• Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    nik edited over 5 years ago
    It is with pleasure that we announce an update to the way Discogs catalogs companies. Previously, we had jammed companies into the 'Label' field as an interim solution. We have now developed the 'Label' field into a full 'Label and Company' field, using a drop-down to select the type of company. This includes series, record companies, copyright holders, publishers, studios, manufacturers etc - you can see the full list, with definitions, at http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-label-catalog.html#Label_And_Company_Definitions

    This system has been created after some discussion (ok, lots...) about the way to correctly catalog all the various entities involved in the release. It is intended that this will make submitting easier, as you don't have to worry about whether or not it is permitted to enter a certain entity - you can enter them all. It also means that we can start properly cataloging things like recordings that were made at Abbey Road Studios - another way to find music you may like.

    In terms of voting, we'd like to request that voters take a 'soft' approach to the use of the tags, especially in problematic or difficult examples. The most important thing is the link goes to the correct page. Only vote "Needs Minor Changes" at the most if an entity should be a series instead of a label, a record company instead of a licensee, etc. Sometimes, these things are not explicitly defined on the release, and we can't expect all submitters to be experts on such matters, or to spend a lot of time researching things.

    At the moment, these new tags will still point to pages with the URL http://www.discogs.com/label/ , and there will be references to 'Label'. We plan to continue to update things as we start to see data getting entered with the new tags.
  • consort over 5 years ago

    Label, Company, Catalog Number etc:
    nice one.
  • 1skinnylad over 5 years ago

    Fantastic. Might I suggest when we update our own collections to mention perhaps the ones that were cb4 in your edit update; a useful guide to other vet-checkers as to the veracity of prior edits. Bbut it would need to also be pored over carefully to ensure correctness in the application of the new fields.
  • mirva over 5 years ago

    One question: is it still required to repeat the catalog number for each entity?
  • Unint over 5 years ago

    Great to see this! Looking forward to seeing how it develops.
  • 1skinnylad over 5 years ago

    1skinnylad edited over 5 years ago
    btw @nik, I think perhaps you meant to link the word "here" at the end of your first paragraph to the webpage that more fully describes the whole new system, didn't you? (or perhaps it was intended to the Forum Topic in which this was discussed?)

    [EDIT}: Cool see v v next reference for this. Thanks.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago


    1skinnylad
    btw @nik, I think perhaps you meant to link the word "here" at the end of your first paragraph to the webpage that more fully describes the whole new system, didn't you? (or perhaps it was intended to the Forum Topic in which this was discussed?)


    Yeh i cut n pasted from here http://blog.discogs.com/

    link is http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-label-catalog.html#Label_And_Company_Definitions
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago


    mirva
    is it still required to repeat the catalog number for each entity?


    Only for labels, not for other entities.
  • mirva over 5 years ago

    Ok, thanks for quick reply.
  • djindio over 5 years ago

    nik
    Label And Companies Update - Now Live!

    wow
  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    Hang on, nik... I need a brief tutorial... so on this sub for example:
    http://www.discogs.com/Alabama-State-Troupers-Live-For-A-Moment/release/2528541
    I would delete the copyright line entered in the Notes, select a Copyright (c) tag, and make a new "AIM Trading Group Pty Ltd." database entry?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    ChampionJames
    I would delete the copyright line entered in the Notes, select a Copyright (c) tag, and make a new "AIM Trading Group Pty Ltd." database entry?


    You can leave the notes intact as they contain date information. But yes, go ahead and make the new entry for "AIM Trading Group Pty Ltd."

    Feels so wrong, it's got to be right :-)
  • asylum27 over 5 years ago

    fantastic. Thank you :)
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago

    Eureka! It works!
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Here is my pet example I just updated:

    http://www.discogs.com/release/57526

    Post yours!

