• NoidsAreUs over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy
    How difficult is it to open the release in question and look/read it?


    Did you ever open the 250+ dubious releases of Sgt. Pepper's, just to find out, if your copy matches an existing sub? No one does. People, esp. sellers, just add their releases and don't give a damn. And that's where dupes are born...
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy edited over 5 years ago
    NoidsAreUs
    Did you ever open the 250+ dubious releases of Sgt. Pepper's, just to find out, if your copy matches an existing sub?


    Of course not.
    Advanced Search is a very patient and helpful tool for these matters.

    Again; do NOT assume that other users know what all those strange abbriviations mean in the FTF. Not only newbies. And, more important, I can't see the benefit
    Gorgyporgy
    of 'throwing' everything in a FTF

    if one can find, very easily, the release they're looking for by using the Advanced Search or Search Bar.
    I think this FTF thing would miss its target and creates only more confusion and makes this Database even more vague, incomprehensible and ineffective. But, hey, maybe I'm old fashioned.
  • 7_Sea_Cods over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy
    Why?


    To me, the point isn't redundancy, it's to explain how to connect the suffix (MO) to the plant (Monarch). Or, if the plant is in the FTF, explain how one can tell it's that plant by looking at the record — in either case, the ideal (in my personal opinion) is something like "A Monarch pressing as identified by the MO suffix on the matrix numbers printed on the label."

    Gorgyporgy
    Here's a hint: type 7E-1053 gatefold sleeve us reissue in the search bar


    To be honest, I don't find this a reliable way to find releases. Someone might have neglected to type "Gatefold" in the sub, and then I've missed it and added a dupe. I honestly think it's better to look at everything in the MR. It's a little more time-consuming but accounts for incomplete subs (of which there are many).

    Gorgyporgy
    I don't see the advantage of 'throwing' everything in a FTF if it doesn't improve the searching after the product you're looking for. Sorry, I just don't see it.


    Fair enough. But at the same time, you can't really argue that it doesn't actually help some people. Is having it there actually making it significantly more difficult for you? That's the only reason I can think of to prohibit it. Otherwise, the cost of having it there (not significant) does not outweigh the benefit (significant for some users).
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    7_Sea_Cods
    But at the same time, you can't really argue that it doesn't actually help some people. Is having it there actually making it significantly more difficult for you? That's the only reason I can think of to prohibit it. Otherwise, the cost of having it there (not significant) does not outweigh the benefit (significant for some users).


    I could argue that this whole argument has the same meaning/weight if it is used vice versa! ....it does actually help some people....making it difficult etc.
    But that would be lame, I admit.

    Nevertheless, look here: http://www.discogs.com/release/8028615 (Be careful it's a draft used for this purpose!) I did what you want me to do. Use the FTF to clearify the differences between mine and the other, similar issues. And you honestly think this is better and more transparent?
  • Showbiz_Kid over 5 years ago

    You search your way, I'll search mine. Why do you want to force everyone through the same funnel? Seems to me you're anti-choice.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 5 years ago

    And yes, this may apply to US versions more than pressings from other countries. So what? What's the big hang-up?
  • 7_Sea_Cods over 5 years ago

    Re: Donald Fagen CD, a couple things -- putting data that already appears in the format (in this case, catalog numbers) is redundant and disallowed. But more to the point, I think there's a limit to what you can get across in the FTF. It's got to be succinct. I don't think either the plant or plant code cross that line, whereas what you have in the FTF in that draft does cross the line, in my opinion anyway. It's a more complex situation that requires more space to explain than the FTF allows.
  • JeroenG8 over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy
    And, more important, I can't see the benefit


    That's your loss.
    It is a very big benefit for other users, and there are a lot of them!
    If you don't see the benefit, just ignore the FTF and search for the vesion you are looking for in the way you like.
    But don't force users who want to do it simply to use 'your way' too.
    Apart from that, this was discussed numurous times before, and management agreed that these things are allowed in the FTF, so why are you (again?) questioning this?
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    JeroenG8
    But don't force users who want to do it simply to use 'your way' too.


    What gave you that idea? I don't want to force anything on anybody. Why should I? This is a discussion isn't it?! And just like you I have an opinion, is that allowed?
    And if you, or the others, just can't see what I've tried to accomplish with my FAKE Donald Fagen draft, than that is your loss, not mine. I merely want to emphasize what you do with the FTF is going the wrong way. That's all.

