• BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    Release in question: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=24222

    I believe that using "This/That" for a tracklisting index is perfectly ok according to these guidelines:

    "12.13.4. Index Tracks should be used only when the release divides itself into named sections in some way. They can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release."

    The sides are titled A/B and This/That on the label.

    I have my rips saved as KO728T-THIS / KO728T-THAT.

    If there's a field available and the info is on the label it should be entered, IMO.

    Am I completely wrong or ??

    Also, why is it showing as "Correct" when I have voted it "NMC" ?
  • mjb over 8 years ago

    To me it seems the spirit of the index track is that it gives us a way to represent how a series of tracks (songs, compositions, movements, whatever) has been given a collective name on a release. The titles of the physical sides themselves are something altogether separate. These side names, and the way tracks are divided among them, is already completely accounted for in the submission guidelines for track positions. For example, you are free to use This1/This2/That1 or This-1/This-2/That-1. Is there any reason why this wouldn't be sufficient?

    BlackCrack
    why is it showing as "Correct" when I have voted it "NMC"


    Correct = 4.0
    Needs Minor Changes = 3.0
    Average = 3.5. Rounded up, that's "Correct"
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    true. I guess it may not technically be the proper way to use it "according to the guidelines", but I'd have to argue that the way I've done this one could be valid. It does look pretty clear and understandable, I think.

    Just curious really, as I've done alot of entries this way recently and have only had this one user say something about it.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    any other opinions on this one?
  • uzumaki over 8 years ago

    I think it's fine and the guidelines should allow it, it doesn't upset anything in the database, it's a more elegant way of showing the information than forcing those side descriptions into the track position box.
  • DaveRowat over 8 years ago

    Seems ok to me.
    12.13.1
    Index Tracks are used to denote groups of tracks (for example: movements in a musical piece, or where a range of tracks are given a collective title). Index tracks should never be used 'on their own', they should always refer to a group of audio tracks directly below.
    12.13.4
    Index Tracks should be used only when the release divides itself into named sections in some way. They can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release.

    12.13.1 seems to even suggest it. This Side and That Side are titles given to each side as far as I can tell. And maybe it is just to let listeners know which side is which, but it is there nevertheless.
    12.13.5
    Index tracks should not be used for denoting generic side, track position, or separate media data (for example, 'Side A', 'CD1' etc), track numbering is used for this.

    If it had said "This Side" and then the tracks were listed This1, This2, or if it was labeled "Side A" and the tracks were labeled A1, A2, then that would probably fall under this as generic. But since the terms used to denote the sides aren't the same as the actual track positions, i don't think that is the same.

    Just my thoughts.
    uzumaki
    it's a more elegant way of showing the information than forcing those side descriptions into the track position box.

    That too.
  • djindio over 8 years ago

    DaveRowat

    12.13.5
    Index tracks should not be used for denoting generic side, track position, or separate media data (for example, 'Side A', 'CD1' etc), track numbering is used for this.

    ^is there a reason the guidelines specifically say 'generic'?? :-)
  • mjb over 8 years ago

    DaveRowat
    12.13.1 seems to even suggest it.


    No it doesn't, but the other guideline you quoted, 12.13.4, does - "special titles given to release sides" ... I didn't even notice that when I was preparing my response above.

    *shrug* As uzumaki said, there's no harm either way, at least not in the web interface. But I'd hate to be trying to parse that data to figure out which index tracks are important titles and which ones are just denoting sides.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    uzumaki
    it's a more elegant way of showing the information than forcing those side descriptions into the track position box.

    Indeed. I'd rather see it as an Index Track than used for positioning.

    Generic = commonly used, standard. ie, Side A, Side One, A, B, One, Two.
  • _jules over 8 years ago


    schtel
    Generic = commonly used, standard. ie, Side A, Side One, A, B, One, Two.

    indeed, and in other languages too: Cara, Lado, Seite or Face (ah!)
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    _jules
    Face

    In what language is that? It's a common use in English to describe a surface. ie, "he climbed up the cliff face." "the face of the earth." "clock face" etc. I don't think it's a generic term for side identification.

    But as I said in that release in question, which I didn't feel the need to mention here, I really don't mind either way. I just like to detail a submission in the fullest I can. And since I subbed it 7 years ago I felt obliged to finish it off due to other users requests. With or without those Index Tracks the data is still correct. And I'd prefer to use my argumentative energy for a more important cause. But we can mention it here if you like. :)
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    Thank You. IMO, it makes it more clear and complete.

    Now if someone directly involved with Discogs can chime in and make it official...
  • marcelrecords over 8 years ago


    schtel
    In what language is that?

    No idea, but since almost all French (and some Canadian) releases I own use this, I figured it out...
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    any other thoughts on this?

    someone from admin?

    please?
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    The current guidelines allow "This/That" as either index tracks or track positions.

    Where they are used depends on their use on the release.

    If it says, for example: "This Side 1" "This Side 2" "That Side 1" etc, then track positions are ok.

    If it says (as in this case) "A1" "A2" etc, and has "This/That" as titles for the sides, then index tracks are more appropriate.

    mjb
    I'd hate to be trying to parse that data to figure out which index tracks are important titles and which ones are just denoting sides.


    This is the only issue here. It is one that we attempted to solve with extra markup to separate index tracks that are supposed to relate to the tracks they contain (IOW the full title includes the index track name), and where the index racks are not part of the complete track title (in this case). I have discussed this with Kevin, but we haven't reached a decision yet about it, I have bumped it again and will let you know if we have a solution.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Going by what was discussed here: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/169803#2173500
    Is your suggestion still correct for: http://www.discogs.com/4-Hero-Combat-Dancin/release/1064

    Assult 1 Mr. Kirk's Nightmare
    Assult 2-1 Move Wid The House Groove
    Assult 2-2 Combat Dance

    It was always my understanding that the "Assult" was a reference to the side name, and in that sense an Index Track rather than a track position indicator would be more applicable. I'm sure this is the same scenario with the example given by BlackCrack in this topic.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Or is it because BlackCrack's example still has a and b next to the tracks that allows "This" and "That" to be used as Index Track?

