• U645177 over 4 years ago

    When a second variation of Matrix / Runout is added to an version of a release, should this second variant be Variant 1, or
    should they be marked Variant 1 and Variant 2. I have been conflicting advice on this subject
    The example I have in mind is Caravan - If I Could Do It All Over Again, I'd Do It All Over You.
    My considered view is that all valid variations should be numbered accordingly.

    What is the standard for this?
  • U645177 over 4 years ago

    Here as example where I added Variant 1 to an existing item, and was advised to relable as Variant 1 and Variant 2:
    Turin Brakes - Ether Song.
    I was advised:
    "If you look at how we deal with the addition of differing versions of matrix data across the website, you will see the the standard format is for the first version to be called variant 1, then 2, 3, and so on; so, we always make the first version Variant 1 when the next version is added. It has nothing to do with the dictionary definition of Variant. If you think about it, there is no standard original version of any matrix, as that would require the first version created at the factory to be the first one entered. Clearly the chances of that happening are pretty slim.So, all versions are Variants."
  • U645177 over 4 years ago

    So which is it?
  • Farjenk over 4 years ago

    When there is only one thing, there are zero variants.
    When another similar thing is discovered, there are two variants.
    There can not ever be just one variant.

    So, my vote is for always having every variant numbered including the initial entry. So Variant 1, Variant 2 etc...

    Edit: I suppose in a case where you can always be sure which "thing" is the original "thing", then perhaps you would only call the second "thing" a variant. But with CDs and LPs etc. it is often difficult to tell which came first, and therefore which would be the variant and which the original...
  • el_duro over 4 years ago

    Farjenk
    When there is only one thing, there are zero variants.
    When another similar thing is discovered, there are two variants.
    There can not ever be just one variant.

    So, my vote is for always having every variant numbered including the initial entry. So Variant 1, Variant 2 etc...


    +1
  • berothbr over 4 years ago

    Farjenk
    So, my vote is for always having every variant numbered including the initial entry. So Variant 1, Variant 2 etc...

    +1
    FWIW this has been discussed a bunch of times before too....
  • U645177 over 4 years ago

    Thanks, I am happy with the responses - this Forum item was just to confirm a discussion I had with a member who reversed exactly this change that I made when adding a second Variant.
  • cheebacheebakid over 4 years ago

    Farjenk
    So, my vote is for always having every variant numbered including the initial entry. So Variant 1, Variant 2 etc...

    +1 here as well
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    I take a different view.
    Variant defined is: A form or version of something that differs in some respect from other forms of the same thing or from a standard.

    My view is when a runout is placed initially, it then becomes the standard from which all other runouts are compared from that point.

    -1
  • baldorr over 3 years ago

    Beatlefan
    I take a different view.
    Variant defined is: A form or version of something that differs in some respect from other forms of the same thing or from a standard.

    My view is when a runout is placed initially, it then becomes the standard from which all other runouts are compared from that point.

    -1


    The flaw with this logic is that there is no "main" version that all others are variants of. It's solely based on whoever added their copy first. That's also why we don't move around variant numbers, since they are arbitrary and only related to when they were added to the database. It's not meant to indicate any sort of chronology on the matrix strings, just that there are slight differences between variants.
  • U645177 over 3 years ago

    For what it is worth, I agree with baldor - there may be a 'standard', i.e. first pressing, but it is just chance that this 'standard' version would be the first entered. And clearly the numeric data on CDs should be in ascending order of Variant, but nobody should be reworking Variants for this!
    The idea of the first Variant being any kind of 'standard'. Perhaps the technical Discog guys, who seem to be universally excellent, should decide this one way or the other!
  • U645177 over 3 years ago

    I meaant "The idea of the first Variant being any kind of 'standard' seems flawed to me."
    Please, Discogs make a decision on this!
  • typoman2 over 3 years ago

    U645177
    Please, Discogs make a decision on this!