    JeroenG8
    and management agreed that these things are allowed in the FTF


    Did I say anywhere that you are doing something against the GL, or against a decision from Mngt.? Don't think so.

    I'm fine with it, as long as I don't have to go along with it. Have a little respect, please?!
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    7_Sea_Cods
    whereas what you have in the FTF in that draft does cross the line, in my opinion anyway.


    I'm sure you knew that I was only illustrating what might happen if the FTF is "outlawed".

    7_Sea_Cods
    But more to the point, I think there's a limit to what you can get across in the FTF.


    Than, by all means, make sure that that is stipulated in the GL.
  • avalon67 over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy
    Nevertheless, look here: http://www.discogs.com/release/8028615 (Be careful it's a draft used for this purpose!) I did what you want me to do. Use the FTF to clearify the differences between mine and the other, similar issues. And you honestly think this is better and more transparent?


    Did it have a white inner sleeve or flecked grey and white ? :/
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    avalon67
    Did it have a white inner sleeve or flecked grey and white ? :/


    Which one do you have?
  • 7_Sea_Cods over 5 years ago

    Gorgyporgy
    I'm sure you knew that I was only illustrating what might happen if the FTF is "outlawed".


    I'm not sure what you mean here. If the FTF is outlawed, only outlaws will use the FTF?

    Gorgyporgy
    Than, by all means, make sure that that is stipulated in the GL.


    It's more just common sense than something explicit in the GL, but it's backed up by staff here.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 5 years ago

    This is getting pointless. The issue of whether this is allowable has already been settled, according to Nik. Many users find it useful. As long as subbers expand on the FTF info in Release Notes, then it's all good - it's a divining tool for experienced users, and a teaching tool for new users.
  • Gorgyporgy over 5 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    The issue of whether this is allowable has already been settled, according to Nik.


    Never debated that!

    Showbiz_Kid
    This is getting pointless.


    Merely gave my opinion. Hope I didn't offend you?

    7_Sea_Cods
    It's more just common sense than something explicit in the GL


    More discussions/topics to follow, I'm afraid.
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    aloha these types of edits re: FTF info added is very helpful to both sellers/buyers and collectors to sort in the MR, thanks

    and this IS by far one of the best leads we are also incorporating
    Showbiz_Kid
    Yes, and you'll find that ALL of my subs with pressing plant info in the FTF also have it in LCCN and Notes. This way you make sure that the information is communicated wherever the user may look.


    Farjenk
    Sounds good!


    For example there are so many multiple pressing variations for some USA LP's that is near impossible to sort them ALL out previously until we started adding FTF info, AND Now when FTF's are added now in the MR one can kwikly sort which from which. This is a ideal is saving valuable time and lowering mistakes so new users are not making Dupes of already existing entries / items which will result in constant merges.

    Easy to see in the MR for USA LP's >>> MON SP / AR / PRCW / / PRC

    https://www.discogs.com/Eagles-The-Long-Run/master/59516

    Diognes_The_Fox
    I think I've stated something to that effect to. I think it's the best method of working it out.
  • Elukkae over 4 years ago

    I absolutely agree with this approach. Especially US releases are impossible to browse through otherwise.
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    Easy to see in the MR for USA LP's >>> MON SP / AR / PRCW / / PRC


    I said something like "SP - Specialty pressing" would be best. The codes alone aren't super helpful, imo.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    I said something like "SP - Specialty pressing" would be best. The codes alone aren't super helpful, imo.


    Yes, you did, and thank you.

    BTW, why does this topic keep rising from the dead like Dracula from his coffin?
  • The_Beatles. over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    BTW, why does this topic keep rising from the dead like Dracula from his coffin?


    Maybe FTF stands for Famous Transylvanian Fiend?
  • jansenENjanssen over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    something like "SP - Specialty pressing" would be best. The codes alone aren't super helpful,

    By implementing this: https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/713797 , it would mean you can add the whole name instead of abbreviations.
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    The codes alone aren't super helpful, imo.


    IMO, think they are just fine ... MON / SP / AR / PRCW / PRC are easy to see in the MR and IF pointed out in the MR like this >>> We added a note on the MR to help sort plants >>>
    https://www.discogs.com/Eagles-The-Long-Run/master/59516 then perhaps this is the answer.

