > Releases, why do we need to have the same value on both even when it doesn't > sound right! > > I think it would be best to put individual disc where they would have > belonged had they been individually released, and put RG for box set in > compilation. > > Comments/Improvement/even disagreement are welcomed and if I'm repeating > something(s) from previous inconclusive discussion, ignore my ignorance but > help the cause. > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Clarification-and-cosolidation-of-live-compilation-bootleg-type-precedence-tp26160010p26160010.html > Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list [email protected] http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