    Don't hold your breath someone from staff comes in here and answers …
    If it's about "Discogs standards", well, you might get a pretty good impression about what scheme the majority of user actually use here:
    https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/707594
  • U645177 over 3 years ago

    Ho hum. Actually, I use this database to record what I have. If only ANY near version exists in the correct format, then I will pragmatically use that, using notes for me to know this! I will create a new item for any that I have that does not exist, but my life is too short to worry about the exact details of a CD that costs 1 or 2 GBP, or how Variants of items are handled. I have much more useful things to do with my life. It is difficult enough to clean, sleeve, protect, alphabetize, store and 'Discog' my existing LP collection, without spending hours NOT deciding how stuff should be entered to descibe all the details of a Discog item!
    SOMEONE, make a binding decision on this subject. PLEASE
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    -1
    baldorr
    BeatlefanI take a different view.
    Variant defined is: A form or version of something that differs in some respect from other forms of the same thing or from a standard.

    My view is when a runout is placed initially, it then becomes the standard from which all other runouts are compared from that point.

    -1

    The flaw with this logic is that there is no "main" version that all others are variants of. It's solely based on whoever added their copy first. That's also why we don't move around variant numbers, since they are arbitrary and only related to when they were added to the database. It's not meant to indicate any sort of chronology on the matrix strings, just that there are slight differences between variants.


    baldore, I agree, but I dont consider my logic as flawed logic.
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    I believe the real problem is that there is no guideline for this runout variant data input. If we were to start a definitive discussion with good concrete ideas and solutions, it might go a long way to help with data input in an orderly manner for the database.

    I propose something like this:

    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# QALQ
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 FHSY
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A variant 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89#
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B variant 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12

    Of course this is my personal preference, everyone has their preferences.

    Let's work from this and come up with a standard way of adding variants that we all can live with.

    Invite users to participate. Poke_Mode, Opdiner, mossinterest, Diognes_The_Fox, WhatCheer, Laurent-Bigot, CykoMF, DIFFO, Pe-Pe
  • mossinterest over 3 years ago

    Beatlefan
    I propose something like this:


    I agree, but the 'numbering' thing is not as important to me as separating the so-called 'variants' (which uaually don't belong) by the rest of the baoi. In other words, they should be added at the end, and leave the original, professional looking submission alone. Some of the ways these users add variants are ludicrous, and again, usually don't even belong to that pressing.
  • mossinterest over 3 years ago

    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# QALQ
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 FHSY
    Rights Society: BMI
    Price Code: 5098
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A variant 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89#
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B variant 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12
  • mossinterest over 3 years ago

    Many of the BAOI's are a complete eyesore, and I won't even try to decipher the mess.
  • mossinterest over 3 years ago

    BTW, we've had an ongoing discussion for awhile, initiated by nik, and picked up again by D_T_F
    https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/395045?utm_campaign=thread-notify&utm_medium=pm&page=2&utm_source=relationship#7561722
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    Farjenk
    There can not ever be just one variant.

    I support the motion that even the first set of runouts entered should be numbered. (Even if only after a 2nd set is added) This is perhaps why we should instead choose to use the more inclusive word "variation" over variant. Even a single runout 'variation' is open to the possibility that another one could exist. Maybe if we added a drop down for the description we'd get some standardization for it's use, Otherwise I don't see this happening.

    Numbered runouts would also make things easier to decipher and discuss later on when we discover 'set 3' was actually from a different pressing and should be moved to another sub. It would be really cool to have some way to link the runout #'d variation to the user who entered it, because some of them Beatles & Floyd records have 15 or more sets of runouts entered. And as mossinterest stated it is oftentimes an eyesore and hard to read. And oh boy, if you dare to try and clean it up you just swatted a hornets nest with a baseball bat.

    I do like Beatlefan's layout. It looks neat and tidy, easy to read although it lacks some description. (As in Stamped or Scribed) That last word 'Scribed' is also a major point of contention for many users. Some users use 'Etched' others 'Hand Written' etc. We really need these terms defined in the guidelines to end the silly edit wars over this stuff. For awhile I opt'd to use 'Scrawled' because it was more descriptive and neutral. I'm sure we could fill an entire thread on this topic alone.