    Clearly though, at least for myself, both examples have 'wacky side indicators'.

    IMHO we adopt the usage of A and B to denote sides regardless of whether a release uses this method. If more creative track positioning exists on a release then we can apply that, for instance tracks named One, Two, Three, etc. But we would still adopt the A and B for our own purpose of side denotation.

    A One
    A Two
    B One

    Now if this example had 'wacky side indicators' also as 'This' and 'That' or 'Assult 1' and 'Assult 2' I feel we should use these as Index Tracks.

    Assult 1
    A One
    A Two
    Assult 2
    B One

    As I have stated before A1 refers to a side indicator and a track position. Collectively we can refer to this as track positioning. But when more creative track positioning occurs, (and I mean track numbers given on the release not side names), we still need to apply a side indicator anyway as A, B. Or possibly:

    Assult 1
    One
    Two
    Assult 2
    One

    But even though when we see a release has listed above we can assume which tracks are on what side, this may not be the case as it's possible the track titled "Two" may actually appear on side B and 'Assult 1' and 'Assult 2' are simple Index Tracks in the conventional sense that we have always used them for. So may actually be:

    Assult 1
    A One
    B Two
    Assult 2
    B One

    That would be my suggestion, to keep the A, B scheme (unless other side indicators which are being used for positioning, exist on the release, but use Side Names for Index Tracks when they differ to the generic terms already specified in 12.13.5

    It will change this:

    Assult 1 - Mr. Kirk's Nightmare
    Assult 2-1 - Move Wid The House Groove
    Assult 2-2 - Combat Dance

    ..to:

    Assult 1
    A - Mr. Kirk's Nightmare
    Assult 2
    B1 - Move Wid The House Groove
    B2 - Combat Dance

    I have always agreed with the suggestions made by helix: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/169803#2176360

    And on a connecting note, I think we would all like to see the implementation of Nested Index Tracks. If only we could think of a symbol to use :D http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/175253
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    schtel
    It was always my understanding that the "Assult" was a reference to the side name, and in that sense an Index Track rather than a track position indicator


    TBH that is a borderline case, as it is somewhat ambiguous. As such, I don't think it is necessarily helpful to use it as an example.

    schtel
    on a connecting note, I think we would all like to see the implementation of Nested Index Tracks. If only we could think of a symbol to use


    I have recommended the colon ":" to be used, in the following markup:

    Proposed Usage For Indicating Named Group Of Tracks

    To denote a named group of tracks, we could use ':' immediately following the index track title. As opposed to the index track being a title, and the following tracks sub-titles, this markup could be used when parsing out the tracks to indicate that the index track should not be considered to be part of the track title (IOW the index track is ignored).

    IndexTrack_Grouping:
    2a Track_Title
    2b Track_Title
    2c Track_Title

    Parses as:

    Track_Title
    Track_Title
    Track_Title

    As opposed to the usual index track,

    IndexTrack_Title
    2a Track_Subtitle
    2b Track_Subtitle
    2c Track_Subtitle

    which could be parsed out as,

    IndexTrack_Title (Track_Subtitle)
    IndexTrack_Title (Track_Subtitle)
    IndexTrack_Title (Track_Subtitle)

    Proposed Usage For Nested Index Tracks

    We could indicate a nested index track with ':' preceding the index track title.

    IndexTrack_Grouping:
    1a Track_TitleA
    1b Track_TitleB
    :IndexTrack_Title
    2a Track_SubtitleA
    2b Track_SubtitleB
    2c Track_SubtitleC
    :-
    3 Track_TitleC
    -
    4 TrackTitleD

    The end of the nested index track is denoted with ':-'
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    nik
    TBH that is a borderline case, as it is somewhat ambiguous. As such, I don't think it is necessarily helpful to use it as an example.

    Well they both have 'wacky side indicators', but I can't see why one would use Index tracks and the other be used for positioning. But if it's the a and b printed on the release then...
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    ^^Yep.
    This record here uses track indexes as
    - A1
    - A2
    - B1
    - B2

    The run-outs read as
    - KO728T-A
    - KO728T-B1

    Just because they preferred to print the index on one center label instead of both they used this side / that side.
    This is useful if you hold the record in your hands, but it's not useful as side indicator for a database.

    I'm fine with adding "This Side" / "That Side" as index track, but it's a borderline case and if we agree, people will start adding "Side 1" and "Side 2" as index track too, because basically this is the same subject and no difference to this / that side.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    rassel
    people will start adding "Side 1" and "Side 2" as index track too,

    12.13.4. Index Tracks should be used only when the release divides itself into named sections in some way. They can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release.

    12.13.5. Index tracks should not be used for denoting generic side..
    http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-trk.html#Insert_Index_Track

    I don't think 'This' and 'That' are generic. They are names specifically chosen to be anything other than what one would normally find, ie One, Two, Side A...etc
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    marcelrecords
    No idea, but since almost all French (and some Canadian) releases I own use this, I figured it out...


    It is indeed French - in French 'face' means the surface of something (just as schtel pointed out that English does as well) so it's like saying 'surface 1' and 'surface 2'.

    And, as an aside, this is the only French meaning for 'face'; a person's face is 'visage'. ;)

  • rassel over 8 years ago

    schtel
    I don't think 'This' and 'That' are generic.

