• Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Holy Moses (2) - Disorder Of The Order has distributors from all over the world listed on the back cover. I think I have posted/asked this question once before, but could not find it in the search of forum.

    What should the country of release be here? It is a German label, but all the distributors added I take mean it was distributed in the countries mentioned. Should the country be left blank in this case?

    http://s.pixogs.com/image/R-2551029-1290030965.jpeg
    http://s.pixogs.com/image/R-2551029-1373910214-5465.jpeg
  • Eviltoastman over 5 years ago

    You could leave the country blank with a release note advising that the release territory is global and refer to the various distributors listed on the rear sleeve. Does that seem reasonable?
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Eviltoastman
    Does that seem reasonable?

    To me it does, but as I have seen this on quite a few releases on metal labels (as you see for this one, there is disagreement in the history as to what to add as country), it would mean this would apply to quite a number of releases, so would amount to a mass edit (if I can still find all of them), want to make sure everyone agrees.
  • Eviltoastman over 5 years ago

    Yes, well I think it should be blank as it cannot be ascertained. As for support, the thing is fresh, you just need to get some support. Should you not get it within a set time, send an SR since it involved a lot of releases and you want to cover your arse.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    On Holy Moses (2) - Reborn Dogs for example, country has been added as UK, US & Europe, but there is a Canadian and Australian distributor as well.

    I am doing the move over of 40 releases to another studio (discussed and agreed on) and some of those have this way of listing distributors. Mass edits are a pain in the behind when there are only 2 doing it.

    I will be patient then.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Bump
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    timetogo edited over 5 years ago
    Amsreddevil
    On Holy Moses (2) - Reborn Dogs for example, country has been added as UK, US & Europe, but there is a Canadian and Australian distributor as well.

    This has been discussed before and, yes, you should leave the country blank. Here is a recent thread for one of my submissions: http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/370913
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Thanks for the link. Would be nice to have some backing when I leave comments/do edits on these releases, the guidelines are not exactly clear on these cases.

    Just noticed something in the guideline RSG §7.1.2.: "If the release is on more than one label, please list the country of the first label you listed in the Label section."
    Is it the way it is worded, or it is just me? Looks kinda odd.
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    I never noticed that Guideline. It is odd. It also would make the county something other than the intended market, which makes this a contradictory Guideline. This is looking more and more like Support Request material to me.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Yet another SR... It does involve quite a few releases on Century Media, and I am sure many other labels, so best solution to involve management imo.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Filed
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Nagelfar - Hünengrab Im Herbst, here is shows worldwide distribution by, would the same apply there?
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    Nagelfar - Hünengrab Im Herbst, here is shows worldwide distribution by, would the same apply there?

    I would think so, yes.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago


    heidenheiden
    What's about this:

    There are hundreds like this. I was just checking some distributors for one of the releases I want to edit, over 100 releases so far found with this kind of listing. Some already have blank, others Germany, others UK, Europe & US. Funnily enough many of these different ways were done by the same bunch of users, and voted correct. No real consistency even with experienced oggers.
  • Eviltoastman over 5 years ago

    heidenheiden
    What's about this: http://www.discogs.com/Abomination-Abomination/release/639986 then?

    The release is of European origin with the intended market being UK, Europe and USA. Germany is not correct.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    On this one I used the country of the main label + the manufacturer country as it reads on my own copy which happened to be both Germany. Then I listed the distributors as reads on the record following advice from "experienced" users and trying to learn a "cohesive" way of updating/editing/submitting, but it's not always easy. Too many times the info from the records are not clear/unified/... and many times some guidelines can have many different interpretations. It's going to be a TITANIC work to unify all systems! ;-p
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago


    Eviltoastman
    The release is of European origin with the intended market being

    Also Australian distributor listed.
  • Eviltoastman over 5 years ago

    In that case we seem to have to default to the label country as per that guideline you linked to which would then make Germany correct.
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    heidenheiden
    On this one I used the country of the main label + the manufacturer country as it reads on my own copy which happened to be both Germany

    The problem is that neither the origin or the label nor the place of manufacture are the criteria for country on Discogs. The criteria is intended market. That makes Germany incorrect.
    Eviltoastman
    In that case we seem to have to default to the label country as per that guideline you linked to which would then make Germany correct.

    Two contradictory Guidelines aren't helping matters, but in previous forum discussions it has always been intended market, not origin of label.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    So, after reading the list of distributors: Distribution-SPV (0511) 810021 ENGLAND-A.P.T.HOLLAND-BERTUSSCHWEIZ-DISCTRADEITALIEN-DISCOMAGICSPAIN-DONOSTI ROCKÖSTERREICH-ECHOGREECE-F.M.RECORDS SAAUSTRALIA-MODERN INVASIONFRANCE-NEW ROSEBELGIUM-PLAY IT AGAIN SAMSWEDEN-SONETUSA-Marketed and distributed by Walkthrufyre Entertainment Corporation, and the "Manufactured in USA by Walkthrufyre" text, rather leave the country in blank, I guess ...
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    heidenheiden
    rather leave the country in blank, I guess ...

