• blumley 8 months ago

  • ikecarumba 8 months ago

    Click on Ambient (2)... this is what you get:
    Profile:
    Brian Eno's Ambient series. = it is not a series under the Editions EG's label.

    I also dispute the current title of Ambient 3 - which is totally different than the title that's printed on the spine, front cover and back cover of the jacket.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Regarding Series, it might be wise to take a quick look at the guidelines (RSG §4.6.2):
    "These will usually be a number of releases on one label, carrying a distinct extra branding indicating a series."

    I think the key word here is "usually".
    We shouldn't be shocked if there is a slight exception in this case.

    J
  • Clogwhistle 8 months ago

    Clogwhistle edited 7 months ago
    ikecarumba
    I also dispute the current title of Ambient 3 - which is totally different than the title that's printed on the spine, front cover and back cover of the jacket.

    I have read your comments in the Release History and your main point appears to be that Ambient #1 was not originally released on Editions EG. If I understand it correctly then it was originally released in the US on PVC and in the UK on the Polydor / EG label.
    Is this the label for the original US release? - https://img.discogs.com/LItBdrdNFRml-2lxbKUAbBMLPww=/fit-in/600x600/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-1109432-1491682529-4485.jpeg.jpg - It appears to be on PVC / EG.

    Allow me to show you my terrible image of the inner bag with Penguin Cafe Orchestra - The Penguin Cafe Orchestra Mini Album (I must get better images made) - https://img.discogs.com/UJgONd1Az2oyEh8qU175OH1pKf8=/fit-in/515x494/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-1999507-1438348542-4604.jpeg.jpg - the top four album covers are listed as "The AMBIENT Series" and below is listed "The Obscure Series." I suggest that as the Series is referred to as such by the Editions EG label then the Series tag is appropriate.
    As proof I'll scan the top part of the cover and I'll add a link here................(working).........done!
    https://img.discogs.com/HTBYwWXa2Va4ngcDvWu11Dn-qxs=/fit-in/300x300/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(40)/discogs-images/R-1999507-1541798151-2646.jpeg.jpg
    PS Hmm. Even my latest scan is a cruddy image. Can someone else do a better image, please? I can't be the only one with this inner bag.
  • hafler3o 8 months ago

    Clogwhistle
    the Series tag is appropriate.


    +1. Series.
  • ikecarumba 8 months ago

    Yes, Ambient 1 on the PVC label.

    No, my main point is that the series applies only to Brian Eno, as the popup states when you click on Ambient (2).

    Additionally, because Ambient 1 - which is obviously part of the Ambient "series" - is on a completely different label (PVC) the 'series' does not belong to either label.

    The term Series on a submission form refers to a "sub label" if you will. Like Vanguard Stereolab is a Series released by Vanguard Records.

    The term series as it relates to the four Ambient records refers to Eno's oeuvre. The term in that sense does not apply to the term as used in the submission form.

    That's my understanding anyway.
  • ikecarumba 8 months ago

    As for the fact that Ambient 1 was also released on the same Editions EG label doesn't mean the Ambience records are an EG series. Those records were released on at least two labels - Editions EG and PVC - maybe more, Polypro, Virgin... who knows? But it's not a series produced by any of the labels, it's simply a suite (or series) of albums produced by Brian Eno. Not to beat a dead horse, but there's no way "Ambient Series" refers to a record label, only to Eno's body of work, irrespective of label.
  • ikecarumba 8 months ago

    Just because Editions EG calls them a series, which implies the Ambient records are their 'series' doesn't mean it's objectively true. More of a marketing thing seems to me, they were not the first label to release those records either. If any of the various labels which released those records has a legitimate claim to ownership of the series, seems like it would be the original label only, and not Johnny-come-lately labels like Editions EG.
  • ikecarumba 8 months ago

