• earshot over 3 years ago

    earshot edited over 3 years ago
    http://www.discogs.com/submissions?label=CBS%2FSony+Records+Inc.
    Edit: This mass edit was done without discussion. I Changed the title so we can discuss the CD plant here.
  • seppuku over 3 years ago

    seppuku edited over 3 years ago
    Can you save us all some time and point out which edits you have a problem with and what you think is wrong about them? I had a quick look and didn't see anything incorrect.

    Also, it is good form to alert the editing user (presumably Colonycollapse23 here?) when starting a thread about edits, either by commenting in a release history or mentioning the relevant user name in the first post.
  • edovan over 3 years ago

    The user does what the label page encourage us to do. However that information seems to have been added without any prior discussion or source, which I think is a larger problem:
    http://www.discogs.com/history?label=CBS%2FSony+Records+Inc.&diff=8

    erdeimano does most likely have something to say. :-)
  • xjoxjox over 3 years ago

  • seppuku over 3 years ago

    CSR was discussed at least, if not resolved, search the forum.
  • earshot over 3 years ago

    I thought the thread title was fairly clear but the problem is the action is not accordance with RSG §14.1.2..
    I posted a link to this forum here:
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=5832101#latest
  • earshot over 3 years ago

    On most discs this company is written as:
    Made by CBS/Sony Inc. or Epic/Sony Inc.

    from the profile of the first: Japanese record company which was established in August 1973.
    It was the successor to CBS/Sony Records Inc. so it seems wrong to have them both.
  • jweijde over 3 years ago

    In my opinion it should be entered as either CSR or CSR Compact Disc as that's the name in the matrix.
  • earshot over 3 years ago

    Only the first CD's manufactured (1982 and early 1983) had a hub text:
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC.

    jweijde
    In my opinion it should be entered as either CSR or CSR Compact Disc as that's the name in the matrix.

    I agree.
  • Colonycollapse23 over 3 years ago

    I'll admit when working on these last night I thought that I would only find a handful of releases with a 'CSR' in the matrix without a Pressed By credit attributed to them. The steps I took were based on the data in one release and just grew from that. CSR was mentioned here: http://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/338398#3169524 (in the beginning of the thread - list of companies commonly found in the outer rings and matrix areas of CD's) as a viable credit and the label page entry of CBS/Sony Records Inc. also provided guidance on the pressing application.

    When adding the Pressed By credit I did not set out to conduct a mass edit. The information was already present on each release upon which I added the data to the LCCN field.

    My apologies for expanding the data to these releases. I now see from RSG §14.1.2 that "if you want to do the same type of edit over many releases, post a message in the Database forum stating your intentions". As stated above, I did not think I would run into so many of these 'CSR' matrices and got caught up in the work.
  • earshot over 3 years ago

    Changed the title. Hope we can discuss the name and role here.
    On the releases manufactured or Made by is is used CBS/Sony Inc. CSR only appears in the hub similar to M.P.O. for MPO.
  • craigandkim over 2 years ago

    So I have a CD I'm entering- Made in Japan (on CD label); it has the matrix for DADC = DIDZ-10151 11 & CSR COMPACT DISC (3x) around the hub.....does this mean it was pressed by DADC Japan (?) and if so what would be the likely pressing date? Thanks in advance
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    craigandkim
    does this mean it was pressed by DADC Japan


    If it doesn't mention DADC or DADC Japan, then I wouldn't credit it.
    If it mentions CSR COMPACT DISC then I'd credit that.
  • craigandkim over 2 years ago

    jweijde
    craigandkimdoes this mean it was pressed by DADC Japan

    If it doesn't mention DADC or DADC Japan, then I wouldn't credit it.
    If it mentions CSR COMPACT DISC then I'd credit that.


    Thanks for the advice- but doesn't having a matrix with the DADC codes point toward DADC as the pressing plant (?) - IE: https://www.discogs.com/help/doc/submission-guidelines-release-label-catalog#4.11
    Cheers
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    The description of the DADC codes in that part of the guidelines is misleading and has been requested to be removed. It's the only part of the guidelines that should be ignored.

    Besides this, I think those codes mainly indicate the involvement of a Sony pressing plant. CSR is a Sony plant.
  • craigandkim over 2 years ago

    Thanks again.
    There does not seem to be much info or an entry for CBS/Sony Records Inc. 1st pressing plant @ Shizuoka,Tokyo, Japan.
    So if the release has the DIDP/DIDZ matrix, states Made in Japan, but doesn't reference CSR in any shape or form in the hub- which entity should we credit?
    Regards
  • craigandkim over 2 years ago

    craigandkim edited over 2 years ago
    earshot
    Only the first CD's manufactured (1982 and early 1983) had a hub text:
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC.