    Not in that case, no. UK, Europe and US would work and there actually is such a tag.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil edited over 5 years ago
    [quote=timetogo][/quote]
    No it wouldn't, Australia is not part of UK, US & Europe. And some of them also have Brazil as country of distribution as well as the others, which again is not part of those three either.
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    Australia is not part of UK, US & Europe

    Sorry, missed Australia somehow. You're right. It should be left blank.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    Moved to blank. Could it be ready for voting now? And as well it's parner version in clear vinyl. Both of them done the same way from my very own copies. :)
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Not the place to ask for votes ;-) There's another forum thread for that.

    Have edited the release I used as example, Holy Moses (2) - Disorder Of The Order, this should be clear enough now, no? All the distributors listed with country in the release notes.
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    heidenheiden
    Could it be ready for voting now?

    For someone who owns the release, certainly. For me, there aren't enough in the way of images to verify the information so I'm not comfortable voting on it.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    heidenheiden
    A.P.T.HOLLAND-BERTUSSCHWEIZ-DISCTRADEITALIEN-DISCOMAGICS

    The bits between the distributors, what character are you using for that? It looks very odd, I see 4 letters in a box, surely cannot be that way on the release? Did you mean to use something like this ■ or this ▀ to show the blocks in between each of them? Similar to how they are listed on the back of one of the CD versions?
    http://s.pixogs.com/image/R-519661-1176194755.jpeg
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    I meant the ones you just typed but I choosed the wrong character. Thanks. I change them soon.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    changed to: Marketed and distributed in the USA by: Walkthrufyre Entertainment.
    Manufactured in West-Germany.
    ℗+©1990
    Distribution-SPV (0511) 810021 ENGLAND-A.P.T.■ HOLLAND-BERTUS■SCHWEIZ-DISCTRADE■ITALIEN-DISCOMAGIC■SPAIN-DONOSTI ROCK■ÖSTERREICH-ECHO■GREECE-F.M.RECORDS SA■AUSTRALIA-MODERN INVASION■FRANCE-NEW ROSE■BELGIUM-PLAY IT AGAIN SAM■SWEDEN-SONET■USA-Marketed and distributed by Walkthrufyre Entertainment Corporation ... it looks better. I knew about the forum thread for votes but it seems no one is interested to "answer my call" in there. I just tried to push the question somehow but I got caught ;)
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 5 years ago

    IMHO when distribution gets so wide as this, it should be narrowed down to the original market area. By that I mean, the market where import duty will not apply to the release. Obviously a release can be sold in multiple markets by exporting / importing, but IMO that is then an import.

    Anyone can get 100 7" run off and say the distribution is 'worldwide', and even organize the distributors etc. But the item is still an import.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    So? Germany then? I mean, NB was not a major but a "little" german label back then:
    http://www.nuclearblast.de/en/label/company/history/1987-1992.html

    On the other side, they sold many of their records in the UK & USA (having launched some now pretty known US bands) & therest of europe. Of course, distributors made it possible. Should me ask from Markus what was his "intended market" at the time?

    Sometimes the "Intended market" issue can get really tricky. :)
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago


    nik
    IMHO when distribution gets so wide as this, it should be narrowed down to the original market area.


    heidenheiden
    NB was not a major but a "little" german label back then:


    Why should it be narrowed down? There are plenty of labels that release items that they have distributed all over the place by other companies. There is a reason the distributors are added on those releases. That is the market area for those releases.

    Even if a label is small, it does not mean it was only releasing in the local market.

  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    RSG §7.1.1....the country should always be the place the release was sold and distributed in.
  • MusicNutter over 5 years ago

    IMHO when distribution gets so wide as this, it should be narrowed down to the original market area


    Are you going against RSG §7.2.3

    As per comment above me
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    We could change the country to Uzbekistan. That would certainly be narrow.

    Yes, I know, that's ridiculous. So is the idea that we abandon the intended market as the Guidelines call for. How do you narrow this down in a way that makes sense? IMHO, you simply can't.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    I never understood RSG §7.2.3 . My stubborn logic tells me "country of origin" is what it tells: Country of origin; and distributors take care of "the market". If not, on the form, change "Coutry" for "Market", otherwise it's like to name apples when meaning stones and having an entry that reads "Country" that many times has to be left empty or filled with continents (ex: Europe; it is not a country). But as long as this rule is active and the majority are fine with it, I will try my best to do as it's told.
  • djmushroom over 5 years ago

    the discogs country-rule is the reason for so many misunderstandings, duplicates, unclear submissions. i believe the majority of discogs users isn't even aware of that specific rule, so i'd like to suggest the following:
    why not install 2 country fields?
    one for country of origin/manufacture, the other for "marketed in" (including a "worldwide" option for the latter).
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago

    I would vote "YES"!
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    Why should it be narrowed down? There are plenty of labels that release items that they have distributed all over the place by other companies. There is a reason the distributors are added on those releases. That is the market area for those releases.