    Hand typing
    Diognes_The_Fox
    something like "SP - Specialty pressing"
    is a REAL pain in the arse, specially when the autocomplete DOES NOT work anymore you will have to type type type type >>>> type to the end of the earth,

    The auto complete was gotten rid many months ago and we would like TO See that add back. >>>>
    autocomplete makes it easy to type the 1st letter "S" and the rest fall in if you have type it before "SP - Specialty Pressing"

    ONE has to remember the short MO - SP codes etc has been added for over a year now to many entries.... SO Is this a good lead ?
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    nik
    Some examples that could be improved would help here.


    Why Not incorporate a "drop down" menu for all of this info for each label, like ~ MO - SP - RI ID's for these Plants like capitol Jacksonville or Winchester etc. Why not make a drop-down menu to use... just like the feature we built for Country: US - Germany France etc >>>>

    Using a drop down list just like "countries" ,,, can BE added as a drop-down feature SO that plant info could be treated the same way and you click on the version "France PDO Pressing" etc

    (button) Jacksonville
    (button) Winchester
    (button) France PDO Pressing

    IF We "know all of the info" and have good info re: variations of info pertaining to each label etc then the key INFO can be put in place so we can have a drop down SO then you CAN check off stuff instead of HAND typing all this stuff .
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    is a REAL pain in the arse, specially when the autocomplete DOES NOT work anymore you will have to type type type type >>>> type to the end of the earth,

    The auto complete was gotten rid many months ago and we would like TO See that add back. >>>>
    autocomplete makes it easy to type the 1st letter "S" and the rest fall in if you have type it before "SP - Specialty Pressing"

    ONE has to remember the short MO - SP codes etc has been added for over a year now to many entries.... SO Is this a good lead ?


    We get support requests asking what those mean. It might be easier to type, but it's not totally clear.

    The CS team uses this heavily: https://smilesoftware.com/textexpander
    I haven't used it personally, but it might help out with some of the redundant typing.
  • truedream over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    is a REAL pain in the arse, specially when the autocomplete DOES NOT work anymore you will have to type type type type >>>> type to the end of the earth,

    Because of resistance to using just the codes, I've been suggesting using the full plant name as entered on Discogs followed by the word "Pressing". You might like that since you can just copy/paste the plant name and type "Pressing".
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    It's really not THAT much of a pain ;)
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    WHY cant we have theee "plant ID # or location" info from the BAIO be added and/or incorporated to the format. so its shows "LP, Album "Pressing plant or type" ... the info from the BAOI could effective IF added or synced to show in the MR right along side with the format for each pressing variation ?

    would that NOt be easier than having to do all these manual edits?

    Showbiz_Kid
    It's really not THAT much of a pain ;)
    maybe NOT such a pain but its very time consuming to say the least.

    truedream
    You might like that since you can just copy/paste the plant name and type "Pressing".
    We like something that would be common or easy to identify >>> as stated before <<<
    BarnyardOrbit
    Why Not incorporate a "drop down" menu for all of this info for each label, like ~ MO - SP - RI ID's for these Plants like capitol Jacksonville or Winchester etc.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    WHY cant we have theee "plant ID # or location" info from the BAIO be added and/or incorporated to the format. so its shows "LP, Album "Pressing plant or type" ... the info from the BAOI


    Previously you asked for a drop-down in BaOI for pressing info. Reason this can't be done: the list is never-ending, and Staff would be deluged with never-ending requests to update it.

    There's no sense putting a "Pressing Plant" field in BaOI, because there's already one in LCCN. It just doesn't show up in the Master View.

    What we have now - using the FTF - is a very workable solution already. Let's not go trying to gild the lily with some fancy-shmancy scheme.
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    What we have now - using the FTF - is a very workable solution already.


    YES YES ... as we think this works very well currently

    but re:
    Showbiz_Kid
    some fancy-shmancy schem
    they are just ideas ... thinking a little differently, might be a solution.
  • Cornbread55 over 4 years ago

    I'm all on board with BarnyardOrbit, Showbiz_Kid et al regarding the usage of the pressing plant ID (e.g. MO, PR) and the code (e.g 53, 25). As a seller, it saves me valuable time (and time = $) when searching for the version of an item I wish to sell. Barnyard's idea of a dropdown box for pressing plants is fantastic, as well.