    Another drawback is as mossinterest displayed (and this is a rather conservative one to say the least) is when the rights and price code info become sandwiched in the middle. That's sloppy, disorderly and should be corrected. Because of the potential for multiple runout sets, they should be listed last, plain and simple. Others feel the Rights should be the last item in the list.

    Is there some reason why the Rights Society information can not live in the LCCN with the labels, publishers and copyright holders info? It would make so much more sense to place this songwriters info with the other companies related to the song. Rather than stored with random codes and scrawlings taken from the manufacturing process.

    Something else to consider are other formats, Here is a CD I spotted recently: Green Day - Nimrod.
    It's actually laid out pretty well, each of the 4 variants however take up 3 lines for the different info which is in many cases duplicated across some of the entries. Also looks like the last 2 differ significantly from the first 2.

    Perhaps some was to physically separate (or group together) these variations would produce a better way to display them. I'm not very big into CD's but can easily see where this could be potentially important when things like disc rot become a factor. (This is already a consideration for older digital formats like Laser Discs)

    My $0.02...
    I'll tweak Moss's entry to make my point.

    Rights Society: BMI (This should go in the LCCN with the publisher info, IMO)
    Price Code: 5098
    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, scribed, variation 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# [Stamped: QALQ]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, scribed, variation 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 [Stamped: FHSY]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, scribed, variation 2): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# [Stamped: WXYZ]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, scribed, variation 2): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 [Stamped SRC logo]
  • WhatCheer over 3 years ago

    there definitely should be some guidelines for variants. i don't believe "Scribed" should be used, as it seems "Etched" and "Stamped" are the terms most used. also i believe each set should be numbered, not just after 1st set (if only one set of runout details is present, there's no need to label it as variant 1, but once a second set is added, the first should be altered to say variant 1...). also the term most used is "Variant" not "Variation". that's my 2cents.
  • cheebacheebakid over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    Numbered runouts would also make things easier to decipher and discuss later on when we discover 'set 3' was actually from a different pressing and should be moved to another sub.
    +1

    CykoMF
    It would be really cool to have some way to link the runout #'d variation to the user who entered it, because some of them Beatles & Floyd records have 15 or more sets of runouts entered.
    It's a PITA for heavily edited subs but at least it can be traced in the release history. I don't know if linking the runouts to users would be programmatically feasible. Users should be encouraged to include the variant they added in the submission note (e.g., I always note something like "runout variant 2 added, existing updated as variant 1" or "runout variant 4 added").

    CykoMF
    Is there some reason why the Rights Society information can not live in the LCCN with the labels, publishers and copyright holders info? It would make so much more sense to place this songwriters info with the other companies related to the song.
    +1 for this

    I'm more aligned to CykoMF's format though personally I think the commas are unnecessary and would suggest "var 1", "var 2", etc. to reduce character count in description and reduce wrap-arounds (also eliminate the "variation" vs "variant" semantic debate altogether).

    On the fence about including the description (Stamped: ) in the data field.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    cheebacheebakid
    I don't know if linking the runouts to users would be programmatically feasible.

    Maybe better would be some kind of a tick box option for owners/collectors to select which set(s) of posted runouts they own within a given release page. Then we could at least identify which sets would be verifiable. Suppose that doesn't do anything to generate revenue and would only cost to maintain, especially through a merge.

    cheebacheebakid
    I think the commas are unnecessary and would suggest "var 1", "var 2", etc. to reduce character count in description and reduce wrap-arounds (also eliminate the "variation" vs "variant" semantic debate altogether).


    +1, Excellent.
    I'd even vote to simplify things a tiny bit further, down to V1, V2, V3, if we could all agree on something like this.

    cheebacheebakid
    On the fence about including the description (Stamped: ) in the data field.


    I know it's not the most elegant solution but how else to apeas the requirement of keeping runout strings to a single line per side? It was decided the [brackets] were acceptable to separate information within a runout string, primarily for identifying pressing stamps. We'd also have to identify this bracket usage in the guidelines or they'll get misused for sure.

    WhatCheer
    i don't believe "Scribed" should be used, as it seems "Etched" and "Stamped" are the terms most used.


    Perhaps, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are correct.
    These definitions have been argued over for years.

