I'm a little out of the loop.. is MB hurting on disk space?
removing DiscIDs is preventing people from using MBs data and forcing
them to use gracenote or other such services.
you say concept of burning downloaded music is in itself old fashioned
i say..to quote The Dude 'that's like.. your
AFAIK (maybe luks can correct me here if i'm wrong) gracenote doesn't
even use the discIDs that MB uses.
they use patteneted fuzzy methods that allow discids that differ
slightly to point to the same data set. so in a way, yes.. they do
have all homebrew IDs if not most.
as to my understanding MB
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 12:30:07 +0100
From: Nikki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [mb-style] albums and single with the same title
To: MusicBrainz style discussion
musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu,
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
i think we need a way to differentiate singles form albums with the same
name.
For example Morphine has an album titled Cure for Pain they also have
a single Cure for Pain as well.
I have both ripped and tagged but they end up
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
i think we need a way to differentiate singles form albums with the
same
name.
For example Morphine has an album titled Cure for Pain they also have
a single Cure
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Thu, 4 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
Steve Wyles wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Brian Gurtler wrote:
i think we need a way to differentiate singles form albums with the
same
name.
For example Morphine has
Simon Reinhardt wrote:
Hi,
I have some questions about linking philosophy which I think need to be
generally clearified because if every moderator follows their own
concepts then we don't have consistent data.
1. Link performers to releases:
a) always, including members of bands
it'd
i am all for some kind of selective album attributes restructuring!
to me this has been a long time coming and should be addressed. it's
something that I've had trouble with very early on.
does anyone know the status of any proposals that touch on this subject?
Any way to get that whole thing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
has deciding which language to use for a bootleg release become much of
an issue on MB yet?
i know that i previously said that the information should be the same as
on the ticket of the event.. but now I'm starting to feel that we
shouldn't have a
Peter Adams wrote:
On Monday 03 April 2006 15:57, Brian Gurtler wrote:
actually adding (live) to every single track on a live album is more
complicated not to mention redundant.
Why more complicated? Who are you quoting there?
haha i don't know why i quoted it to be honest.. maybe i just
great email
Nikki wrote:
Hi,
I was curious about the distribution of countries for bootlegs [1] and I
noticed that the untitled bootleg style [2] doesn't really consist of much
and live bootleg style [3] still doesn't expand the location very much. A
general style appears to have emerged
i'm all for this AR type.
it's fairly easy to tell which myspace band pages are official and which
are not... this is where voting will come in no? if someone think it's
not official than they can vote no.
Cristov Russell wrote:
Beth wrote:
With MySpace's growing popularity. There are some
why should it not be official?
if you want to link to a fan site, use the fan site AR, no? :)
Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2006/4/15, Brian Gurtler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
i'm all for this AR type.
it's fairly easy to tell which myspace band pages are official and which
are not... this is where
searching for Lance Bass.. no results match your request
Cristov Russell wrote:
i'm all for this AR type.
it's fairly easy to tell which myspace band pages are
official and which are not... this is where voting will come
in no? if someone think it's not official than they can vote no.
numerous the laws.
Cornelius Tacitus
-Original Message-
From: Brian Gurtler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 2:09 PM
To: Cristov Russell
Cc: 'MusicBrainz style discussion'
Subject: Re: [mb-style] [RFV] MySpace AR request
searching for Lance Bass
Beth wrote:
My thoughts...
Q1. Which DVDs to add?
A1. All DVD musical rips.
Arguments: it was argued MB was a music database. Music
DVD's are based on music and bands. That in itself seems to be a good reason
to add them. If MB is supposed to be an archive of band's music at
a rip
where the actual chapters do not directly line up with the official
tracklist. For the cases where people just want to add the official
tracklist plus some sort of DVDID like Steve suggested then it doesn't
seem relevant to me.
Brian Gurtler wrote:
i'm talking about seperating audio
Chris Bransden wrote:
On 04/04/06, Brian Gurtler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what about an option to give live releases 2 titles?
one with the live/bootleg style and one with any possible DVD title or
even bootleg title? be able to select one of the two when tagging.
hell maybe all releases
I'm not against a style to be used for naming live tracks.
with this proposition, I'd like to see clarification on when to use
these 10 proposed certain styles as well as exactly which parts of the
proposal apply to non-album tracks only
any of those ten examples would be okay to use?
are cities
trackname (live) should not appear on any track on any live album.
the album that the track resides on tells us that it's live.