    I have no idea, by the way, which label was first to release the Ambient series. Don't know if PVC was the original label to release those records in the U.S or not. Doesn't change my point. The Ambient records are definitely, literally, a series. Just Eno's series though. Not any particular label's series.
  • blumley 8 months ago

    Ok I've always personally viewed it as Eno's series anyway, the question is whether or not that matters in terms it being a valid use of series on Discogs
  • Myriad 8 months ago

    But isn't series for label/record company series, not a series of related albums as determined by the artist?
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Series does not have to be under a single label. To assert otherwise is false. The question, in my opinion, is very easily dismissed because ikecarumba insists it has to be under one label, and it doesn't.
    This meets all criteria of being a series.
    Guidelines support that. It isn't very vague.
    If an artist makes three releases under one label, and they are three of a series, and then the three releases are reissued under a different label, the three new ones are still part of the original series, assuming the series is named the same. Series is thus independent of label under some circumstances.

    J
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Another hypothetical example: A label announces releasing a series of three items.
    The label releases the first of the series, then the second of the series.
    Then the label changes hands and becomes a different label.
    The new label releases the third item of the series. It is released under a different label but it is still the third member of the original series.

    J
  • Myriad 8 months ago

    amoebasinger
    Regarding Series, it might be wise to take a quick look at the guidelines (RSG §4.6.2):
    "These will usually be a number of releases on one label, carrying a distinct extra branding indicating a series."

    Actually the guideline you're linking directly instructs us not to consider this a series:
    "Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered original works by an artist"

    Which is what this case falls under.
  • ultimathulerecords 8 months ago

    Definitely a series. But not exclusive to nor a sub-label of EG.
    A series can run across different labels.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Myriad
    "Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered original works by an artist"


    I have to disagree because the next statement following the examples conditions the statement you're quoting:
    "If the releases are connected in some manner, but have no branding on the releases, then [they*] are not considered a series... "
    This does have branding on the release.
    Beethoven's 1st Symphony
    Beethoven's 2nd Symphony, etc., do not.

    I came up with another hypothetical example which comes close to this problem:
    An artist announces a series of three releases.
    The first one is released on a UK label, and at the same time, on an associated US label.
    The second and third are only released on the UK label.
    All four releases are in the same series.

    J

    *typo in the Guidelines
  • blumley 8 months ago

    Myriad
    Actually the guideline you're linking directly instructs us not to consider this a series:
    "Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered original works by an artist"


    Interesting point, but when you look at the examples I believe this is to prevent albums or works being collated into a series when they are clearly not, as per the examples given, or perhaps Scott Walkers albums 1 through 4 for another example. Eno's series was clearly developed AS a series, Eno is not the sole artist and, whilst connected, it exists separately to his main catalogue.

    "Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered original works by an artist, for example, Led Zeppelin l / II / III / IV, Beethoven's Symphony No.1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 etc, Selected Ambient Works 85-92 and Selected Ambient Works Volume II"

    If you refer to the first para. in the series guideline:

    "A branded series of releases. These will usually be a number of releases on one label, carrying a distinct extra branding indicating a series."
    Bold text by me to add emphasis. 'Usually' implies not necessarily exclusively.

    "The most common and sure way of knowing if something is a series is when the word 'series' appears in the name."
    This is definitely the case here.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Before we completely abandon this inquiry, let's look at the question about the Title.
    Different problem, I would like to put it in a different thread:
    https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/780419

    J
  • Calle_jr 8 months ago

    Discogs series is a term establihed by the label and a marketing thing, not an artistic thing.
    I would never regard Enos series as a discogs series because it’s an artistic theme.
    Discogs series is rather a way to promote collecting and to combine cat# for a label.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Calle_jr
    Discogs series is a term establihed by the label and a marketing thing, not an artistic thing.
    I would never regard Enos series as a discogs series because it’s an artistic theme.
    Discogs series is rather a way to promote collecting and to combine cat# for a label.


    Hmm, not according to the guidelines, which has been quoted multiple times here.