    We could probably discuss this for eternity, but even if we find out that "This" and "That" would be generic, do you really think that people who don't read this forum thread at a regular base (~90%) will see the fine line between Side I / Side 1 / This Side ?
    I fear, that after the first use of "This Side" as index track people will refer to this and just add whatever is printed on the release itself.
    Maybe I'm wrong, but the difference is not that obvious.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    I think I see what your saying, but generic means commonly used. So if This and That are commonly used enough as One and Two to be regarded generic, then I agree, they are generic. But I would not have that same knowledge as you and others. From what I've seen it is used, but not common. IMHO

    And, of course, any side name with "Side" as part of the name shouldn't automatically be regarded as generic.
    Kergillian
    It is indeed French - in French 'face' means the surface of something

    Ah, makes sense.

    sur-face = on-face
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    schtel
    So if This and That are commonly used enough as One and Two to be regarded generic, then I agree, they are generic

    I haven't counted them, but I have at least 50 records using "This Side" and "That Side". Probably depends also on your personal collection :)
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    ..and how many records you have in total to deduce a percentage. :)
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago

    schtel
    Ah, makes sense.

    sur-face = on-face


    indeed :)

    For the Dis n' Dat question - I think that This/That This/Other Side records are not uncommon and I really don't see that it's any different than labeling it Side 1 and Side 2. It is referring to a side by direction, it is not NAMING the sides.

    If the release actively applies a NAME to the side for artistic purposes ('Blaze Side', 'Cool Side') then index tracks are fine. For This and That, I think it's generic enough to be relegated to the notes...
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Yes, I think I agree with that now too.

    ...

    So what about Face? Is that common/generic too. :)

    I think I'm going to assume that it is.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    Thanks Nik :)
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    schtel
    So what about Face? Is that common/generic too. :)

    I think I'm going to assume that it is.


    Most certainly - it's just a translation of Side. Every Franco-Quebec vinyl release has Face instead of Side, and most French vinyl of Francophone artists do as well...

    Just flipping through a few of my subs/collection (I always write this in the ntoes...), here's a few examples from both regions:

    http://www.discogs.com/Alain-Bashung-Pizza/release/1871645
    http://www.discogs.com/Autour-De-Lucie-Autour-De-Lucie/release/1846242
    http://www.discogs.com/Boule-Noire-Aimer-DAmour/release/1917945
    http://www.discogs.com/Robert-Charlebois-Live-De-Paris/release/1963133
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    Kergillian
    If the release actively applies a NAME to the side for artistic purposes ('Blaze Side', 'Cool Side') then index tracks are fine. For This and That, I think it's generic enough to be relegated to the notes...

    Yep, that would be my preferred choice too.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    preferences (opinions) aside...

    nik
    The current guidelines allow "This/That" as either index tracks or track positions.

  • rassel over 8 years ago

    Yes, but I'd like to know then, why "Side I" and "Side II" are not to enter as index track?
  • thewintman over 8 years ago

    So, should this be turned into Index Tracks?
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=212#latest

    nik certainly thinks it shouldn't even be on the release even though it is.

    Index or track positioning?
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    thewintman, to me that release looks fine as is.
  • thewintman over 8 years ago

    Well I thought that too, but wouldn't be adverse to BIG LOAD/A and BIB LOAD/B being Index Tracks either.
    I wouldn't mind more feedback though (said Thurston to Kim).
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Clearly these are Side Names to be used as Index Tracks otherwise BIG LOAD would be printed next to every track if meant to be used for positioning. Creative track positioning should be applied for creative track numbers, meaning that creativeness will be printed next to every track. Otherwise the 'creativeness' applies to the group of tracks that appear below it. Which is why we use Index Tracks. The way I read that release is:

    BIG LOAD/A
    01
    02
    03

    BIG LOAD/B
    04
    05
    06
    07

    But since..
    RSG

    12.2.3. With sides - LP, 7", cassette etc, side specification is mandatory:

    A1
    A2…
    B1
    B2…


    then we insert A and B..

    BIG LOAD/A
    A01
    A02
    A03

    BIG LOAD/B
    B04
    B05
    B06
    B07

    Also I thought due to nik's recent comment's and (proposed?) guideline update in another thread, zeros are allowed if embedded but not when they precede, ie A01 is ok but 01 is not allowed.

    I think "12.2.14. More creative track positions" should be changed to "12.2.14. More creative track numbers"

    To me this is creative track positioning, numbering:
    http://www.discogs.com/Bj%C3%B6rk-Greatest-Hits-Volumen-1993-2003/release/235098

    It's been my belief that this is why 12.2.14. exists; for the track numbers or the side indicator + the track number. And not 'side names' to be used as part of the track positioning here on discogs. It seems to me that we have:

    Index Tracks => Index Tracks
    Side Names (Non-generic) => Index Tracks
    Side Indicators => Positioning, A, B, a, b etc
    Track Numbers => Positioning 1, 2 etc

    nik
    The current guidelines allow "This/That" as either index tracks or track positions.