    IE: I re-checked one of my entries and hence updated -Toto - Toto IV to CBS/Sony Records Inc.
    Even though CSR is not mentioned, the manufacturer is stated "verbatim" which aligns with CBS/Sony Records Inc. - this should statement probably be added to the profile as well??
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    This discussion seems to have stagnated, should new profile/s be created for CSR? CSR COMPACT DISC?
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    I can only find releases with CSR, so it seems that should be the name.
  • earshot over 2 years ago

    jweijde
    I can only find releases with CSR, so it seems that should be the name.


    That is a search engine problem google finds 239 releases:
    https://www.google.com/search?q=%22CSR+COMPACT+DISC%22+site%3Awww.discogs.com&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    Maybe create both then to find out if it's some kind of 'legit' name change ?
  • earshot over 2 years ago

    AFAIK:
    The hub inscription has changed trough the years:
    only very early CD's 1982 and probably first part of 1983:
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC.
    1983 and 1984:
    CSR COMPACT DISC (3x)
    much later even up to the '90:
    CSR.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    Bumping this.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    Bumping again
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    I'd create both then.
  • earshot over 2 years ago

    jweijde
    I'd create both then.

    +1
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    What role should be given to the company credit for CSR? CBS/Sony Records Inc. mentions in bad English to "please used at 'Pressed by' !", is that based on anything? Or just go with Manufactured By?

    Agreed to create CSR (2) for those with CSR in hub?
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    It's either Pressed By or Glass Mastered At. I'd go for Pressed By.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jweijde
    It's either Pressed By or Glass Mastered At.


    What is that based on? This is why we ask, the profile states pressed by, but no backing given by anyone, now you say or glass mastered at, based on what information?
  • earshot over 2 years ago

    I think we should use manufactured by for releases with:
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC.
    and also for the ones with CSR because the CD is not only pressed by but the complete manufacturing process is done by CSR.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    earshot
    but the complete manufacturing process is done by CSR.


    Not quite, all under CSR (2) so far have another manufacturer mentioned
    Judas Priest = ジューダス・プリースト* - Hero, Hero = ヒーロー、ヒーロー - manufactured by Teichiku Records Co., Ltd.
    Emerson, Lake & Palmer = エマーソン・レイク&パーマー* - Love Beach = ラヴ・ビーチ - Manufactured By – MMG Inc.
    and so on
  • earshot over 2 years ago

    I meant the (compact) disc. A CD release can have more than one manufacturer, one for the disc, jewel case and artwork.
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    Sounds good.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    So we should change the Pressed By to Manufactured By role on the ones we already edited then?
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    So we should change the Pressed By to Manufactured By role on the ones we already edited then?
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    So we should change the Pressed By to Manufactured By role on the ones we already edited then?
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    So we should change the Pressed By to Manufactured By role on the ones we already edited then?
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    So we should change the Pressed By to Manufactured By role on the ones we already edited then?


    Really nobody care about this? Then we will leave those as is.
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    If there's no "manufactured by" mentioned in the matrix, then Pressed By should be ok.
  • jansenENjanssen over 2 years ago

    jweijde
    f there's no "manufactured by" mentioned in the matrix, then Pressed By should be ok.


    But why? We have seen it mentioned in several discussions about CD manufacturers that unless there is specific evidence a release was pressed by the company, to stick to the general terms like manufactured or made by instead.

    CBS/Sony Records Inc. would need an update to reflect all of this. We aren't going to touch it as none of the information added has had any proper references added in submission notes at all (vague comments like "source japanese wikipedia" is not a proper reference), as seems very common on discogs, though this is very much contra the guidelines to not give proper references in submission notes.
  • velove over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    But why? We have seen it mentioned in several discussions about CD manufacturers that unless there is specific evidence a release was pressed by the company, to stick to the general terms like manufactured or made by instead.

    it's a grey area without clear rules. so just do whatever feels fine ;)

    I've started using the less specific roles more often as I've found out that some companies weren't really pressing the cds.
    I also use manufactured by for www.some-url.com credits
  • jweijde over 2 years ago

    jansenENjanssen
    (vague comments like "source japanese wikipedia"


    It could ofcourse be better but atleast it is referring to a source, contrary to all other updates to that profile.
  • craigandkim about 1 year ago

    I think CSR is getting messy- now we have CSR Compact Discs. Regards
  • jweijde about 1 year ago

    CSR Compact Disc is fine, as long as that is the name mentioned in the matrix. It will get unneccessarily complicated if people have to enter CBS/Sony Records Inc.when it doesn't actually say that.
  • 4theLuvOvMusic about 1 year ago

    I was advise for post here on discussion I start https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/752935 , I copy what I say there:

    CSR Compact Discs was create https://www.discogs.com/release/9269644-3-Flute-Concertos/history?diff=2 incorrect because person make mistake is stamp as CSR COMPACT DISC in CD hubs on all release where is this company, create new page CSR Compact Disc for this in stead? Also, is allow to link for discogs list on company page site box?
  • 4theLuvOvMusic about 1 year ago

    create page for CSR Compact Disc in stead?
  • jweijde about 1 year ago

    Callout to seppuku, edovan, xjoxjox, earshot, velove and Colonycollapse23 and others: can draw this topic to a conclusion?