    Personally, I think that we should maintain a consistency that whatever is printed on the label should be listed in the FTF as is, but if the pressing plant can only be determined by the runout etchings (i.e. CP), then it should be listed as a ___ Pressing (i.e. "Pitman Pressing") in the FTF.

    Of course, it is extremely helpful to make note of the significance of the pressing code/ID in the Notes section for users who may not be familiar with the abbreviations.

    Thanks for all your input here.

    Micah
  • data_boy over 4 years ago

    I have no problem using the FTF for pressing variations or any other distinguishing factor that helps sort when trying to locate my particular issues.

    Having read much of this forum, I find many users get hung up on the FTF being part of the format. If I recall, Mgmt. stated some time back (another similar forum discussion) that the FTF might be moved so as not to be part of the format field.
    Might be a good idea to specifically have this field appear elsewhere but still appear on the MR pg to help users find their specific release.

    I also have no problem with plant codes in the FTF, perhaps a drop down menu for that might be useful (rather than Other) but these codes seem to be industry standards and do not take long to get used to understanding them once familiar with them. The forum on runouts provides much detail and uses them also. So imo it is consistent.

    And yes, any FTF info should be explained more thoroughly in the notes especially when codes/abbrev. are used. Since the FTF only shows the first 3 letters, another reason to use codes imo.

    As to those users who seem to think that we just have to click each release to find the pressing or other details, it is often that I can spend up to 10 minutes just trying to locate my release when there are many US issues. Many don't even list pressing/runout info, then I have to check images if they are there. So the FTF is quite a time saver and very useful and serves it's purpose. I find my issue in much less time WITH the FTF, I appreciate it ;)
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    We get support requests asking what those mean. It might be easier to type, but it's not totally clear.

    +1 zillion.

    The difference between "CP" and "Pitman Pressing" is that CP is simply a code, "Pitman Pressing" is a descriptive term that encapsulates that particular variation. Even if you have no idea that Pitman is a pressing plant, it's clear that it's the 'Pitman Version', whatever that maybe. A quick scan of the page or keyword search for Pitman will reveal what that means. "CP" will not have the same affect.

    Likewise, "Pitman" applies universally to all releases pressed at Pitman whereas as "CP" only applies to those that were pressed there and were released on labels that utilize "CP" in its matrix coding. Crucially, there are many releases that might show the code for one plant on the labels, but were in fact pressed at another plant, which potentially can cause confusion. Thus, by forgoing the code for a descriptive term, we avoid this.

    Lastly, RSG §6.1.6 states "The free text field should not be used to describe things that are already in the Format or Description fields". Surely this implies that we shouldn't use the FTF to replicate a BaOI field in the format.
    data_boy
    As to those users who seem to think that we just have to click each release to find the pressing or other details, it is often that I can spend up to 10 minutes just trying to locate my release when there are many US issues.

    +1 Using the FTF to describe the pressing has been a tremendous development.

    Not to go too far off topic, but I've always thought it would be great if ginormous MRs like Please Please Me had a nested, i.e., expandable/collapsable view that grouped each wave of editions together, e.g.,
    - 1st UK Pressing (Variation 1, 2, 3)
    - 1st US Pressing (v1, v2, v3, etc.)
    - 2nd UK Pressing (v1, v2, v3, etc.)
    - 1980s reissue (v1, v2, v3, etc.)
    - 2000s remaster (v1, v2, v3, etc.)
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    berothbr
    Crucially, there are many releases that might show the code for one plant on the labels, but were in fact pressed at another plant, which potentially can cause confusion.


    I assume you're referring to the many Lps from Atlantic and its subsidiaries that were pressed by the various Record Clubs using existing label stock with other plant codes on them? I have run across this many more times than I care to recount, and it's a very valid point.
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    I assume you're referring to the many Lps from Atlantic and its subsidiaries that were pressed by the various Record Clubs using existing label stock with other plant codes on them?

    Not those specifically, but yes those certainly are some great examples.

    My main point was to reemphasize what DTF wrote, which is that using a code or a number is ambiguous and less effective than simply using a descriptive term and using the notes to clarify the meaning. However, there are of course a few exceptions to this, chiefly SRC, i.e., "Specialty" truncates to "Spe", which can be mistaken for "Special".
  • Mr-Love over 4 years ago

    berothbr
    Lastly, RSG §6.1.6 states "The free text field should not be used to describe things that are already in the Format or Description fields". Surely this implies that we shouldn't use the FTF to replicate a BaOI field in the format.