    And that's plain wrong IMHO. I feel they should only be considered for positions when they appear next to each track, not when they refer to a group of tracks like normal Index Tracks do.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    this works for me also

    schtel
    BIG LOAD/A
    01
    02
    03

    BIG LOAD/B
    04
    05
    06
    07

  • rassel over 8 years ago

    schtel

    BIG LOAD/A
    01
    02
    03

    BIG LOAD/B
    04
    05
    06
    07


    Nope, this doesn't work for me, because of:
    RSG
    With sides - LP, 7", cassette etc, side specification is mandatory:

    04 as track number is in no way side specific.

    schtel
    BIG LOAD/A
    A01
    A02
    A03

    BIG LOAD/B
    B04
    B05
    B06
    B07

    This is correct.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    rassel
    Nope, this doesn't work for me, because of:

    Yeah, that's basically what I agreed, "side specification is mandatory"

    tbh, I wrote that late last night whilst very tired. I realize there is one flaw in when is said..
    schtel
    Index Tracks => Index Tracks
    Side Names (Non-generic) => Index Tracks
    Side Indicators => Positioning, A, B, a, b etc
    Track Numbers => Positioning 1, 2 etc


    ..because it's the confusion between a 'side name' and a 'creative position'. For me, I have never seen this confusion, it's easy to understand what the artist intended in the examples I've seen. But..
    nik
    The current guidelines allow "This/That" as either index tracks or track positions.

    .. I understand what you mean, although I hope we can agree that this is wrong and it should be one or the other. The problem is that we are trying to apply/create a guideline that predicts the "creative track positions" used on releases and, as yet, unseen releases. I think that may be an impossible task to predict what 'creativeness' we will come upon.

    Suffice to say that we use the A, B system but can replace this with X, Y when printed on the release. But we should Index Tracks when XXX, YYY are used as replacement side names. So:

    X1- TrackName
    X2- TrackName
    Y1- TrackName
    Y2- TrackName

    and

    XXX
    A1 - TrackName
    A2 - TrackName
    YYY
    B1 - TrackName
    B2 - TrackName

    I think to display a releases like:

    BIG LOAD/A01 A Journey To Reedham (7.am Mix)
    BIG LOAD/A02 Full Rinse (Featuring MC Twin Tub)
    BIG LOAD/A03 Massif (Stay Strong)
    BIG LOAD/B04 Come On My Selector
    BIG LOAD/B05 The Body Builder (Dressing Gown Mix)
    BIG LOAD/B06 Tequila Fish
    BIG LOAD/B07 Jaques Mal Chance (Il N'a Pas De Chance)

    or...

    Assult 1 - Mr. Kirk's Nightmare
    Assult 2-1 - Move Wid The House Groove
    Assult 2-2 - Combat Dance

    ..is not preferred by anyone here?

    In short..

    1. Side specification is mandatory. For the sake of clarity, please use A, B etc for side identification, in place of 1, 2, One, Two, Side One, Side Two etc (in any language). More creative Side Indicators can be used if displayed so on the release eg, X, Y or x, y, etc
    2. Track numbers should be taken from the release and should also be applied if no numbers are displayed on the release, A1, A2, B1, B2 etc. Except if there is only one track on a side then just the Side Identifier will suffice. ie use A and not A1
    3. Creative track numbering can be used if displayed as such on the release, eg One, Two. Side specification is still mandatory, use a hyphen to separate the Side Identifier from the track number if necessary, ie AOne => A-One
    4. Non-generic Side Names can be used as Index Tracks if displayed so on the release. (Nested Index Tracks could also be used where applicable (when implemented))
    5. Common sense should be applied above all when determining the use of creative positioning or Index Tracks. Please contact the help forums for further advice.

    Something like that would be the gist of my suggestion. No doubt it could be worded better, combined with other guidelines etc, and I may have missed things out. But I feel something like this should make it clearer to understand when to apply Index Track for Side Names and positioning for creative track numbers.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    I give up. I'm not trying to CHANGE the guidelines here, just FOLLOWING the current ones according to how I interpret them (which is correct and has been confirmed by Nik).

    I've wasted enough of my time on this. Dowhatchalike.
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    thewintman
    I wouldn't mind more feedback though (said Thurston to Kim).


    Very nice ;)

    rassel
    This is correct.


    Actually, by the images it should be

    BIG LOAD/A
    A.01
    A.02
    A.03

    BIG LOAD/B
    B.04
    B.05
    B.06
    B.07

  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    Kergillian
    Actually, by the images it should be


    And even then, I don't think index tracks are necessary here - it's like having an index track saying: AlbumTitle Side A and AlbumTitle Side B. It should be relegated to the notes, really, if deemed *absolutely* necessary to transcribe...
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Album Title: Big Loada
    Side A Name: BIG LOAD/A
    Side B Name: BIG LOAD/B
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago

    ^^and...?
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Kergillian
    it's like having an index track saying: AlbumTitle Side A and AlbumTitle Side B.

    That's incorrect. The Albumtitle = Big Loada, not Big Load.

    Your AlbumTitle Side A and AlbumTitle Side B

    would equal:

    Big Loada/A and Big loada/B which is not what is printed.
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    rassel edited over 8 years ago
    Yes, that's very interesting, but where will this discussion lead to?

    I took a look at my collection and found this nice example here:
    http://www.discogs.com/Erick-Morillo--Harry-Romero--Jose-Nunez-Dancin/release/246490
    As there are no scans of the label yet, too bad, I have to write it here:

    "Logo Side A"
    a1 - Dancin - 2003 Rmx

    "This Side B"
    b1 - Dancin - Fuzzy Hair Rmx
    b2 - Dancin - Fuzzy Hair Lust Rmx

    Should we use "Logo Side A" and "This Side B" as side names and add them as index tracks? Nobody will be able to tell, that Logo Side A is a generic side name.
    But is "Logo Side" the name of the side or just an identifier?

    IMO it's ok to add the NAME of a side as index track like "The bumping side" or "Live at the Palladium" but not the identifier as e.g. "Logo Side".
    This is the purpose of an index track, to lump together tracks in a certain structure, not to denote a side.
    "The bumping side" contains the bumping tracks, "Live at the Palladium" contains tracks recorded at the palladium. "Logo Side" has no meaning for the tracks itself.
    BIG LOAD/A and BIG LOAD/B are side identifiers and have no meaning for the tracks on this sides.