    J
  • Myriad 8 months ago

    Calle_jr
    Discogs series is a term establihed by the label and a marketing thing, not an artistic thing.
    I would never regard Enos series as a discogs series because it’s an artistic theme.
    Discogs series is rather a way to promote collecting and to combine cat# for a label.

    Indeed and I even pointed out that the guideline itself states that artistic conceptual series should not be used for this role, which seems to have been selectively ignored by amoebasinger and others. I’m really not sure how that entire paragraph has been misunderstood and ignored by everyone in this thread.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    Myriad
    that entire paragraph has been misunderstood and ignored by everyone


    Guidelines
    Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered original works by an artist, for example, Led Zeppelin l / II / III / IV, Beethoven's Symphony No.1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 etc, Selected Ambient Works 85-92 and Selected Ambient Works Volume II. If the releases are connected in some manner, but have no branding on the releases, then are not considered a series - for example, Drexciya "Storms". Branding for an album and related set of singles, promos etc when the concept falls short of being a proper series, and isn't called one by the label, should not be treated as a series - for example, "Motown Remixed".


    Are to talking about this paragraph? I don't see how it was "ignored" because I brought it up myself. But if you're still mystified as to why it was "misunderstood," speaking for myself, it's because I'm dumb.

    But seriously folks, this paragraph merely applies to the many artists who choose to name their releases simply by numbers IN SERIES. Such as Bachman-Turner Overdrive II. It isn't the second of a series, though it has every similarity, it is simply their second release, that's all.

    This was also explained even more clearly by another user on this thread.

    J
  • hafler3o 8 months ago

    Myriad
    I’m really not sure how that entire paragraph has been misunderstood and ignored by everyone in this thread.

    ? No I think the existence of the series was ignored until the proofs were found. Ambient AND Obscure series releases as advertised. This is not like Led Zep I-IV or Peter Gabriel's 1st 4 releases.
  • Calle_jr 8 months ago

    hafler3o
    This is not like Led Zep I-IV or Peter Gabriel's 1st 4 releases.

    What about Mozart Horn Concertos? Or the Bach Cantatas? How are they different from the Eno series?
  • hafler3o 8 months ago

    Calle_jr
    ... What about Mozart Horn Concertos? Or the Bach Cantatas? How are they different from the Eno series?

    With nothing to look at what do I say? which specific items are you on about?
  • ultimathulerecords 8 months ago

    amoebasinger
    "If the releases are connected in some manner, but have no branding on the releases, then [they*] are not considered a series... "
    This does have branding on the release.


    I think you are missing the point.

    The Branding here is the word AMBIENT, and the uniform cover design.

    Also it is advertised on certain releases as so.

    Many series do not have logos.
  • Calle_jr 8 months ago

    hafler3o

    With nothing to look at what do I say? which specific items are you on about?

    They are general examples. Hundreds of composers made artistic suits or series that are recorded in full, in parts and mixed or not mixed with other material.
    Wagners Ring is also such a suite. And actually all symphonies, as mentioned in the guidelines.
    I think it’s wrong to regard these as series in the Discogs sense, unless they are marketed or expressed as such by the specific label.
  • hafler3o 8 months ago

    hafler3o edited 8 months ago
    Calle_jr
    They are general examples. Hundreds of composers made artistic suits or series ...

    Ok, so specifically we have a pair of series advertised as such (Ambient / Obscure) on inner sleeves. These releases cover a goodly number of different artists and share design elements for the covers. For me the facts

    the issuing label names them (poly-liners)
    the series is not all 'one artist' (so not a suite)
    the series covers follow two distinct design elements
    the artists have lots of other releases at and around that time that never appeared in these series. Eno / Budd's next album together is not in the Ambient series, but it sure is gorgeous ambient music!

    makes me believe the Ambient and Obscure series are Series by the Discogs definition. They are marketed and expressed as such. See clogwhistle's poly-liner sleeve marketing and branding.
  • ultimathulerecords 8 months ago

    ultimathulerecords edited 8 months ago
    Calle_jr
    What about Mozart Horn Concertos? Or the Bach Cantatas? How are they different from the Eno series?