    It has nothing to do with BAOI - "Description fields" refers to tags like Album, Limited Edition etc, see https://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-format.html#Format_Descriptions
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Mr-Love
    It has nothing to do with BAOI

    Which is why I wrote it implies. To clarify, because RSG §6.1.6 includes a restriction that basically says if the format info already has a dedicated place on the submission form, then it doesn't belong in the FTF. This implies that when determining how to formulate the FTF, we should avoid using a redundant plant code/BaOI info because this would be consistent with RSG §6.1.6's explicit restrictions.
  • Mr-Love over 4 years ago

    berothbr
    Which is why I wrote it implies. To clarify, because RSG §6.1.6 includes a restriction that basically says if the format info already has a dedicated place on the submission form, then it doesn't belong in the FTF. This implies that when determining how to formulate the FTF, we should avoid using a redundant plant code/BaOI info because this would be consistent with RSG §6.1.6's explicit restrictions.

    That's your very personal interpretation which I don't agree with at all. If it'd mean all of the submission form, it'd say so.
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Mr-Love
    That's your very personal interpretation

    First, this was an anecdotal point. Second, any post by a user about a RSG that isn't just a quote is obviously a personal interpretation.
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    berothbr
    The difference between "CP" and "Pitman Pressing" is that CP is simply a code, "Pitman Pressing" is a descriptive term that encapsulates that particular variation. Even if you have no idea that Pitman is a pressing plant, it's clear that it's the 'Pitman Version', whatever that maybe. A quick scan of the page or keyword search for Pitman will reveal what that means. "CP" will not have the same affect.


    Something like "CP - Pitman pressing" in FTF + release notes to clarify that meaning would probably be the best method of differentiation, honestly.
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    Something like "CP - Pitman pressing" in FTF + release notes to clarify that meaning would probably be the best method of differentiation, honestly.

    If we're going that route, my preference would be, e.g., Pitman (CP) Pressing, Pitman - CP Pressing, etc., because regardless of the label's coding system, the FTF text on the MR page will still display universally as Pit, which promote consistency. But either way, I'm +1 for this idea.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    What I have been doing for about a year now for Atlantic pressings, and and it seems to satisfy all needs, is this:

    * Columbia Records Pressing Plant, Pitman in LCCN
    * "Pitman Pressing" in FTF
    " "Columbia Records Pressing Plant, Pitman denoted by 'CP' suffix in label matrices' in Notes

    While this is obviously tailored to Atlantic &c. issues, the same works on submissions from all other companies -- add to LCCN, add to FTF, explain the identifying factor in Notes.
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    Something like "CP - Pitman pressing" in FTF + release notes to clarify that meaning would probably be the best method of differentiation, honestly.


    that direction sounds fine and suitable enough. my concern is how is that gonna LOOK or be seen in the MR >> "CP - Pitman Pressing"

    so We tested it and updated on this entry by adding "MO - Pressing"

    It shows in the MR Emerson, Lake & Palmer with a space before the tail end " )"
    Emerson, Lake & Palmer Emerson, Lake & Palmer (LP, Album, Promo, MO )
    and you can see a different with just SP in FTF
    Emerson, Lake & Palmer Emerson, Lake & Palmer (LP, Album, Promo, SP)

    >>>>

    we also like to add UP a useful tool >>> we feel this should be added to the MR's, as we have been adding a note in the (MR) Master right up front to give a short blurb about the codes to lessen anyone's confusions.

    Please note: USA pressing plant manufacturing variations are coded as abbreviations like: "PR", "MO", "RI", "SP" to show in the MR as (LP, Album, MO) etc. One had to double check all the subs to make they have the correct ID currently seen

    for example:
    https://www.discogs.com/Emerson-Lake-Palmer-Emerson-Lake-Palmer/master/11780
    https://www.discogs.com/ABBA-Bj%C3%B6rn-Benny-Agnetha-Frida-Waterloo/master/25702

    this MR note states all the plant #'s (many of which) we have not seen before (16, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 28, 36, 53, 56, 72, 73)
    https://www.discogs.com/Donna-Summer-On-The-Radio-Greatest-Hits-Vol-1-2/master/27115
    this one shows "PRCW" https://www.discogs.com/Eagles-The-Long-Run/master/59516
    this one shows "CTH" https://www.discogs.com/Emerson-Lake-Palmer-Tarkus/master/11871

    We have alot of entries that are have been edited to show only (Atlantic types) CP MO etc, so then those will need to redone again ??
  • discosanddragons over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    We tested it and updated on this entry by adding "MO - Pressing"


    is not the same as

    Diognes_The_Fox
    "CP - Pitman pressing"


    Why are you missing that it is repeatedly asked and generally agreed upon that we add more of a description?
    What's so hard about putting the actual plant in the FTF?
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    USA pressing plant manufacturing variations are coded as abbreviations like: "PR", "MO", "RI", "SP" to show in the MR as (LP, Album, MO) etc.