    And by the way, has anybody thought on how to number the tracks if they are numbered in a rather "creative" manner, as e.g. leaving out track# 13, starting with track number 12 and counting down to 1 and so on? :p

    EDIT: Just found out, that I've got two copies of this record and the one I added the side identifiers is not in the database yet. Yupiieeee.
  • RobinsRoostRecords over 8 years ago

    Should I use index tracks for these sides then? Bill Oliver - Texas Oasis
    I put them in the Matrix numbers spaces.
    One side is called the Warbler side and the other side is called the Turtle side. The only way to tell which is A and which is B is from the matrix numbers that have an A and a B on them.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    rassel
    This is the purpose of an index track, to lump together tracks in a certain structure, not to denote a side.

    12.13.4. Index Tracks should be used only when the release divides itself into named sections in some way. They can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release.

    I think the main issue is the confusion between a side title and a track position. Or for that matter what a side title is when it's so close to what we describe as a generic side name/identifier.

    Can we agree that this is the current problem? The choice, for example between BIG LOAD/A being used as an Index Track to represent a Side Name and BIG LOAD/A being used for a track position.

    Without sounding like 'listen to what I say' and please don't assume that I think you haven't read my posts, but please reread this if it helps. Or not if you do get what I'm saying: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/207436#2584366
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    RobinsRoostRecords
    One side is called the Warbler side and the other side is called the Turtle side. The only way to tell which is A and which is B is from the matrix numbers that have an A and a B on them.

    I think so. But apparantly it depends on how they are being used.
    nik
    The current guidelines allow "This/That" as either index tracks or track positions.

    Where they are used depends on their use on the release.

    If it says, for example: "This Side 1" "This Side 2" "That Side 1" etc, then track positions are ok.

    If it says (as in this case) "A1" "A2" etc, and has "This/That" as titles for the sides, then index tracks are more appropriate.


    So if your tracks have numbers then Warbler side and Turtle side can be used as Index Tracks. If your tracks don't have number then they are to be used as track positioning, ie Warbler1, Warbler2, Turtle1, Turtle2 for a two track per side release. I think this is silly though, as loads of release do not have track numbers or side identifiers, it's something we apply, ie A1. Clearly, for me Warbler and Turtle are side names regardless of track numbers appearing on the release. If they appeared next to every track then this would be different.

    I think I'm just repeating myself now, so nik will have to tell me to shut up. :)
    But seriously, I think this current understanding/procedure doesn't work.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    schtel
    If your tracks don't have number

    Sorry, side identifier plus track number, ie A1
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    schtel
    I think the main issue is the confusion between a side title and a track position.

    Hmm, no
    schtel
    Or for that matter what a side title is when it's so close to what we describe as a generic side name/identifier.

    Yes.
    schtel

    Can we agree that this is the current problem? The choice, for example between BIG LOAD/A being used as an Index Track to represent a Side Name and BIG LOAD/A being used for a track position.


    Sorry, but using track numbers like "BIG LOAD/A01" is the same as using track numbers "Logo Side A1", "This Side A1" "Side I A1". So basically I can't see that BIG LOAD/A is a title of a side and though shouldn't be used for numbering the tracks nor as index track above the tracks.
    schtel
    I think "12.2.14. More creative track positions" should be changed to "12.2.14. More creative track numbers"

    Yep.
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    schtel
    That's incorrect. The Albumtitle = Big Loada, not Big Load.

    Your AlbumTitle Side A and AlbumTitle Side B

    would equal:

    Big Loada/A and Big loada/B which is not what is printed.


    If you cannot see the correlation between that and the album title, then I don't know how to explain it any more clearly.

    Do you honestly think that both sides are magically called Big Load for other, random reasons?

    It's for the notes. It's redundant to put those as index tracks as they don't actually say anything to discern the difference between sides, either artistically or scientifically.

    rassel
    This is the purpose of an index track, to lump together tracks in a certain structure, not to denote a side.
    "The bumping side" contains the bumping tracks, "Live at the Palladium" contains tracks recorded at the palladium. "Logo Side" has no meaning for the tracks itself.
    BIG LOAD/A and BIG LOAD/B are side identifiers and have no meaning for the tracks on this sides.


    Exactly.

    schtel
    They can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release.


    Agreed. However 'BIGLOAD/A' and BIGLOAD/B' are not 'special titles'. They are side identifiers. The very fact that there is nothing unique between these identifiers proves it.

    If it was listed as Big Load and BIGGER LOAD, *then* they would be actual titles - each side having a different one.
  • hermanito over 8 years ago

    Index tracks are a good thing to have, but let's not use it too much please.
    If a release has sides like:
    This Side/That Side
    Up Side/Down Side
    Sun Side/Moon Side
    X/Y
    Then I'd say put it in the notes like:
    This Side = A-side
    That Side = B-side

    And leave the track list like it should be. There's an A side and a B-side on every record. On 2xLP it's A, B, C, D and so on.

    Putting all kinds of side identifiers in the track list clutters my view. But that's strictly my view ;-)

    The A and AA sides is also is something I don't really like but a total different discussion. And I can agree with the reasons we're doing it like that :-).
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Kergillian
    If you cannot see the correlation between that and the album title, then I don't know how to explain it any more clearly.

    I do see the correlation, but your saying it is the album title, when it isn't. It's part of it.
    Kergillian
    Do you honestly think that both sides are magically called Big Load for other, random reasons?

    No not really, I know it's a play on words. Release is called Big Loada => side is called Big load/a, other side is called Big Load/b
    Kergillian
    They are side identifiers.