Chris Bransden wrote:
both, IMO. i don't want a non-album track with 'TrackName (live)' as
the title. but then, we also say that tracknames should be 'TrackName
i misread i guess. sorry.
Chris Bransden wrote:
i wasn't talking about live albums :)
On 03/04/06, Brian Gurtler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
trackname (live) should not appear on any track on any live album.
the album that the track resides on tells us that it's live.
Chris Bransden wrote
actually adding (live) to every single track on a live album is more
complicated not to mention redundant.
Björn Krombholz wrote:
On 4/3/06, Brian Gurtler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
trackname (live) should not appear on any track on any live album.
the album that the track resides on tells us
incessant whining?
and you call Me confrontational..
Robert Kaye wrote:
On Mar 27, 2006, at 4:53 AM, Don Redman wrote:
Well, then I'd say we should add this now and let Brian add the
appropriate Relationships.
I mean if we finally have a rule, we should use it :-)
Yes, but
Luks
looks whose whining now..
Robert Kaye wrote:
On Mar 27, 2006, at 4:39 PM, Jan van Thiel wrote:
I think that if e.g. inhouseuk (sorry to (ab)use your name, just
giving an example), a moderator with a spotless record, had requested
these, they would've been added almost instantaneously.
I
something to say. This is certainly nothing of
interest, and documents why you are facing unwillingness if you request
something.
g0llum
Behalf Of Brian Gurtler
Sent: Dienstag, 28. März 2006 05:59
looks whose whining now..
___
Musicbrainz
, too, OK :-)
BTW what is it instrument/other or instrument/wind/other?
DonRedman
Don Redman wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 05:37:02 +0100, Brian Gurtler wrote:
at least one album and a ton of live shows
it's already been established that it will be added as per Redman
i'm tired
not make you a good link
editor -- in my opinion.
I'm sorry.
On Mar 6, 2006, at 8:20 AM, Brian Gurtler wrote:
i have interest in this Instrument Secretary thing.
Robert Kaye wrote:
On Mar 3, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Don Redman wrote:
No not a single Instrument, but I think that Mo's wholly new
I'm still confused as to why are we putting DVDs into MB? MB has no way
of providing information to DVD players does it?
like i said my opinion is if it's a DVD of a concert or performance, it
doesn't belong in MB unless it's added as a bootleg. the word DVD won't
even be an issue as the title
on the original album/track page, it should probably read albumtitle
covered by coverartist which shows both that the album/track was
covered, and by whom in one line.
-b.
azertus wrote:
Don Redman schreef:
The link phrase sounds weirt to my (nonnative) ears: Natty Dread is
covered by Natty
cover of should be an option and should go under the existing sub
group covers or other versions
Charlie Hunter Quartet - Natty Dread [1] _is a cover of_
Bob Marley - Natty Dread [2]
I've opened a ticket for this at
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/1097
to create those relationships.
Simon Reinhardt wrote:
Brian Gurtler wrote:
I've entered this into trac a while ago (12/13/05) and now it's in MB
limbo
http://test.musicbrainz.org/trac/ticket/63
anyhow.. not to get too far ahead of myself, i don't see any reason to
be bashful with what
Orion wrote:
Brian Gurtler wrote:
no, it would not leave the entire database as bootleg. it would make the
live concert DVD rips bootlegs where the source is the DVD (aka DSBD as
far as live recording sources are labled outside of MB).
Please expand on this, because it makes no sense
mud crow wrote:
I think you are all looking at this from the wrong angle.
If I own a DVD I can simply type the track details into MB, no need to
rip anything or copy anything, exactly as I do with vinyl or tape. Or I
could enter more precise data and rip the dvd and add times to the
tracks
Orion wrote:
Brian Gurtler wrote:
which is basicly making a bootleg audio CD out of a DVD. Same as if you
were to record the audio from a television performance on the late show
with David Letterman.
If it were an official release, you would have imported a CD not a
ripped audio from
34 matches
Mail list logo