    The devs are working on some tweaks. We can expect to be changing and improving things as we go, code, layout, guidelines, our own concepts. This is just the beginning...
  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    Thanks, nik, I'll give it a shot....

    nik
    Feels so wrong, it's got to be right :-)


    Will Discogs be providing therapists to help us through this transition...?
  • yuhann over 5 years ago

    Nice one!

    nik, if no data exists, is it required to enter "none", or do we leave the field blank?
  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    nik
    Here is my pet example I just updated:

    Why did you grant (C) and (P) to both entities? Seems from the notes that only Capitol got the phonographic, CEMA had the copyright...? Or do I miss a subtlety?
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    yuhann
    nik, if no data exists, is it required to enter "none", or do we leave the field blank?

    Yeah, this. When you say that you don't need a catalog # for non-labels or series (I think this is correct), then does that mean we don't even have to enter "none".?

    Cheers!

    Nice work by the way! :D
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    ChampionJames
    Will Discogs be providing therapists to help us through this transition...?


    No, this is the big bad world, sink or swim matey!

    yuhann
    if no data exists, is it required to enter "none", or do we leave the field blank?


    In which field?

    ChampionJames
    Why did you grant (C) and (P) to both entities? Seems from the notes that only Capitol got the phonographic, CEMA had the copyright...? Or do I miss a subtlety?


    On the back cover, both entities get (p) and (c).
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    DaveRowat
    When you say that you don't need a catalog # for non-labels or series (I think this is correct), then does that mean we don't even have to enter "none".?


    You don't need to enter anything.

    Feels weird, but it is going to work. also, the idea is to change how we enter cat#s anyway, move that to the Barcode And Other Identifiers section (Catalog Numbers, Barcodes, and other Identifiers... CAT#BAOI!)
  • psychonausea over 5 years ago

    Can the Labels+cat# be displayed in a column instead of a row?
    It might still look okay with one or two labels, but I'm afraid a release with three or more labels is going to look pretty messy.
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    nik
    You don't need to enter anything.

    Excellent, thanks!

    hmm, also, i noticed that the label on the first 3 I have updated have disappeared on the artist page: Fuck The Facts. I haven't removed the original label though, I only added recording studios. Is that by design?

  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Devs are working on a quick fix, cat# should be carried across to companies that are entered without a cat#, for example my pet release 2nd top at http://www.discogs.com/label/CEMA+Special+Markets should have the cat# attached. Also going to hide the hyphen.
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago

  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    Another question for you, nik... on this one
    http://www.discogs.com/Alabama-State-Troupers-The-Alabama-State-Troupers-Road-Show/release/2715684
    the label is "Elektra." The copyright holder is "Elektra Records." The database has a big warning on the "Elektra Records" page not to use it.
    What do I enter for the (C)? "Elektra", "Elektra Records," or make a new "Elektra Records (2)"?
  • mirva over 5 years ago

    Btw, updating the releases causes the label disappear in my Collection, and an additional comma is added after the catalog number.

    For example Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - The Little Mermaid (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) shows as:
    Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - The Little Mermaid ( - 6403N, )
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    DaveRowat
    i noticed that the label on the first 3 I have updated have disappeared on the artist page: Fuck The Facts. I haven't removed the original label though, I only added recording studios. Is that by design?


    Looks like a bug, I have let the devs know.

    psychonausea
    Can the Labels+cat# be displayed in a column instead of a row?
    It might still look okay with one or two labels, but I'm afraid a release with three or more labels is going to look pretty messy.


    We played about with that one. releases with a bunch of labels looked a mess in any case, it was horrible figuring out which cat# belonged to which label on Lotus (12) - Version 2.0, for example. Having them on the same line also compacts the display and lets us show different entities up there like series etc and keep the display clean. Of course, we will see how this all pans out and update as needed.
  • Unint over 5 years ago

    For compilations, if we enter copyright holders and publishers for every single track, would the only way to identify which tracks they belong to be to use the notes?