    Someone also missing the point. AMBIENT is not an Eno series. He was merely the curator.

    You are mixing up Composition series with Label series. These are totally different things.
    A Composition series is like "Concerto No. 1" and "Concerto No. 2" etc., which applies to the works, not the release. The guideline about Composition series is not at all relevant here.
    A Label series is naming or branding that appears on the release and is not related to the release works or compositions.
  • Calle_jr 8 months ago

    hafler3o
    so specifically we have a pair of series advertised as such (Ambient / Obscure) on inner sleeves.


    ultimathulerecords
    AMBIENT is not an Eno series. He was merely the curator.


    Ok! Now I get it. Sorry. I agree these are series then.
  • ultimathulerecords 8 months ago

    So, does everyone get it now?

    1. Ambient is a series of 4 albums

    2. All these titles (and similar variants) are currently incorrect...
    Ambient 1 (Music For Airports)
    Ambient 2 (The Plateaux Of Mirror)
    Ambient 3 (Day Of Radiance)
    Ambient 4 (On Land)

    3. All should be titled...
    Music For Airports
    The Plateaux Of Mirror
    Day Of Radiance
    On Land
    ...with Ambient as the Series

    The same also apples to the Discreet Music and Fourth World Music.

    This also resolves amoebasinger's split-off thread (why he did that, I don't know) https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/780419
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    ultimathulerecords
    This also resolves amoebasinger's split-off thread (why he did that, I don't know)


    It's self-evident why I did it; also I explained it at around post 15: the series question is not the same as the title question.
    It could or could not be in a series.
    The result of that decision does not necessarily affect the title, no more so than any release in any series directly affects the title of that release. It's not a mystery.

    J
  • ultimathulerecords 8 months ago

    amoebasinger
    It's self-evident why I did it


    You explained. But I don't see the need. It could all be discussed in this one thread. Having two related threads about the same subject just complicates things.

    amoebasinger
    The result of that decision does not necessarily affect the title, no more so than any release in any series directly affects the title of that release. It's not a mystery.


    You seem to be talking in riddles, and making a big discussion out of something that's simple and obvious.
  • amoebasinger 8 months ago

    ultimathulerecords
    simple and obvious


    I'm not making a discussion. All the users are making a discussion.
    Though these issues are simple and obvious to you, they are not so obvious to everybody.
    This thread is a question whether Ambient (2) has any right to exist.
    A user said that Ambient (2) didn't fit the requirements to be a series.
    So, that's what this thread is about: whether Ambient (2) should remain a series or be eradicated.
    I started the other thread after this one was resolved.
    It refers to the second question about changing the titles of 100 or so releases.
    I am used to Internet fora where each thread has one topic.
    The Discogs forum can be a little loosey-goosey, but I think both questions are getting worked out.
    Remember, this is the series thread: Should Ambient (2) continue to exist as a series.
    The other thread is the titles thread: What should the titles be for all these similar releases.

    J
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    ultimathulerecords
    Calle_jrWhat about Mozart Horn Concertos? Or the Bach Cantatas? How are they different from the Eno series?

    Someone also missing the point. AMBIENT is not an Eno series. He was merely the curator.

    You are mixing up Composition series with Label series. These are totally different things.
    A Composition series is like "Concerto No. 1" and "Concerto No. 2" etc., which applies to the works, not the release. The guideline about Composition series is not at all relevant here.
    A Label series is naming or branding that appears on the release and is not related to the release works or compositions.


    I totally disagree.

    Eno planned and produced the Ambient series of records, NOT the EG label nor the other two labels which released Ambient series records.

    Brian Eno originated the concept of ambient music on his 1975 release Discreet Music,which was released on the Obscure label and he continued the concept on Ambient 1, which was released on the Polydor label.