    Stamped is pretty self evident, machine stamped seems redundant to me.
    Etching implies an erosive process involving acid or ??
    Scribed implies written, as by a scriber.
    Suppose the word 'Scratched' is more technically more accurate but that word carries a different meaning when dealing with records. (and CD's) I'd really rather avoid using that word.

    Additionally, some folks view the markings as they are found on the finished record, others focus on how the marking were placed on the original master plates. Where do we draw the line?

    What we need is a universally acceptable term for 'hand written verbiage' if such a thing exists.
    Any wordsmiths out there?
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    I could go with this format created by mossinterest
    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# QALQ
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 FHSY
    Rights Society: BMI
    Price Code: 5098
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A variant 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89#
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B variant 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12

    CykoMF's reminding us of the stamped and etched runouts is good to keep in mind. Although i would favor stamped and [etched] in the description field and using short but concise desriptions, ie variant, and etched. I also favor keeping the entire runout on one line, as best we can. We should concentrate on runouts, and not get bogged down with other BAOI issues. I have no suggestions for those long runouts.
    I am not in favor of modifying the original runout to add ie. (variant 1). But if we collectively decide that's the way it should be, I would abide by the decision.

    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, scribed, variation 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# [Stamped: QALQ]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, scribed, variation 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 [Stamped: FHSY]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, scribed, variation 2): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# [Stamped: WXYZ]
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, scribed, variation 2): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 [Stamped SRC logo]

    cheebacheebakid has a good point with the idea "Users should be encouraged to include the variant they added in the submission note"

    ynpguy, disneyfacts, gippy, TopCats45s, degm, sebfact
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    It could end up being problematic but I kinda like the V1, V2, V3 idea for variant or variation... could be construed as "version" or something else...
  • WhatCheer over 3 years ago

    let's not forget that the reason for this is to represent all variations of releases, not to have the text look good / professional. it's the data that's important. when a seller lists their copy and wants to be sure its details are represented in a listing, adding runout variants to the listing covers the copy they're selling, so having it be part of the listing itself is important. of course uniformity is important, but until there are definitive guidelines, there will continue to be many differences of opinion as to terminology, etc.
  • cheebacheebakid over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    Etching implies an erosive process involving acid or ??
    That's one definition, don't know why so many get hung up on it in particular. There's no acid in an Etch-A-Sketch, there's no acid involved when something's etched in your memory, etc. Plus it's also less characters than "scribe" which is always helpful.

    OED
    3 Cut or carve (a text or design) on a surface.
    ‘her initials were etched on the table flap’
    3.1 Mark (a surface) with a carved text or design.
    ‘a Pictish stone etched with mysterious designs’

    Cambridge
    to cut a pattern, picture, etc. into a smooth surface, especially on metal or glass, using acid or a sharp instrument

    Collins US
    1. If a line or pattern is etched into a surface, it is cut into the surface by means of acid or a sharp tool.

    Collins British
    3. to cut with or as if with a sharp implement
    he etched his name on the table

    CykoMF
    machine stamped seems redundant to me
    Me too, as does "hand-etched"
  • TopCats45s over 3 years ago

    Beatlefan
    I kinda like the V1, V2, V3 idea for variant

    Me too ^ and here's my two cents:

    Pressing ID, Rights, Whatever constant info on top
    Matrix / Runout (Label A): 66949
    Matrix / Runout (Label B): 66989
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, etched, variation 1): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# 1
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, etched, variation 1): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 2
    Matrix / Runout (Runout A, etched, variation 2): Y680A MF-A-66949-15B89# 3
    Matrix / Runout (Runout B, etched, variation 2): Y680B -66989-15A R972#12 4

    Another recent discussion pretty much unanimous regarding scribed/etched https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/762503
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    So... use stamped or etched, i'm good with that.
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    cheebacheebakid
    cheebacheebakid about 2 hours ago
    CykoMF
    Etching implies an erosive process involving acid or ??
    That's one definition, don't know why so many get hung up on it in particular.