    Unfortunately though, that term doesn't exist in the RSG. It's all referred to as track positions. But we'll have to agree to disagree on what you refer to as a Side Identifier I think is a Side Name + Side Identifier. :)
    schtel
    Or for that matter what a side title is when it's so close to what we describe as a generic side name/identifier.

    rassel
    Yes.

    rassel
    So basically I can't see that BIG LOAD/A is a title of a side and though shouldn't be used for numbering the tracks nor as index track above the tracks.

    Then what on earth is it dude? :)
    rassel
    Yes, that's very interesting, but where will this discussion lead to?

    I don't know. I think we maybe going around in circles. I'm certainly getting deja vu. :D
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    hermanito
    If a release has sides like:
    This Side/That Side
    Up Side/Down Side
    Sun Side/Moon Side
    X/Y
    Then I'd say put it in the notes like:
    This Side = A-side
    That Side = B-side

    That could well be an option, then this guideline becomes redundant:

    12.13.4. Index Tracks ... can be used to enter special titles given to release sides or different media, if so done on the release. http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-trk.html#Insert_Index_Track
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    rassel

    So basically I can't see that BIG LOAD/A is a title of a side and though shouldn't be used for numbering the tracks nor as index track above the tracks.
    schtel
    Then what on earth is it dude? :)

    IMO it's not a title but an identifier. Take another immaginary example of a record called e.g. "Watch". Now the sides will be marked as "Watch/A" or "Watch/B". Would you still say that the sides names are "Watch/A"? No, this is an identifier to indicate which side is the A-Side, same for "Logo-Side" or "That Side".
    And I agree with hermanito, cluttering the track positions with expressions like "Logo-Side A1" or even longer expressions is ridiculous. Think of how the credits will look like:
    "Flute, Guitar" - "Artist A" (Tracks: Logo-Side A1, Logo-Side A3, Logo-Side A5 to Logo-Side A7, The Other Side B1, The Other Side B3 to The Other Side B5)
    instead of
    "Flute, Guitar" - "Artist A" (Tracks: A1, A3, A5 to A7, B1, B3 to B5)

    :)

    hermanito
    Then I'd say put it in the notes like:
    This Side = A-side
    That Side = B-side


    Cool, get's my vote.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    In the real world people don't use 'side identifiers' this is a term we use here for correct track positioning. Watch/A is actually a side name plus a side identifier. You show your example to anybody and ask them "what is this side called" and they will all say "Watch/A". Only a fool would say "actually it hasn't got name, it's not called anything. But it does have a character string which indicates which side certain tracks are on." Yeah, and the side is called Watch/A.
    rassel
    And I agree with hermanito, cluttering the track positions with expressions like "Logo-Side A1" or even longer expressions is ridiculous.

    That's my whole fffing point!! But if you say it's an identifier then releases ending looking like this: http://www.discogs.com/4-Hero-Combat-Dancin/release/1064

    Assult 1 - Mr. Kirk's Nightmare
    Assult 2-1 - Move Wid The House Groove
    Assult 2-2 - Combat Dance

    What's the difference between 'Assult 1' and 'BIG LOAD/A'

    I don't need to discuss this anymore. It's the story of my life trying to convince people to use both sides of their brain. It just can't be done.

    helix
    Bearing in mind Position allows usage of Standard Positions (A/B) in place of what is written on the release (Side 1, Side 2) etc

    To evaluate potential index track usage:

    If the text looks to be the solitary candidate side indicator:
    1. Don't use an index track!
    2a. Use actual information as written on the release as a combined side/position indicator in the position field.
    or
    2b. Use Standard Side/Positions (e.g. A1/B1) in the position field and put the actual side indicators in the notes.

    Multiple candidate side indicators (This/That, Side 1/Side 2, A/B etc.):
    1. Use an index track for your rejected side indicator.
    2a. For your chosen side indicator, use information as written on the release as a combined side/position indicator in the position field (note that the side indicator must not be the same as used in 1.).
    or
    2b. Use Standard Side/Positions (e.g. A1/B1) in the position field and put the actual side indicators in the notes.

    Please clarify Insert Index Track with the above as attempting to explain this thought process to a submitter who has used index tracks in error will be difficult. Thanks.

    Personally, I think wacky side indicators as Index Tracks and using standard A/B side indicators in the position field is much simpler than the above brain workout and clearer than hiding information in the notes.

    *****************

    Side Indicators

    This section applies to physical media with sides.

    Standard

    Standard side indicators follow a single capitalised letter format (e.g. A/B, A/AA, X/Y). These should be used in combination with the track number to populate the Pos. field (see Position).

    Non-Standard

    Non-standard side indicators are of the form Side 1/Side 2, This/That, Up/Down etc.

    For non-standard side indicators either:
    a) Ignore them and use a standard side indicator in the Pos. field.
    b) Use an Index track for the side indication and use a suitable standard side indicator in the Pos. field.

    Insert Index Track

    Index Tracks are used to denote release divisions:
    a) Physical media divisions (separate media, sides).
    b) Track groupings (movements in a musical piece, a range of tracks are given a collective title, clearly defined bonus material, hidden tracks).

    Usage:
    a) Should only be used only when the release itself divides the media or tracks in some way.
    b) Should follow a logical ordering sequence as defined on the release itself (i.e. media, side, tracks groupings).
    c) Should not be used 'on their own', but refer to a group of tracks directly below.
    d) Should not be used for adding incidental information which belongs in the Release Notes.

    For track groupings within a tracklisting, it is necessary to denote the end of the group by adding an Index Track containing a single dash (-) after the last track in the group.