    Amsreddevil
    RSG §7.1.1....the country should always be the place the release was sold and distributed in.


    timetogo
    We could change the country to Uzbekistan. That would certainly be narrow.

    Yes, I know, that's ridiculous. So is the idea that we abandon the intended market as the Guidelines call for. How do you narrow this down in a way that makes sense? IMHO, you simply can't.


    The guidelines are a guide, and especially in cases like 'country', they are not rigid rules. They may even need improvement.

    The 'country' field has always been a hard one to pin down exactly. A lot of the time, it is not on the release. And even when there are countries mentioned, we have often to interpret it.

    'Country' as a singular statement is a useful tool to us to describe the release and sort them from other similar releases. It is not always an precise statement of a singular fact.

    In this case, the country field should be the primary economic area where the release was distributed - in this case Europe. In all other areas, the release will be an import, attracting import duty.

    djmushroom
    why not install 2 country fields?
    one for country of origin/manufacture, the other for "marketed in" (including a "worldwide" option for the latter).


    That may be good, but we still want to see a concise and compact list on, for example, Master Release pages that shows us the 'country' so as to distinguish versions of the release.
  • slur over 5 years ago

    Well, why not narrow it down to "Manufacterd" or "Made In" and allowing to fields for the cases where the Record is pressed in U.S.A., Jacket printed in Canada for example.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil edited over 5 years ago
    nik
    In this case, the country field should be the primary economic area where the release was distributed - in this case Europe. In all other areas, the release will be an import, attracting import duty.

    How would it be different if it was released in France or Australia by German based labels? So the USA & Europe tag would be rubbish then? If it was made in USA for USA & Europe distribution, European countries would pay import duty, and according to you, Europe would not qualify as a country to be added, and the same vice versa, if made in Europe and distributed in USA. One country tag to get rid of. Don't other countries in Europe pay import duty when they import things from other European countries? Do away with the Europe and UK & Europe tags, in fact, do away with all the combined country tags then.

    Utter nonsense!
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago


    slur

    slur 18 minutes ago
    Well, why not narrow it down to "Manufacterd" or "Made In" and allowing to fields for the cases where the Record is pressed in U.S.A., Jacket printed in Canada for example.


    I would vote yes, too
  • Horrific_child over 5 years ago

    slur
    Well, why not narrow it down to "Manufacterd" or "Made In" and allowing to fields for the cases where the Record is pressed in U.S.A., Jacket printed in Canada for example.

    That's the only way, a country description makes sense. Nowadays the range of interpretation is to wide and I'm sick of dicussions, which market was/ is the intended.
    Tags like "Manufactured In", "Made In", "Pressed In" "(Cover) Printed In" a.s.o. would be more precise and less confusing. To keep the current country info I would mainly interpret this as "Market In" as it was intended originally, in detail of course sometimes it has to be changed for some releases. But we need a point, where we can start from.
  • Horrific_child over 5 years ago

    And of course keep in mind, the database is not only made for the next few years, it should be valid "forever":-) I think, it's hard to recognise which was the release intended for marketing/ distributing after ten or 15 years, unless it's not printed on the sleeve.
  • heidenheiden over 5 years ago


    Horrific_child
    That's the only way, a country description makes sense. Nowadays the range of interpretation is to wide and I'm sick of dicussions, which market was/ is the intended.
    Tags like "Manufactured In", "Made In", "Pressed In" "(Cover) Printed In" a.s.o. would be more precise and less confusing. To keep the current country info I would mainly interpret this as "Market In" as it was intended originally, in detail of course sometimes it has to be changed for some releases. But we need a point, where we can start from


    Horrific_child
    And of course keep in mind, the database is not only made for the next few years, it should be valid "forever":-) I think, it's hard to recognise which was the release intended for marketing/ distributing after ten or 15 years, unless it's not printed on the sleeve.


    I agree with each single word, point, coma and number! Thanx!

  • Dark_Diver over 5 years ago

    There are tons of releases which don't bear any mark where it was manufactured - you would have to use the market again for these releases. How do you want to show that in a Master release view if there's another version which has a sentence like "Made in Somewhere"?