    To summarise the following can be found in the matrix area of Japanese CDs:
    CSR
    CSR COMPACT DISC
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC.

    The proposal is as follows:
    CSR = Pressed By - CSR (2)
    CSR Compact Disc = Pressed By - CSR Compact Disc (now incorrectly in the db as CSR Compact Discs)
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC. = Manufactured By - CBS/Sony Records Inc.

    Like to get some support to finish this one. Suggestions for improvement, if any are welcome.
  • velove about 1 year ago

    jweijde
    The proposal is as follows:
    CSR = Pressed By - CSR (2)
    CSR Compact Disc = Pressed By - CSR Compact Disc (now incorrectly in the db as CSR Compact Discs)
    MANUFACTURED BY CBS/SONY RECORDS INC. = Manufactured By - CBS/Sony Records Inc.

    Looks good
  • Colonycollapse23 about 1 year ago

    jweijde
    CSR = Pressed By - CSR (2)


    CSR (2) in use
    In agreement with changes
    +1
  • jweijde about 1 year ago

    Since there haven't been any counter arguments for over a week, I consider this one concluded .
  • craigandkim about 1 year ago

    craigandkim edited about 1 year ago
    Sounds good- lets run with it
    Suggest removing CSR Compact Discs and redirect to CSR Compact Disc
  • Yuu 10 months ago

    I saw this discussion just now, after looking around a bit, since one of my submissions had pressing plant changed. Just why has there been made different "manufacturers" just because of mould text variations? It was the same plant who made them all, and the legal name of of plant remained the same until 1991. Guys, it is mind boggling that you create chaos around for no reason. What has been done is completely unreasonable. If the point was that novice users cannot see why CSR is same thing as CBS/Sony Inc. (real name of pressing plant), you can just list it in plant notes that CDs from this plant came with slightly different mould text in different years.
  • MedozK 3 months ago

    MedozK edited 3 months ago
    Yuu
    I saw this discussion just now, after looking around a bit, since one of my submissions had pressing plant changed. Just why has there been made different "manufacturers" just because of mould text variations? It was the same plant who made them all, and the legal name of of plant remained the same until 1991. Guys, it is mind boggling that you create chaos around for no reason. What has been done is completely unreasonable. If the point was that novice users cannot see why CSR is same thing as CBS/Sony Inc. (real name of pressing plant), you can just list it in plant notes that CDs from this plant came with slightly different mould text in different years.


    Kind of agree. Are Columbia Records Pressing Plant, Pitman CD pressings now up for splitting, where some have CMU P## and others just have P ## pressed in the moulds?
  • jweijde 3 months ago

    Yuu
    create chaos around for no reason


    There is no chaos. There are three clearly defined entries.
    MedozK
    Are Columbia Records Pressing Plant, Pitman CD pressings now up for splitting

    That's a different pressing plant and not covered by this thread. If you feel it should be considered, create a new topic.
  • MedozK 3 months ago

    MedozK edited 3 months ago
    jweijde
    Yuucreate chaos around for no reason

    There is no chaos. There are three clearly defined entries.

    MedozKAre Columbia Records Pressing Plant, Pitman CD pressings now up for splitting
    That's a different pressing plant and not covered by this thread. If you feel it should be considered, create a new topic.

    Not needed, just illustrating the unnecessary addition of 3 separate versions of the same pressing plant. Really had no idea you could split a plant into 3 versions... even though the plant is the same...

    So serious questions aren’t these 2 additional ones added ANVs for CBS / Sony Records, Inc. Cause if we were talking artist, they would be.
  • Yuu 3 months ago

    jweijde
    There is no chaos. There are three clearly defined entries.

    Changes of mould text is definitely not a valid reason to have three redundant profiles for same pressing plant. Main profile of plant is CBS/Sony Inc. (that is proper name of a plant) and everything that they pressed in relevant timeframe should go there just like it did before someone decided, out of blue, to make separate profiles for mould text variations. Also it's against rules. Hence chaos.
  • jweijde 3 months ago

    jweijde edited 3 months ago
    Yuu
    Changes of mould text is definitely not a valid reason to have three redundant profiles for same pressing plant


    Changes in the mould text are regularly reason enough to create separate entries for releases, so I don't see what the big issue is if we do the same for plant profiles. The text and name used (= the branding) is clearly different.

    Yuu
    someone decided, out of blue, to make separate profiles for mould text variations


    Not really. There was a discussion and there was consensus.
    Yuu
    Also it's against rules.


    I wonder what 'rules'. The general practice on this site is to enter the names mentioned (= the branding) in the matrix. Hence why we have entries such as UNI (8) and www.takt.eu and do not change that to something like "Universal" or "TAKT". The guidelines also indicate we should enter data as closely to the release as possible.

Log In You must be logged in to post.