    I think it's because the word 'Etched' having the dual meaning, adds to the confusion. Etching implys a totally different process here in the USA. Etched glass for instance, is never scratched with a sharp tool.
    The word 'Scribed' avoids that confusion but it does sound more like a verb, also sounds technical.
    The actual process is closer to engraving actually. Perhaps 'Carved' would be a better description with less confusion?

    Guess the only reason to give it much considerations is because not everyone here speaks English and we should be cognizant of avoiding confusion when things translate into other languages.

    I really don't have a strong opinion on either of the two most popular options, maybe just a little biased for Scribed but honestly it doesn't matter much to me, just wish we'd pick one and stick with it.

    What term would be used for a CD matrix? I rarely see any description used on CD's.
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    somewhatdistantghost came up with a good guideline wording for entering a baoi data:

    When entering BaOI Variants, please add the full group of codes (Matrix, Mastering SID code, Mould SID code), even if one or more of these codes is repeated in other Variant groups - redundancy is preferred when entering BaOI data.

    When adding a BaOI Variant group to a submission which had only one set of codes prior to the addition of the new Variant group, the existing set of codes becomes Variant 1, and each subsequent Variant group follows sequentially.

    Variant numbers must not be swapped or moved about once set, regardless of any sequence which may be suggested by Matrix data.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    That's really good. I like it.

    What about the placement of the descriptors? Shouldn't they also follow some form of structure?
    It would appear most of us already enter them as a location with descriptive text followed by modifiers.
    I.E. Side, Runout, Stamped, Variant #

    I just ran into this one: Magical Mystery Tour where they listed the Variant numbers first.
    If we evolved to the V1, V2 system, this could be advantageous for sorting.
  • sebfact over 3 years ago

    I agree to somewhatdistantghost's definition from further up.

    S, H or HS? Stamped, Hand-Etched or Hand-Etched Script was introduced over 6 years ago and has become the standard since then. However, I guess this could be changed to S = Stamped, E = Etched, ES = Etched Script (which I will propose here as well).

    Beatlefan
    Variant numbers must not be swapped or moved about once set, regardless of any sequence which may be suggested by Matrix data.
    +1
    What should be added: There's no ranking for variants - the variant number has no importance but to show how many variants there are in total.

    IMO, we should not use V1, V2 etc. but variation or variant, to avoid confusion with where V1 also appears in the matrix string.
  • andrenafulva over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    Etching implys a totally different process here in the USA. Etched glass for instance, is never scratched with a sharp tool.

    But see the dictionary definitions cited 5 posts up from yours; two of them from US dictionaries, both of which mention cutting with a sharp instrument as well as acid. You may not be familiar with 'etch' in this sense, but it is clearly part of the generally understood definition in the USA.

    sebfact
    Stamped, Hand-Etched or Hand-Etched Script was introduced over 6 years ago and has become the standard since then. However, I guess this could be changed to S = Stamped, E = Etched, ES = Etched Script

    I'm not sure what is the benefit in this change. I'm new to this particular thread, so would be grateful if someone could point me to the comment(s) where this was proposed and the reasoning behind it.

    Are there cases where runouts are etched by machine? Perhaps there are. I do think it is useful to have a clear distinction between type (machine lettering) and hand-writing (which is etched). This is the most easy thing for people to distinguish, and the most obvious characteristic of a runout string to look for. If we removed the word 'hand' from a descriptor denoting 'made by hand', I think we would end up with a lot more confusion among the larger part of the user base about which descriptor to use, what they mean when they are found in the description fields, and consequently more confused and less accurate data input.

    Forgive me if I've missed something obvious here.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    andrenafulva
    But see the dictionary definitions cited 5 posts

    This is what I was referring to when I said the definition have been argued on for years.
    Given enough time anyone can find a link to support their (or any) perspective.

    Here is a link to the 'official' dictionary that I was expected to use back in my school days:
    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etch?src=search-dict-box

    It mentions the acid process and delineating. How that for muddling the water? LOL
    As I stated, it's really not a problem for me, I'm adaptable.

    More interested in opinions from some Non-English speakers here.
    Which term translates the word for writing better?