    About the release of the initial start post - just leave the country for these ones.
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 5 years ago

    nik edited over 5 years ago
    Amsreddevil
    How would it be different if it was released in France or Australia by German based labels?


    France and Germany are in the EU.

    A release in Australia by a German label is an Australian release.

    Amsreddevil
    ? So the USA & Europe tag would be rubbish then?


    There is a possibility that "USA & Europe" as a country tag may be incorrect, yes. We'd have to look at some examples and figure it out.

    Amsreddevil
    Don't other countries in Europe pay import duty when they import things from other European countries?


    Not in the EU, no.

    Amsreddevil
    Do away with the Europe and UK & Europe tags, in fact, do away with all the combined country tags then.


    Those tags are correct, since it is a single market. The "UK & Europe" one is just to satisfy data capture when European and UK distributors are listed on the release.

    slur
    why not narrow it down to "Manufacterd" or "Made In" and allowing to fields for the cases where the Record is pressed in U.S.A., Jacket printed in Canada for example.


    A country field for companies is a possibility, but for the moment that info can go in the notes.

    Horrific_child
    Tags like "Manufactured In", "Made In", "Pressed In" "(Cover) Printed In" a.s.o. would be more precise and less confusing.


    More precise, yes. Less confusing, I'm not sure. For example, a load of UK releases are pressed / printed in France. Would it be helpful / less confusing to have those listed as country:France? I'd argue; "no".

  • Horrific_child over 5 years ago

    nik
    More precise, yes. Less confusing, I'm not sure. For example, a load of UK releases are pressed / printed in France. Would it be helpful / less confusing to have those listed as country:France? I'd argue; "no".


    That's exactly what I'm talking about, splitting the country info. One for "Printed In" or "Pressed In" and one for "Marked/ Distributed In". And a few more like suggested above. Submitters can choose one or more of them if possible.

    By the way, Europe(ean countries) and EU are different. E.g. Turkey belongs to Europe but doesn't to EU (like a few more). And those non-EU states have to pay duties of course.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago


    nik
    Not in the EU, no.

    Odd, I do when I import from the UK. How is that then? The fact that you pay import duty or not should not have anything to do with anything. If the intended market is including a territory you pay import duty, then that is still the market for the release. Why add a distributor to a release if it does not include the intended market?

    To me it is most logical that if a distributor is added on a release, it is included in the intended market, which therefore should be reflected in country add to that release. When you have such evidence on a release, why ignore it?
  • Horrific_child over 5 years ago


    Amsreddevil
    The fact that you pay import duty or not should not have anything to do with anything.

    +1
  • djcarbines over 5 years ago

    djcarbines edited over 5 years ago
    Amsreddevil
    Don't other countries in Europe pay import duty when they import things from other European countries? Do away with the Europe and UK & Europe tags, in fact, do away with all the combined country tags then.

    Actually, as far as I am aware, no they don't as EU members, they are seen as economically the same country, even if in a marketing sense they are not. Duty also varies from type of product to type of product country to country

    Personally, I don't think splitting the pressed in / printed in is a good idea. It is good for editors to be clear on information but reduces clarity for country of release.

    Many consumer products have components from multiple countries but have either a single market for release (sale) or a different combination of countries for sale than manufacture.

    Possible solution: separate country of release / country of manufacture fields?
  • djcarbines over 5 years ago


    Amsreddevil
    When you have such evidence on a release, why ignore it?

    Exactly - I have seen many "Europe" eligible releases that also state South Africa, Asian and Australian distribution countries with no provision for these extra markets.
  • djcarbines over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    nikNot in the EU, no.
    Odd, I do when I import from the UK. How is that then? The fact that you pay import duty or not should not have anything to do with anything

    Case in point for keeping the UK & Europe tag, and that the UK behaves very much as a separate entity to Europe.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil edited over 5 years ago
    djcarbines
    UK behaves very much as a separate entity to Europe.

    And don't we know it! But I still disagree with the tag, as it is discriminatory. There are more countries in Europe that have their own way of doing things, not all are part of the EU and have different markets, etc. As most do not know how to apply the tag either, it would be better to get rid of it, or then give the option of having more combinations. CIS countries for example.

    I also pay import duty for other non-EU countries in Euopre, should they get a separate That Country & Europe tag then too according to the logic used on discogs?
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    For the releases with worldwide distributors, should the country be the country of the label or the intended market which would be worldwide? Would like to get on with the edits of those releases as I was planning to update some anyway.

    nik
    In this case, the country field should be the primary economic area where the release was distributed - in this case Europe. In all other areas, the release will be an import, attracting import duty.

    nik
    A release in Australia by a German label is an Australian release.

    As it is the German label releasing it in all those countries, the 2 statements seem a bit conflicting maybe?
  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 5 years ago

    "Europe" should be taken to mean the European market, IOW the EU.