    Exactly and it not only varies depending on the record label, but sometimes isn't even listed on the labels. This I don't understand why we don't want to be universally consistent. Likewise, does this mean that for record labels that just used a ##, then if we are going to be consistent, we would be using, e.g., "19 Pressing" in the FTF to represent a Bestway pressing. In other words, why not ensure that the truncated letters represented on the MR page are the same regardless of whether it's an ATCO, Polygram, Mercury, London, etc. release.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    Right - and some of those Polydor plant numbers are integrated into the rimtext and are very easy to overlook. Much better to put those in an Other field in BaOI and list the plant name in FTF and Notes.
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    plant numbers are integrated into the rimtext and are very easy to overlook


    uhmm Not really they are a different type of text be it big/smaller and the font is (usually) different. so they are easy for Us to see ...
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    uhmm Not really they are a different type of text be it big/smaller and the font is (usually) different. so they are easy for Us to see ...


    I kinda know what I'm talking about.

    See https://www.discogs.com/Millie-Jackson-Hard-Times/release/465825#images/15609853
  • BarnyardOrbit over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    I kinda know what I'm talking about.


    well please do not FEEL like you are alone... I know all about the #'s and its a little larger than the 1st letter, IMO stands out

    https://img.discogs.com/VP2am7o5eD62Ksl-EvIE_led45U=/fit-in/541x470/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-465825-1485820334-5909.jpeg.jpg
  • Showbiz_Kid over 4 years ago

    :rolleyes:
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    BarnyardOrbit
    uhmm Not really they are a different type of text be it big/smaller and the font is (usually) different. so they are easy for Us to see ...

    It's really easy for anyone to miss something even if it's super obvious in hindsight. Plus not everyone has a clean copy and sometimes the text is obstructed, worn, unclear (e.g., weird font), or this (just kidding about that last one). It's obviously a lot easier for you than it is for me, but most users don't have decades of experience spotting those differences.
  • discosanddragons over 4 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    :rolleyes:


    +1.

    HOW many more TIMES does the FOX have to ask that we put the plant name in the FTF because MANAGEMENT gets support requests ASKING what the codes MEAN?
    It must be a half dozen times between the three threads about this that most of us have contributed opinions to.
    I thought this discussion was pretty much wrapped up a while ago. I'm starting to wonder if it's a discussion at all or if someone just wants there way.
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    I don't really feel that any use of the FTF field for master release level differentiation purposes is anything more than a bandaid than a real longterm solution. It's not something we should really be sweating too hard, given it might hopefully get blown away with a more elegant solution the next time the master release page is overhauled.

    Yes, I agree my view on how it should be presented for now is somewhat redundant and annoying to implement. Unfortunately, I think it's the clearest way to explain an admittedly complex difference to someone who needs to be able to make and discern the differentiation without needing to have a prior knowledge of record pressing plant identifiers.

    Of course, the universe would decree that the most common 'starter' records are also the ones with the most variants.
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    It's not something we should really be sweating too hard, given it might hopefully get blown away with a more elegant solution the next time the master release page is overhauled.

    To clarify, you're saying that 1) it doesn't really matter whether we use, e.g., "MO" or "Monarch Pressing" and 2) if performing a larger edit, changing, e.g., "MO" to "Monarch Pressing" should be avoided because it's basically just a matter of preference?
    OR
    Are you saying that it's ok to expand the abridged version, e.g., "MO" to "Monarch Pressing" while performing a larger edit kind of like how it's ok to, e.g., edit the release notes by changing "cat#" to "catalog number", so long as it's incidental to our edit?
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 4 years ago

    berothbr
    To clarify, you're saying that 1) it doesn't really matter whether we use, e.g., "MO" or "Monarch Pressing" and 2) if performing a larger edit, changing, e.g., "MO" to "Monarch Pressing" should be avoided because it's basically just a matter of preference?
    OR
    Are you saying that it's ok to expand the abridged version, e.g., "MO" to "Monarch Pressing" while performing a larger edit kind of like how it's ok to, e.g., edit the release notes by changing "cat#" to "catalog number", so long as it's incidental to our edit?