    Script is something I've seen used a few times but have to admit it is not very common.
    I see a much higher occurrence of reversed and striked-thru text writing in runouts than script.
  • cheebacheebakid over 3 years ago

    sebfact
    we should not use V1, V2 etc. but variation or variant, to avoid confusion with where V1 also appears in the matrix string.
    This is why I proposed "var 1" as V1 can also be confusing for releases which use "Volume" as side indicators or where multidisc sets use "Volume" for headers.

    andrenafulva
    Are there cases where runouts are etched by machine?
    If there are, they would probably be laser etched, but seems unlikely to have a laser combined with a cutting lathe...
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    Please reference discussion https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/52550ef5d07b0969693effeb?page=1
    it's been going for 4 years ( I never knew )
    Cheers
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    cheebacheebakid
    This is why I proposed "var 1" as V1 can also be confusing for releases which use "Volume" as side indicators or where multidisc sets use "Volume" for headers.


    I fail to see how using V1, V2 etc in the description field would affect any of the information entered in the data string field. There are separators in place. Maybe on a 10+ disc sets where there might be a Side V, but thats got to be an extremely remote possibility.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    Here is a release I just tidy'd up using the proposed V1, V2 method.
    Please have a look and debate any concerns.
    Elvis* - Such A Night / Never Ending
  • andrenafulva over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    Please have a look and debate any concerns.

    My concern is that it is not clear what 'V1', 'V2', etc. means. You have removed 'variant' and replaced it with 'V', which is, in my opinion, a loss of useful information.

    I'm not sure why you have also removed the word 'side', as this is also useful information.

    'Runout side A, stamped' or 'Side A runout, stamped' is the accepted wording, and I think it is better than your 'Stamped in runout A'.

    I don't see any good reason for changing the wording as you have done. It brings no benefit that I can see.
  • Beatlefan over 3 years ago

    I like it better than "variant" (I pretty much despise that word when referring to runout data), my preference is V1, V2 at the end of the string. And I feel we don't need "side" it's immediately understood (by me).
    Im out the door... maybe more comment later.
  • baldorr over 3 years ago

    There is no need to preserve space here. I see no issue with writing out variant or variation.

    I also don't know why we wouldn't indicate the side, even if it's written in the matrix.

    Again, being explicit is far better than any abbreviation or code or something.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    andrenafulva
    My concern is that it is not clear what 'V1', 'V2', etc. means. You have removed 'variant' and replaced it with 'V', which is, in my opinion, a loss of useful information.


    baldorr
    I see no issue with writing out variant or variation.


    Some good points and a very fair argument. The submission guidelines could easily explain the 'V' which might also reduce the inherent confusion and frequent misuse of the currently accepted terms used.

    Variant implies there must be a source for comparison. (Then we get endless debating over which variant is the original, followed by number 1, number 2, etc.) Whereas the word variation is more inclusive but needs to be numbered with the original entry becoming number 1, and the subsequent versions following as number 2, 3 etc. (These get argued about all the time)

    V1, = Version 1, Variation 1, You can call it whatever the hell you want and it is still easy enough to figure out. Works for media with or without sids and automatically sorts itself visually. Especially when placed at the start of the BAOI description strings which follows the Matrix/Runout bit and prefaces the physical descriptions. (Stamped/Etched/Etc)

    andrenafulva
    I'm not sure why you have also removed the word 'side', as this is also useful information.


    Is the word 'Side' used in the tracklist or credit sections? No, it's typically just A or B and somehow we've managed to figure it out. If a submitter were holding a record in their hand and knows what the runout is, chances are extremely high they would be able to figure out the A vs B thing.

    For media without sides this isn't required so why is 'side' needed if A and B are adequate otherwise? The use of A and B in and of themselves imply that sides are involved. Would anyone here seriously become lost and disorientated over the simplified term "Stamped in runout B"?

    baldorr
    There is no need to preserve space here

    Here not so much but, some other more popular releases have far more data to interpret, I.E.:
    https://www.discogs.com/The-Beatles-The-Beatles/release/3212823
    https://www.discogs.com/Pink-Floyd-The-Dark-Side-Of-The-Moon/release/367104

    Perhaps mossinterest remembers the album we ran across with about 14 different sets of runout strings entered. While on the one hand I do appreciate the thoroughness of the submitters, many were incomplete and/or incorrect and that picks at the scab of another sore entirely.