    The 'Country' field does not stand up to exacting requirements here, because a) it is not commonly mentioned on the release, b) we only have one field for it, and it is not a precise data capture, unlike most of the other fields on the release form. it should be seen as a shorthand to attempt to identify a release, not as a first and last statement of pure fact.The release notes can expand on it if necessary.

    Amsreddevil
    Don't other countries in Europe pay import duty when they import things from other European countries?


    nik
    Not in the EU, no.


    Amsreddevil
    I do when I import from the UK


    Where are you importing to? What import duty are you paying?

    Amsreddevil
    The fact that you pay import duty or not should not have anything to do with anything. If the intended market is including a territory you pay import duty, then that is still the market for the release. Why add a distributor to a release if it does not include the intended market?


    Because it is not the primary market, and will blur the distinction between the primary market and all the other markets a release can be sold in, as an 'import'.

    To keep it simple, use the primary market for the 'Country' field. The others can be mentioned in the release notes.

    Amsreddevil
    For the releases with worldwide distributors, should the country be the country of the label or the intended market which would be worldwide?


    It should be the primary economic area where no import duties are applied.

    [quote= nik]In this case, the country field should be the primary economic area where the release was distributed - in this case Europe. In all other areas, the release will be an import, attracting import duty. [/quote]

    [quote= nik]A release in Australia by a German label is an Australian release.[/quote]

    Amsreddevil
    As it is the German label releasing it in all those countries, the 2 statements seem a bit conflicting maybe?


    I don't understand, the statements are consistent and don't conflict FWICS.

    Maybe real life examples would help.
  • gboe over 5 years ago

    gboe edited over 5 years ago
    nik
    More precise, yes. Less confusing, I'm not sure. For example, a load of UK releases are pressed / printed in France. Would it be helpful / less confusing to have those listed as country:France?

    Not listed as Country=France. Listed as pressed or printed in France.

    I can't imagine how it ever could become more confusing to have fields for exactly what you would pretty need to write in notes to make a proper sub - that manufactural country is not the same as market for this release.

    Once again Discogs policies are based on it's background in UK/US. In general most major label releases in all scandinavia is manufactured in other countries, e.g. all CBS releases. A great number of those releases are tagged their manufacture country currently:

    Gasolin' - Jumbo Nummer Nul / Kattemor
    Gasolin' - Pas På Svinget I Solrød

    What indeed could be less confusing is to have all those scandinavian releases in Discogs correctly. By offereing a Printed In field.

    Besides that, 50's and 60's releases in many small countries had a large number of releases made by combining orig. US vinyls with local covers or vice versa:
    Miles Davis Quartet* - It Never Entered My Mind
    The Mills Brothers - The Mills Brothers Live! Recorded At The Tivoli Gardens Copenhagen

    If giving the subbers fields to add this kind of into wil confuse the subbers is a solid argument - how then did the LCCN fields pass that filter?

    The only field we currently have for country - which at least should be labelled "Market" for a start - today is THE most generally error-filled field, as stating market is in most cases in at least Europe a work of guessing, assuming and getting as close as it gets.

    Asking people to sub exactly what's on release, "Printed in", "Pressed in" etc, will result in a more accurate state of data. Not bad for a database.

    More country fields will decrease confusion. Not increase.
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    nik
    Maybe real life examples would help.

    The release linked in my first post here, that is one on German label distributed worldwide if that is what you mean?

    Ok, maybe I don't get it, but if you release a CD worldwide, to me that is the intended market & therefore also included in the primary economic area, as the CD is sold there too, including have to pay import duty. If the German label were to release a CD in one of those countries like Australia, it would still be open to the same import duty if the CD is manufactured in Europe and sent over there. Or I am seeing this totally incorrectly?

  • Staff 3.1k

    nik over 5 years ago


    gboe
    Not listed as Country=France. Listed as pressed or printed in France.

    I can't imagine how it ever could become more confusing to have fields for exactly what you would pretty need to write in notes to make a proper sub - that manufactural country is not the same as market for this release.


    Thats fine, but that needs a new field etc, it is not a simple change. And it doesn't solve the initial problem, which is we want to see a clear country in lists, so we can differentiate otherwise identical releases.

    gboe
    Once again Discogs policies are based on it's background in UK/US. In general most major label releases in all scandinavia is manufactured in other countries, e.g. all CBS releases.


    I don't think that is a justified criticism. For example, there are many UK release that were made in other countries (France, for example).

    gboe
    In general most major label releases in all scandinavia is manufactured in other countries, e.g. all CBS releases. A great number of those releases are tagged their manufacture country currently:


    That is simply incorrect though. They should be updated.