    Anything missed?

    http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/169803#2176360

    This last comment from helix was a reply to nik but was ignored. And this discussion here has encouraged no further development.
  • hermanito over 8 years ago

    There's a section on the submission page called:
    Barcode & Other Identifiers.
    I think side indicators/identifiers would fit quite good in this part.
    Submit all vinyl track lists with A and B-side and the identifier field translates label/sleeve info for you.
    More then 90% of all records is released with A and B-side, so that could be a point to begin with.

    On the release page the BAOI section could be moved to the place between the release info (Artist, title, label, format etc.) and the track list.
    We would have all information concerning the physical item on one place and eventual side identifiers would be visible above the track list.

    We wouldn't have to discuss this matters again like is done now IMO.
    The difference between a side identifier and an index track isn't that hard to make I think? A simple guideline could be written for it.

    If I was "the management" I would do it this way, but I'm not ;-)
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    hermanito
    Sun Side/Moon Side


    This is the one exceptions, where it is clear that they are TITLES and not simply identifiers...

    The others I agree with, that they should be relegated to the notes.

    schtel
    Then what on earth is it dude? :)


    It's an identifier. As I said earlier (and rassel reiterated) If both sides have the same 'title', then it's not truly a 'title'.

    schtel
    but your saying it is the album title, when it isn't. It's part of it.


    I'm saying it's related to the album title. It could be a play on words, it could be a typo, it could be a secret attempt by Squarepusher to confuse Oggerdom. But what it's NOT is a side title ;)

    rassel
    Cool, get's my vote.


    Indeed. I do that anyhow ;)

    schtel
    In the real world people don't use 'side identifiers' this is a term we use here for correct track positioning.


    Of course they do - identifier is a common term. Which is why we have an entire field for them ;)

    schtel
    Watch/A is actually a side name plus a side identifier.


    This cannot be true. Both sides cannot be 'named' the same thing. A title is a unique name given to something to differentiate it from other, similar things. So if you title each side, they will be titled uniquely to differentiate them (Sun Side/Moon Side; Kill Side/Em All Side; High Side/Higher Side, etc). Sun Side and Moon Side is saying 'This side is the Sun Side, and that side is the Moon Side'.

    If both sides are the same 'Watch/A; Watch/B' it's merely an identifier. It's saying 'This is Side A of Watch and that is Side B of Watch'.

    schtel
    What's the difference between 'Assult 1' and 'BIG LOAD/A'


    If both sides are the same, then there is no difference, and that should also be relegated to the notes.

  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    The big loada ep is a bad example IMHO because it is very ambiguous and 'playful'.

    I don't think this issue should be complicated.

    Clever Title
    A1
    A2

    Stupid Title
    B1
    B2

    -> Use index tracks.

    Clever 1
    Clever 2

    Stupid 1
    Stupid 2

    -> Use track positions.
  • Kergillian over 8 years ago


    nik
    I don't think this issue should be complicated.

    Clever Title
    A1
    A2

    Stupid Title
    B1
    B2

    -> Use index tracks.

    Clever 1
    Clever 2

    Stupid 1
    Stupid 2

    -> Use track positions.


    Fair enough. And for all other non-titular or generic names/identifiers just leave it to the notes...?
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    nik

    Clever 1
    Clever 2

    Stupid 1
    Stupid 2

    -> Use track positions.

    My interpretation of this is, that we shouldn't generate madeup track positions out of a side name and a track position.

    So BIG LOAD/A01 is an invalid track position though. Correct?
    If not, I rather feel like Stupid1. :p
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    nik
    I don't think this issue should be complicated.

    But it's only your logic that makes it complicated. And the fact that you find 2 examples presented to you to be ambiguous helps to verify this. Personally I don't find I have a problem in understanding the artist's intentions.
    nik

    Clever 1
    Clever 2

    Stupid 1
    Stupid 2
    -> Use track positions.


    If Clever and Stupid appeared before each track on the release, then I would agree. And 'creative positiong" should be changed to "creative numbering" in that specific guidelne. In the examples we have talked about it is not creative numbering that has been displayed, but creative side names.

    tbh nik, nobody here agrees with your logic on this...
    rassel
    My interpretation of this is, that we shouldn't generate madeup track positions out of a side name and a track position.

    ...and it's because of that. Keep the creative track numbering scheme found on a release for track numbering + side indicators A, B etc, like we use anyway. Or X, Y, etc if so on the release. Wacky Side names = Index tracks. Please.
    Helix's proposal should be reconsidered IMHO
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    rassel
    So BIG LOAD/A01 is an invalid track position though. Correct?


    Again, this example is ambiguous and playful. I don't feel there is any advantage whatsoever in complicating the release by trying to jam it into the track positions. It's a fun example to kick about, but it isn't going to lead to any eureka moments IMHO.

    schtel
    tbh nik, nobody here agrees with your logic on this.


    I don't think that is quite fair, I think the Squarepusher example is agreed upon. The Assault example is contentious http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/169803 , and I can accept I made the wrong call on that, especially if it overcomplicates things.
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    It would really be easier for everybody if we could agree, that we should generally use index tracks to denote the sides, regardless if they're generic or not, but, on the other hand, we would have to use A1, B1 on double sided medias or 1, 2 on single sided medias.

    I can't see any problem in submitting a record as
    Side 1
    A1 First Song
    A2 Second Song
    A3 Third Song
    Side 2
    B1 First Song
    B2 Second Song
    B3 Third Song

    or

    Sunny Side
    A1 First Song
    A2 Second Song
    A3 Third Song
    Dark Side
    B1 First Song
    B2 Second Song
    B3 Third Song

    This would be a greate relief for everybody here and we wouldn't need to discuss it over and over again.
  • hermanito over 8 years ago

    rassel
    This would be a greate relief for everybody here and we wouldn't need to discuss it over and over again.