    Please remember that any changes would affect more than just 45's or LP's so it's usually best to keep things simple as possible for better acceptance across the multitude of application.
  • andrenafulva over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    Here not so much but, some other more popular releases have far more data to interpret, I.E.:
    https://www.discogs.com/The-Beatles-The-Beatles/release/3212823
    https://www.discogs.com/Pink-Floyd-The-Dark-Side-Of-The-Moon/release/367104

    Using 'V' instead of 'variant' will not save any space in submissions, as each entry will still take 1 line. And it wouldn't make it any easier to read/find data; indeed, it would make it harder, as 'variant' is explicit and therefore requires no interpretation, which is not the case with 'V'. As long as each entry in BaOI on a submission is entered in an consistent format, it will be easy to scan multiple lines even containing a little bit more text (i.e. 'variant' and 'side').

    CykoMF
    Variant implies there must be a source for comparison.

    To the extent that this is true, it is just as true of 'V1, V2', as you yourself say:
    V1, = Version 1, Variation 1
    both of which imply a 'source for comparison' just as much as does 'variant'; and therefore, so does 'V'.

    In any case, the guidelines make it perfectly clear that the order of runout variants in submission imply no precedence as a reference to the first one in the list; they are entered in strict chronological order of submission, and shouldn't be swapped about after entry. There is no hierarchy among the variants, nor any reference back to the first source. Indeed, RSG §5.2.c refers to these different versions contained in one sub as 'variations'.

    CykoMF
    Please remember that any changes would affect more than just 45's or LP's so it's usually best to keep things simple as possible for better acceptance across the multitude of application.

    There will be no mass changes needed in using 'variant' and 'side' as these are the long-established forms in recording runout strings and are currently used in most submissions that contain runout entries. Your proposal to use 'V' and omit 'side' would indeed entail enormous numbers of edits across the database.

    I still see no benefit whatever in your proposals to use 'V' and omit 'side' from runout strings – indeed I see a minor deterioration in data usefulness – so I cannot support them.
  • cheebacheebakid over 3 years ago

    Beatlefan
    my preference is V1, V2 at the end of the string
    Yes, Discogs prefers bigendian with the "biggest" category first, then successively smaller categories. That's why we have:
    Artist - Title (instead of Title - Artist)
    YYYY-MM-DD (instead of DD-MM-YYY)
    A1, A2, B1, B2 (instead of 1A, 2A, 1B, 2B)

    So runout descriptions should follow as:
    [Side] [etched/stamped] [variant]

    andrenafulva
    as 'variant' is explicit and therefore requires no interpretation, which is not the case with 'V'
    That's why I suggested "var" as middle ground when description could use some truncation.
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    I can see the point, here is a release where they are actively employing that methodology.
    https://www.discogs.com/release/4786344-Let-It-Be/history?utm_campaign=release-update&utm_medium=pm&utm_source=relationship#latest

    Personally I see the 'Var #' bit getting lost in the jumble. But I guess it works.
    Anyone care to comment on it?
  • CykoMF over 3 years ago

    Hmm.. Not much opinion on that I guess. Well, OK.

    Here's another one that I have a question about:
    https://www.discogs.com/release/edit/160210

    Notice the entry in the BAOI:
    "stamped on both sides [variants 1 to 4]"

    I have seen some entry where this is not as simple, it might state: stamped [variants 1, 2 & 4] or something similar. Is this OK?
  • typoman2 over 3 years ago

    CykoMF
    I have seen some entry where this is not as simple, it might state: stamped [variants 1, 2 & 4] or something similar. Is this OK?

    Why not? As long as it's factual …

    1st version = Variant 1, no abbreviation needed we don't have a space problem AFAIK
  • Diognes_The_Fox over 3 years ago

    I am in favor of numbering the first set "Variant 1" once more than one set of matrix numbers are added.

Log In You must be logged in to post.