    Ambient 2, 3 and 4 were released on the EG label but they are not a series planned or formulated by EG, all credit for the Ambient series of records goes to Brian Eno, no credit goes to Obscure, Polydor or EG.

    Also Ambient 3 is definitely a Laraaji album not an Eno album, even though it was produced by Eno. In the title, as it is listed on Discogs, Brian Eno should be credited as an artiist in my opinion, but not the main artist. Ambient 4 is still one of Eno's Ambient 'series' though, obviously.

    Please go to en.m.wikipedia.com or google Brian Eno discography.
  • stevefreeman 7 months ago

    Clogwhistle
    the Series tag is appropriate.

    Another +1

    ultimathulerecords
    3. All should be titled...
    Music For Airports
    The Plateaux Of Mirror
    Day Of Radiance
    On Land
    ...with Ambient as the Series

    +1
  • anagrama 7 months ago

    Patently a series. +1
  • ultimathulerecords 7 months ago

    ikecarumba
    I totally disagree.


    Well, you say you disagree, but then you agree.
    Then you start talking about labels in reference to each one. Labels are not tied to series (unless they are a label specific series that is).
    As I said before, it seems you are missing the point as to what a series comprises on Discogs.

    amoebasinger
    A user said that Ambient (2) didn't fit the requirements to be a series.
    So, that's what this thread is about: whether Ambient (2) should remain a series or be eradicated.
    I started the other thread after this one was resolved.
    It refers to the second question about changing the titles of 100 or so releases.
    I am used to Internet fora where each thread has one topic.


    Both the same subject, and as far as I can see, all but two here agrees that it is a series, and in the other thread agree as to what the titles are.

    ultimathulerecords
    All should be titled...
    Music For Airports
    The Plateaux Of Mirror
    Day Of Radiance
    On Land
    ...with Ambient as the Series


    +1

    (just for those that are counting)
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    Ambient 1, 2, 3 and 4 are obviously a series of records but they are not a 'series' put out by a particular label.

    The four Ambient records are a series put out by Brian Eno.

    A series put out by a label is different than a series put out by an artist.

    I just want to differentiate the two.

    It's my firm opinion that it's incorrect to list the 'series' as if it was formulated by a label.

    The Ambient series are part of Brian Eno's body of work and exist separately, independently from any label.

    Is it your position that the Ambient series is a product of a certain label? If that's your claim, please explain.

    I'm not disagreeing to be disagreeable, I'm just saying there are at least two ways of defining the term 'series' when it comes to records.

    I maintain that the Ambient series belongs to Eno, and not to any particular record label.
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    I agree completely that "labels are not tied to series" necessarily. 100%!
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    I agree completely that "labels are not tied to series' necessarily. 100%!

    My problem is listing it under the label category which implies that the series is the idea of the label and not the artist.
  • amoebasinger 7 months ago

    amoebasinger
    ...this is the series thread: Should Ambient (2) continue to exist as a series.
    The other thread is the titles thread: What should the titles be for all these similar releases.


    ultimathulerecords
    Both the same subject...


    I struggle to see how anyone believes that. It's apples and oranges.
    Whether Ambient (2) should continue to be recognized as a series on discogs does not affect the titles of any releases.
    The titles of any releases do not necessarily cause Ambient (2) to be a series or not.
    But if we must mix the two in one thread... I don't care.

    J
  • amoebasinger 7 months ago

    ikecarumba
    ... [L]isting it under the label category which implies that the series is the idea of the label...


    It's actually under the "Label, Company, Catalog Number, Etc." category, if that's any better.

    J
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    It's better to mention that Ambient 3 is the third release of the Ambient series in the submission notes.

    All the categories on the Label, Company, Catalog No., etc. list are concerned with the label, and only peripherally connected to the artist and his body of work.

    The Ambient series are not married to any label, so the records should not be entered on the label list as if they were connected.