    1) It does matter for readability in the short term. Going for something that's clear helps a lot. Also, even if there's improvements at the development level, updating submissions to that standard can take years.
    2) I'd make those edits if you stumble into them.

    We can strive to make things clearer, but I don't think it's worthwhile to really iron out any set in stone system yet.
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    We can strive to make things clearer, but I don't think it's worthwhile to really iron out any set in stone system yet.

    Understood / thanks!
  • dgenda over 4 years ago

    Hope somebody will read this...

    Is this only for vinyl or CD pressing plants can also be added to FTF?

    If we are doing these intervention into FTF because multiple pressings for USA vinyl are distraction to visibility (agree), then we should consider problems with multiple European CD plants too. Unlike European vinyl which was made almost everywhere in Europe for manufacturing countries own markets, European CDs are pressed in several plants for whole Europe (and wider). So what we have as "FTF problem" with US vinyl plants, it is exactly the same problem with European CD plants from 1990s towards today.
    For example CDs from 1999 David Bowie Series can be found pressed by:
    EMI UDEN, EMI SWINDON, EMI ITALY, OPTIMAL, MEDIAMOTION, IMS ITALY, TAKT...

    Another question about FTF and visibility: is there any forum link with decision about Club Editions. Should we, beside generic "Club Edition" tag, add BMG, CRC... in FTF?
  • discosanddragons over 4 years ago

    It is fine to use the FTF to distinguish the pressing plant for CD's as well.
    You do not need to use the FTF for club editions,
    The company responsible for the club edition should be entered in the LCCN field for Record Company and if there is a separate number for the club edition, it should be entered in the description field for the company.
  • dgenda over 4 years ago

    thanks discosanddragons
    I agree on club editions, that is how I submitted my club cds but people currently started to use FTF for BMG, CRC... so I was checking is there some new decision on club cds and FTF that I missed
  • dgenda over 4 years ago

    thanks discosanddragons
    I agree on club editions, that is how I submitted my club cds but people currently started to use FTF for BMG, CRC... so I was checking is there some new decision on club cds and FTF that I missed
  • Showbiz_Kid over 3 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox, can we get some clarification here? The discussion has reopened about how to do this on Atlantic / ATCO (and presumably Polygram) releases in this Bee Gees release history, and it seems to me that we really need to nail down once and for all how we do this.

    Should the FTF contain:
    - Just two-letter / number codes? (i.e., RI, CP, SP, MO, 16, 46 etc.)
    - Just plant names? (i.e., Pitman, Specialty, Monarch, Bestway etc.)
    - Combination? (e.g. "CP - Pitman Press)

    There's a lot of back and forth going on. It would be nice to have a Staff opinion lock it down.
  • discosanddragons over 3 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    Diognes_The_Fox, can we get some clarification here?


    There was this a few days ago.
    https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/757300?page=1#7511570
  • Showbiz_Kid over 3 years ago

    Diognes_The_Fox
    I've embraced a hybrid:

    MO - Monarch Pressing.

    Code up front so that it'll be visible on the master release page. Explanation next to it to explain what it means.

    It seems to be the most clear method of doing these.

    Copying quote here for future reference. Thanks!
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 3 years ago

    This is how I've been doing it recently. IMO this is a pretty clean/clear way of doing it.

    Showbiz_Kid
    - Just two-letter / number codes? (i.e., RI, CP, SP, MO, 16, 46 etc.)


    Not a fan - identifies, but doesn't state what it's identifying.

    Showbiz_Kid
    - Just plant names? (i.e., Pitman, Specialty, Monarch, Bestway etc.)


    Use this if there's not a printed code / usable matrix suffix (ex, Atlantic codes) on the release somewhere.

    Showbiz_Kid
    - Combination? (e.g. "CP - Pitman Press)


    Use this if there's a pressing plant ID printed somewhere.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 3 years ago

    Thank you Brent - bookmarking this one.
  • OLDFRIENDSFORSALE over 3 years ago

    FTF:
    Allied Pressing
    or
    ARC Pressing
  • Showbiz_Kid over 3 years ago

    Allied. Who calls it ARC?
  • mightyvinyl over 2 years ago

    Showbiz_Kid
    Allied. Who calls it ARC?