    The most important thing that in general people want to know the intended market, not where the sleeve was printed.

    gboe
    should be labelled "Market"


    Well that is an easy change, but will it help? That terminology may confuse more than it clarifies, and get mixed up with 'Marketplace' etc.

    Amsreddevil
    If the German label were to release a CD in one of those countries like Australia, it would still be open to the same import duty if the CD is manufactured in Europe and sent over there. Or I am seeing this totally incorrectly?


    It depends where it was manufactured. Normally, a release will be manufactured close to it's market, and also taking into consideration taxes and duties etc. There is less profit in shipping something half way round the world, then paying a bunch of tax and duty, when you can get it manufactured in the local economic zone.

    Amsreddevil
    maybe I don't get it, but if you release a CD worldwide, to me that is the intended market & therefore also included in the primary economic area


    My feeling is that 'worldwide' is not helpful to us for cataloging records. Although the importing thing may be seen as pedantic, I think it gives releases good boundaries so we can define 'where it comes from', insofar as we can do that.
  • loukash over 5 years ago

    nik
    More precise, yes. Less confusing, I'm not sure.

    Much less confusing. I'm sure.

    It's about time to link to my old Country Field Revamp Proposal again:
    http://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/5215038194697336111a78be#5215038194697336111a78b7
  • hatfulofelt over 5 years ago

    I want to start a thread to propose that Unofficial releases don't even have a market, nor would it be right to blank the country, if their origin is known. I don't agree with listing these 2 Russian bootlegs as Europe, for example. I'm hoping someone can explain why that's "right," which it isn't, btw (Europe just makes no sense, it's just closer to Russia?). I'd love nik to comment, too. Real Life - Heartland & Real Life - Flame
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    I still do not believe paying import duty when a release is also intended for that market should make any difference. Intended market is intended market, there is no two ways about it.
  • hatfulofelt over 5 years ago

    It's certainly difficult and sometimes impossible to determine intended market w/o also being asked to take such things into account, somehow.
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    Hello! I have a small problem here. You can see clearly that this reissue has been pressed in Taiwan (printed both on the cover & cd itself), but one of the submitters insists that it has been released in Japan. What is your opinion about that?
    http://www.discogs.com/Battlecat-Gumbo-Roots/release/4749591
    Thank you!
  • hatfulofelt over 5 years ago

    That seems ok.
  • cellularsmoke over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    I still do not believe paying import duty when a release is also intended for that market should make any difference. Intended market is intended market, there is no two ways about it.


    I agree - if a label gets local distributors to make sure a release is put out in a country that sounds like Intended Market to me; Napalm Records has a US distribution arm to get their releases out here, and yet so many times I see users enter them as Autria only releases - even though I'm not getting an Import Record from a Napalm release, I'm getting a US Distributed Record. The US is obviously an intended market and should be reflected so in the country.

    Perhaps we should allow for multiple Countries to be selected, and I don't mean add to the number of combination countries in the list, but to allow for added a second country onto that field.
  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    'Austria' as country on Napalm Records is somehow correct to the guideline; but doesn't match the 'intended market' concept, cause the intended market includes at least germany, which is the biggest market for underground metal in europe.
    the country tag is a big problem in most of the releases on smaller heavy metal labels from europe. in the 90s there was (maybe still is) a network of small labels from different european countries - modern invasion from australia also in sometimes, that distributed all of their releases at least europewide - simplification, cause not every country in europe had a local label/distributor -; many, if not almost all releases of these times mention this network on the covers.
    but so far i've seen, the country is the one of the label in most cases. I'm not happy with that, but will wait for more precise guidelines.
    the duty paying doesn't matter imo, too
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    Hectic1
    I have a small problem here. You can see clearly that this reissue has been pressed in Taiwan (printed both on the cover & cd itself), but one of the submitters insists that it has been released in Japan. What is your opinion about that?

    Where the CD is pressed does NOT determine the country.

    It's hard to see anything clearly from your images, but... If the text at the bottom on the back is in Japanese rather than Chinese then, yes, it's a Japanese release. If it's in Chinese then I'd change the country.
  • Myriad over 5 years ago

    cellularsmoke
    I agree - if a label gets local distributors to make sure a release is put out in a country that sounds like Intended Market to me; Napalm Records has a US distribution arm to get their releases out here, and yet so many times I see users enter them as Autria only releases - even though I'm not getting an Import Record from a Napalm release, I'm getting a US Distributed Record. The US is obviously an intended market and should be reflected so in the country.