    That's my whole beef at this point... the series is Eno's work, so his series should be credited to him and not to either of the two labels which released the serie (Island and EG Editions - PVC were a subsidiary label of EG apparently).

    Cordially with Respect,
    Ike
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    Should have typed:

    The Ambient series are not married to any label, so the records should not be entered on the label list as if they were connected to a label.
  • ikecarumba 7 months ago

    Of course each of the records IS connected to its label.

    Not all together as a series though, because neither of the two labels originated or produced the series. One label started it and the next label finished it. Neither label can lay claim to thinking it up, they only released and marketed the records.
  • _jules 7 months ago

    Ambient (2)
    Profile:
    Brian Eno's Ambient series.

    Artist Title (Format) Cat# Year
    Brian Eno Ambient 1 (Music For Airports) (Album) 55 versions 1 1978
    Harold Budd / Brian Eno Ambient 2 (The Plateaux Of Mirror) (Album) 32 versions 2 1980
    Laraaji Produced By Brian Eno Ambient 3 (Day Of Radiance) (Album) 21 versions 3 1980
    Brian Eno Ambient 4 (On Land) (Album) 43 versions 4 1982

    I see no label claiming marriageship on this series page.
    Surely everything's good and this thread can be marked [Resolved].
  • amoebasinger 7 months ago

    _jules
    I see no label claiming marriageship on this series page.
    Surely everything's good and this thread can be marked [Resolved].


    +1
    I think the original complaint was based on the belief that a series must be directly connected with a label, but it's been demonstrated several ways in this thread that there are exceptions. A series can be a couplethree different things and no harm will come of it.

    J
  • yuhann 2 months ago

    yuhann edited 2 months ago
    _jules
    Surely everything's good and this thread can be marked [Resolved]

    Well, perhaps not entirely. I think we still need to come to an agreement on how to title these four albums:

    ultimathulerecords
    1. Ambient is a series of 4 albums

    2. All these titles (and similar variants) are currently incorrect...
    Ambient 1 (Music For Airports)
    Ambient 2 (The Plateaux Of Mirror)
    Ambient 3 (Day Of Radiance)
    Ambient 4 (On Land)

    3. All should be titled...
    Music For Airports
    The Plateaux Of Mirror
    Day Of Radiance
    On Land
    ...with Ambient as the Series

    ... gets my support.
  • cheebacheebakid 2 months ago

    ultimathulerecords
    1. Ambient is a series of 4 albums

    2. All these titles (and similar variants) are currently incorrect...
    Ambient 1 (Music For Airports)
    Ambient 2 (The Plateaux Of Mirror)
    Ambient 3 (Day Of Radiance)
    Ambient 4 (On Land)

    3. All should be titled...
    Music For Airports
    The Plateaux Of Mirror
    Day Of Radiance
    On Land
    ...with Ambient as the Series
    Adding a +1, missed this thread first time around
  • hatfulofelt 2 months ago

    It's never too late, until it's too late.
  • Fauni-Gena 2 months ago

    ultimathulerecords
    Definitely a series. But not exclusive to nor a sub-label of EG.
    A series can run across different labels.

    I agree with this.
    ikecarumba
    Not all together as a series though, because neither of the two labels originated or produced the series. One label started it and the next label finished it. Neither label can lay claim to thinking it up, they only released and marketed the records.

    That really doesn't matter. האלבומים המקוריים (that's Hebrew for Original Albums) started out on NMC United but, at least for the first few years, included albums which still had NMC (2) and CBS branding. Later on it included releases on Hed-Arzi. it's still one series with identical series branding across all the labels. Another Israeli example (sorry, that's what I know best) is כמו פעם (Hebrew for Like Old Times) which incorporates releases on three different labels, all of which are now owned by the same company. Having said that, the label branding of the original releases is generally retained. Once again, series branding is consistent. It's one series on three labels.

Log In You must be logged in to post.