    ARC = Allied Record Company. Lots of folks do.

    I prefer AR though for FTF though.
  • nfnshdbzznzz over 2 years ago

    Hi, this discussion is for vinyl releases, would similar be able to be applied to CD releases? If you have 2 releases identical except for pressing plant/manufacturer, could the company be added to the ftf? And if so, say you have one pressed by Specialty Records Corporation, add the full name Specialty Records Corporation or SRC?
  • OLDFRIENDSFORSALE over 2 years ago

    nfnshdbzznzz
    And if so, say you have one pressed by Specialty Records Corporation, add the full name Specialty Records Corporation or SRC?


    but now they change FTF from SRC Pressing to Specialty Pressing ...

    and since Specialty Records Corporation is already in LCCN i do not see a justification, benefit nor sense...

    because:
    mightyvinyl
    ARC = Allied Record Company. Lots of folks do.

    +1

    (same for SRC)
  • mightyvinyl over 2 years ago

    And further: remember, the point of the FTF is to provide info to differentiate releases at a glance, and it only displays the first three characters.

    With that in mind, which 3 letters more clearly indicate the name of the pressing plant?

    Specialty Records:
    SRC
    Or SPE?

    Allied Record Co
    ARC
    Or
    ALL?
  • Showbiz_Kid over 2 years ago

    I think this falls squarely under the preference of the original subber, and and any attempts to force a way of doing it upon the community is dilettantism. You do it your way, and I’ll do it mine. Anyone who changes Someone eles’s entry, unless it is blatantly incorrect, risks being EI’d under the “personal preference” rule.
  • TopCats45s over 2 years ago

    Personally I go by what is on the physical release and referenced in the plant ID. And always, always add the full name. "SP - Specialty Pressing". or "SRC - Specialty Pressing". Sometimes it's both - then just toss a coin.
  • berothbr over 2 years ago

    mightyvinyl
    the point of the FTF is to provide info to differentiate releases at a glance
    Where does this come from? I don't see it in RSG §6.1.5-7...
    mightyvinyl
    which 3 letters more clearly indicate the name of the pressing plant?
    About 100+ posts ago, DTF explained that Discogs receives SRs from users asking what the codes, acronyms, etc. in the FTF are supposed to mean. What we've learned here is that whatever you do, it's critical that you use the release notes to explain it and to try to avoid any jargon if you can.
  • Showbiz_Kid over 2 years ago

    TopCats45s
    SP - Specialty Pressing

    And this is exactly the way DTF has said Staff wants it on Atlantic / Atco / Asylum issues, or any releases with plant codes on labels.
  • dsyn2spin about 1 year ago

    I just came across a MR page where there is about 14 different
    pressing plant variations of the initial US release. About half
    of them had FTF identifiers which made those versions easy
    to quickly ID directly from that (MR) page. However, one of
    them had only "6-A" showing in it's allotted three character FTF slot.
    This proved to be totally counter intuitive for me and I was
    not able to quickly ID that version from the MR page itself.
    As it turned out, it was "6-All Disc Records, Co." Normally
    I see "All" in the FTF, and that is sufficient for me to make
    a quick ID from MR page. So, by adding this plant code "6"
    before "All Disc", it really screwed things up (for me at least)
    It's a clear indication that adopting such a precedent as placing a
    number code for any given pressing plant directly preceding
    the name of the plant itself in the FTF is surely going to be
    problematic just as often as not, because it cancels out
    the usefulness of the FTF on MR page right off the bat.
    I can think of other reasons why it's a bad practice as well,
    which I won't attempt to elaborate on in this post..
    I did read through most of this thread where this
    practice seemed to be under consideration in some
    capacity. However it remains unclear to me what,
    if anything, was the result of all that. In any case
    I believe strongly that any such thing is A VERY BAD IDEA.
    The current practice of entering the plant name
    itself, or any of it's commonly used label matrix
    abbreviations (i.e. MO, Monarch etc.) is TOTALLY SUFFICIENT
    to our purposes.
  • Showbiz_Kid about 1 year ago

    Please see Diognes' instructions here: https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/368277?page=2#7523520
    We've been doing it for a year like this now.

Log In You must be logged in to post.