    Amen
    I don't think I get any votes for my idea to put side identifiers to the BAOI section (and move that part above the tracklist)
    So this proposal gets my vote. Keep it simple please!
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    nik
    I don't think that is quite fair, I think the Squarepusher example is agreed upon. The Assault example is contentious http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/169803 , and I can accept I made the wrong call on that, especially if it overcomplicates things.

    ok, I accept that for the 4 Hero release. thank you.

    But I think the main issue is the 'creative track positioning'. I think it should be replaced with 'creative track numbering'. When I started that thread last year it was to try and get Side Names used for Index Tracks. And, if I remember rightly, that was the outcome. But it seems these Side Names end up being used for track positioning, and this is where they look wrong. It's on this point that I feel nobody likes this way of dealing with it and also, more importantly, I do not feel we are representing the artists 'creativeness'.

    I would urge you please this one last time to re-read the points I have made through this thread and helix's comments too, who generally puts it in a more applying way. If you think it's worth discussing more to finalize then we can do that, or if you feel the way it's currently dealt with is the best way then so be it; I have no more comments to make.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    @ rassel, I agree to use Side Names as Index Tracks, in fact the guidelines do say this is possible. But I do not think there is any advantage to having generic sides names being used, due to the amount of updates that would be needed. If we were starting the database from scratch then this indeed would be a more desirable option along with the Format being used above each piece of media within a mixed media release. And whilst I feel there could have been many 'better' ways of displaying data from the onset, I also appreciate that this was not feasible because the database started off with just some simple concepts. I'm sure teo did not envisage the advancements that have been made to this wonderful site. :)
    rassel
    This would be a greate relief for everybody here and we wouldn't need to discuss it over and over again.

    Apparently "it ain't over until the fat lady sings." :)
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    schtel
    @ rassel, I agree to use Side Names as Index Tracks, in fact the guidelines do say this is possible.

    Ok, but you agree that this would be the
    - easiest
    - most straigthforward
    - most logic
    way to enter the side names and track numbers / positions?
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    Yes I do.
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    nik edited over 8 years ago
    I'd like to get some things cleared up regarding Index Tracks before we move forward with this.

    Index tracks were initially conceived to relate directly to the tracks below, for example for movements in a piece of classical music.

    Expanding it to side names and other things that are not intended to directly be refereed to in the contained tracks is a natural but unintended use of Index Tracks, and I'd really rather we addressed these two aspects in some way (markup / programming) so we can keep the concepts separate and allow any future parsing to make sense. There is also the matter of nested index tracks that is included in this. I will bring this topic up again with the other admin, and try to get a resolution.

    We can then consider guideline changes / simplification.
  • schtel over 8 years ago

    ok thanks, I think that will be a good idea.

    For the record I feel this should be noted:

    1. Index Tracks
    2. Side Names
    3. Side Identifiers - A, B, One, Two, X, Y etc
    4. Track Numbers

    It may be a case of introducing a Side Names function rather that using the Index Track function, if that makes things easier. Just a suggestion for your discussion.
  • BlackCrack over 8 years ago

    Perfect. I think anyone that doesn't see that this is a pretty damn clear way to list a release needs to get their head checked out. How can this possibly not make sense to anyone?

    rassel
    It would really be easier for everybody if we could agree, that we should generally use index tracks to denote the sides, regardless if they're generic or not, but, on the other hand, we would have to use A1, B1 on double sided medias or 1, 2 on single sided medias.

    I can't see any problem in submitting a record as
    Side 1
    A1 First Song
    A2 Second Song
    A3 Third Song
    Side 2
    B1 First Song
    B2 Second Song
    B3 Third Song

    or

    Sunny Side
    A1 First Song
    A2 Second Song
    A3 Third Song
    Dark Side
    B1 First Song
    B2 Second Song
    B3 Third Song

    This would be a greate relief for everybody here and we wouldn't need to discuss it over and over again.

  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 8 years ago

    I can still see objections to Side 1 / Side 2 being made into index tracks, this may cause problems in terms of standard practice, updates, and redundancy / unnecessary complication, but we can hash that out after we figure out the index track issue.
  • rassel over 8 years ago

    Ok, I was thinking a little bit about this index track thing :)

    What seems obvious to me, is the fact, that we shouldn't mix up positions of tracks and the name of track categories.
    The track positions need to be unique and should indicate the absolute position of a track on a media, regardless of it's content.
    The index tracks should be used to denote groups of tracks (for example: movements in a musical piece, or where a range of tracks are given a collective title).

    We really should keep these two things apart, as a group of tracks may span several physical records, so we can't nest physical descriptors and track groups.

    The correct place to denote the physical position of a track should be the track numbering. If we expand the usage of the track numbering and allow to enter more than just a few characters, we would already have a nice possiblity to describe named records and sides in just leaving the track name field blank.

    The correct field for grouping tracks is the index track and this should stay as it is.

    About nesting index tracks and position tracks:
    I can't see no big problem in this, we may use something like the "+" sign to indicate that this index track is nested, this sign should be replaced by a sign like "∙" or an indent, this would work fine for physical and logical descriptors.

    I made an example on how this could work and look like, an example with two records, each one with a name as "Nasty" for the LP and "Nice" for the CD, the record sides are named as "Side 1" and "Side 2". There are three index tracks as "Songbook 1" to "Songbook 3" and the CD has got a nested index tracks within "Songbook 2" called "Live Performance".

    It doesn't look perfect, but IMO it looks quite distinctive.

    http://www.discogs.com/Rassel-Test-Drive-Baby/release/2224939

Log In You must be logged in to post.