    Napalm Records would be a perfect example of where to use that UK, Europe & US tag I think. Austria is obviously too narrow of a description, it being the label's main base.
  • slur over 5 years ago

    loukash
    It's about time to link to my old Country Field Revamp Proposal again:
    http://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/5215038194697336111a78be#5215038194697336111a78b7


    I think that would solve a lot of the constantly arrising questions.
  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    Can somebody give an example for a MR, where contained releases can be dinstinguished only by the country tag ?
    All the releases I looked at last times, had an obvious 'as on the release' distinguishing feature
  • Myriad over 5 years ago

    Myrkvi174
    Can somebody give an example for a MR, where contained releases can be dinstinguished only by the country tag ?
    All the releases I looked at last times, had an obvious 'as on the release' distinguishing feature

    Very common for major label releases. In the master release Lorde - Pure Heroine, the Australasian and Canadian editions are identical but for the countries.
  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    Myriad
    In the master release Lorde - Pure Heroine, the Australasian and Canadian editions are identical but for the countries.


    the australasian is 'marketed by' U.M. Australia, whilst the canadian is 'manufactured by' and 'distributed by' U.M.Canada Inc.
    quite easy to distinguish
  • Myriad over 5 years ago

    Myrkvi174
    the australasian is 'marketed by' U.M. Australia, whilst the canadian is 'manufactured by' and 'distributed by' U.M.Canada Inc.
    quite easy to distinguish

    Sorry, thought you meant only looking at the master release page.

    Having two release submissions where the only difference between the two submissions does not meet the criteria for a unique release (RSG §1.4.2), so ideally we would never see submissions that could be distinguished only by the country tag.
  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    Myriad

    Sorry, thought you meant only looking at the master release page.


    that is a problem of how the data is shown, not of the data itself.

    Myriad
    Having two release submissions where the only difference between the two submissions does not meet the criteria for a unique release (RSG §1.4.2), so ideally we would never see submissions that could be distinguished only by the country tag.


    if so, it is an argument, that the 'country' tag is dispensable

  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    Myriad
    Napalm Records would be a perfect example of where to use that UK, Europe & US tag I think.

    Most Narada releases (including their myriad sublabels) and most Celestial Harmonies releases (again including myriad sublabels) fit in to this category as well.
  • hatfulofelt over 5 years ago

    Yet sometimes, if one looks closely enough, the country of manufacture changes, whilst everything else does not. Nettwerk, Celestial Harmonies, 4AD, Beggars Banquet, and may others all have this, making things confusing since sometimes, they're all made one place, but for sale elsewhere too.
  • ProfKolbi over 5 years ago

    loukash
    It's about time to link to my old Country Field Revamp Proposal again:
    http://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/5215038194697336111a78be#5215038194697336111a78b7

    +1
    IMO this would go a long way in preventing genre-country cross-ups:
    http://www.discogs.com/Lolita-Cuevas-Frantz-Casseus-Haitian-Folk-Songs/release/5058647
  • loukash over 5 years ago

    loukash
    my old Country Field Revamp Proposal

    Unsurprisingly, some two years later, my old statement still stands as well:

    loukash
    what a waste of everyone's time and energy discussing issues based on this esoteric concept over and over again
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    timetogo
    Hectic1I have a small problem here. You can see clearly that this reissue has been pressed in Taiwan (printed both on the cover & cd itself), but one of the submitters insists that it has been released in Japan. What is your opinion about that?
    Where the CD is pressed does NOT determine the country.

    It's hard to see anything clearly from your images, but... If the text at the bottom on the back is in Japanese rather than Chinese then, yes, it's a Japanese release. If it's in Chinese then I'd change the country.


    So what determines the country of release if not the clear indication printed both on the CD & cover?
  • ProfKolbi over 5 years ago

    timetogo
    If it's in Chinese then I'd change the country.

    Don't know if it's relevant but the Label's site lists it as an "import."
    http://www.2tight.jp/products/detail.php?product_id=573


  • el_duro over 5 years ago

    loukash
    what a waste of everyone's time and energy discussing issues based on this esoteric concept over and over again

    Sorry for participating in wasting everyone's time and energy but I still don't get it :)

    Which country should be added, if any?

    Scientist And Prince Jammy - Dub Landing Volume 1 And 2

    Released on a British label, manufactured in the UK, distributed in EU, Australia, Japan and Canada.

    UK = primary market?
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    Hectic1
    So what determines the country of release if not the clear indication printed both on the CD & cover?

    The Guidelines say to leave it blank.
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    timetogo
    The Guidelines say to leave it blank.

    In which point? If the Japanese label itself brand it as an import on their website and it was clearly made it in Taiwan then...? But from another hand it has been made for the Japanese market rather than Taiwanese... It's either Taiwan or Japan but for sure it shouldn't have been left blank :)

  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    hatfulofelt
    Yet sometimes, if one looks closely enough,


    If you did so, please give an example. I don't want to search all these label's discographies

  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    at the current state, yes. but unfortunately the entries lack information on companies and identifiers. if made in different countries, at least the pressing plant so the sid codes would be different, I'd guess. In general, the more complete the data is, better distinguishers than 'country' will appear, I think.

  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    I have to correct my opinion about the 'country' field. It is needed, cause there is often such information, that can be turned into valid data, on releases. but what, if it is renamed in 'localizations' (or similiar) with a dropdown that includes tags like 'made in' 'printed in' distributed in' ... just a thought . by now all is mixed in the country field, which isn't very accurate sometimes
  • Amsreddevil over 5 years ago

    Myrkvi174
    the country tag is a big problem in most of the releases on smaller heavy metal labels from europe.


    The main reason I started the thread in the first place.

    loukash
    It's about time to link to my old Country Field Revamp Proposal again:

    Am leaning more & more towards this. First thought it might confuse things more for some users, but we are used to adding things like companies now, going a step further and adding countries (locations) for the company roles seems most logical.

  • magnix over 5 years ago

    loukash
    It's about time to link to my old Country Field Revamp Proposal again:
    http://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/5215038194697336111a78be#5215038194697336111a78b7

    Amsreddevil
    Am leaning more & more towards this. First thought it might confuse things more for some users, but we are used to adding things like companies now, going a step further and adding countries (locations) for the company roles seems most logical.

    +1 indeed
  • loukash over 5 years ago

    Amsreddevil
    First thought it might confuse things more for some users

    As far as I see it, the only major challenge will be the algorithm that will define which country should be primarily displayed in list views like MR, or generally the design of such lists. If we'd want to display several countries at once, and in which order.

    I could imagine having a column where countries would be displayed just by their country codes.
    Example: Steely Dan - Aja would appear in the Aja MR like this:
    Aja ‎(CD, Album) – MCA Records, MCA Records – MCD 01745, DMCL 1745 – DE, FR – 1984

    "DE, FR" because it's "Printed in Germany", "Made in Germany", and it has distribution codes for "D" and "F". The latter would also have a menu entry in the revamped Country field: "Distribution Code – Germany" and "Distribution Code – France" (apart from the actual codes being noted verbatim in BAOI).

    So in order not to confuse new users, all it needs is to have enough menu items to cover the majority of possible country-related credits, like "Made In", "Printed In", "Distributed In", you name it. That, and an updated guideline.

    And frankly, I can't imagine how can anything be more confusing than a guideline which currently states:
    Discovering the country can be very easy, or quite obscure.

    Duh. :P
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    timetogo edited over 5 years ago
    Hectic1
    In which point? If the Japanese label itself brand it as an import on their website and it was clearly made it in Taiwan then...? But from another hand it has been made for the Japanese market rather than Taiwanese... It's either Taiwan or Japan but for sure it shouldn't have been left blank :)

    The Guidelines say that if there is doubt it should be left blank. It's pretty darned clear. Please don't apply your own standards "for sure".
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    But an answer is there and the real core of the case is which one suits better. If you're in doubt then I think it's timetogo for you, because to give up on a problem is not moving it forward (leave it blank it's not a sollution here period). Sorry for the sarcasm but you're not helpfull at all.
  • timetogo over 5 years ago

    I'm not helpful? Fine. Ignore the Guidelines and see how far that gets you on Discogs. It should be left blank.

    One thing for certain: the place of manufacture is NOT the country on Discogs. Japan is far more likely than Taiwan in this case.
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    timetogo
    One thing for certain: the place of manufacture is NOT the country on Discogs. Japan is far more likely than Taiwan in this case.


    You see you can if you only want. thx :)
  • hatfulofelt over 5 years ago

  • Myriad over 5 years ago

    Myrkvi174
    at the current state, yes. but unfortunately the entries lack information on companies and identifiers. if made in different countries, at least the pressing plant so the sid codes would be different, I'd guess. In general, the more complete the data is, better distinguishers than 'country' will appear, I think.

    You're never going to have a case where two submissions are identical except for the country. If that were so, they would be merged and the country for the resulting entry would ideally list both if we had the option to choose several countries.
  • Myrkvi174 over 5 years ago

    This is why I came to the conclusion to drop the 'country' field first. not needed as distinguishing mark. but, as said above, I've changed my opinion.
    loukash proposal for a new and expanded country field is a good idea
  • Hectic1 over 5 years ago

    nik
    Horrific_childTags like "Manufactured In", "Made In", "Pressed In" "(Cover) Printed In" a.s.o. would be more precise and less confusing.

    More precise, yes. Less confusing, I'm not sure. For example, a load of UK releases are pressed / printed in France. Would it be helpful / less confusing to have those listed as country:France? I'd argue; "no".


    So why not to establish two country fields? The first one would show where exactly a record has been manufactured/pressed and a second would indicate which market it has been released for (if it's possible to determine of course).

Log In You must be logged in to post.