    Also, if, for example, a recording studio has the same name as an existing record label... still use (2) for the recording studio?
  • Luigi499 over 5 years ago

    Luigi499 edited over 5 years ago
    This seems like it's worth a try:
    http://www.discogs.com/release/2174403

    Edit:
    Looking at the master release of the above edited record, I can see that bthe label has disapeared from the listing:
    http://www.discogs.com/Rave-Tirolers-Uipy/master/233785
  • sanberg101 over 5 years ago

    How to enter "Recorded at their reh. studio with 2 trax" as seen here ?
    http://www.discogs.com/release/1908772
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago

    found a bug: Various - Halleluja... Halleluja (Berühmte Chöre)

    Deutsche Grammophon isn't mentioned as label no more on the release I updated in this MR.
  • zin over 5 years ago

    Just to double check - all "self-released" labels are still Labels ?
  • hmvh over 5 years ago

    What of ANVs, especially those that include the country, such as -
    Recorded at Abbey Road, London

    - are we to stick to "Abbey Road", and kill the London part, or use that as the full name, creating a myriad of weird ANV/PANs?

    There are lots of similar situations, especially with location-based entities.

    Otherwise, looks intriguing at first glance.
  • sanberg101 over 5 years ago

    and is it really needed to keep the same info twice in the "Companies etc" and "Notes" like here ?
    http://www.discogs.com/release/2174403
  • mawiles over 5 years ago

    What about name variations?
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    sanberg101
    How to enter "Recorded at their reh. studio with 2 trax" as seen here ?
    http://www.discogs.com/release/1908772

    Yeah, weird semi-unnamed studios. If we had a ANVish function, maybe Unholy Grave Rehersal Studio LNV "their reh. studio" ?

    I got one: What about for Live songs? Recorded At: "Underground, The" (some club in Quebec that probably doesn't exsist anymore. Is that ok? Or maybe it should be The Underground?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    ChampionJames
    http://www.discogs.com/Alabama-State-Troupers-The-Alabama-State-Troupers-Road-Show/release/2715684
    the label is "Elektra." The copyright holder is "Elektra Records." The database has a big warning on the "Elektra Records" page not to use it.
    What do I enter for the (C)? "Elektra", "Elektra Records," or make a new "Elektra Records (2)"?


    The concept is heavily 'as on release' for company names unless there is proof they are the same entity and we should therefore change the name so it appears on the same page (or ultimately use Name Variation).

    mirva
    updating the releases causes the label disappear in my Collection, and an additional comma is added after the catalog number.

    For example Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - The Little Mermaid shows as:
    Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - The Little Mermaid ( - 6403N, )


    Thanks, both bugs now noted and will be looked into, no ETA right now though.

    Unint
    For compilations, if we enter copyright holders and publishers for every single track, would the only way to identify which tracks they belong to be to use the notes?


    Ah, right. I think we need a clause in the guidelines stopping every entity to be entered for compilations, as it is just going to be very messy. So I'd avoid that right now.

    Unint
    Also, if, for example, a recording studio has the same name as an existing record label... still use (2) for the recording studio?


    Yes, use the same system, unless the rec studio and label are one and the same, in which case use the same entity. Eventually, entities that have multiple roles will be divided up like we divide artist credits.
  • asylum27 over 5 years ago

    Interesting result here:

    http://www.discogs.com/release/75547

    The copyright in this owned by the band - the artist - and yet we now have a company or entity called Kraftwerk. These are the same thing. I guess this is something we need to live with and a case where the lines between company and artist are blurred
  • Internaut over 5 years ago

    I love to be able to make profiles for entities like Grieghallen :-)
  • psychonausea over 5 years ago

    nik, in your update you have chosen not to add the 'manufactured by' data - please update as per labelscans ;-).
    If you would have, which entities would you have added? Capitol Records Inc., Capitol Industries Inc., or both?
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    Do we maybe need a Remastered At? Apologies if this was discussed in that other thread... I get all ADD when these kind of updates are out. I've got about 30 tabs open right now...
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    sanberg101
    How to enter "Recorded at their reh. studio with 2 trax" as seen here ?
    http://www.discogs.com/release/1908772


    Anything non-specific -> notes.

    Dr.SultanAszazin
    found a bug: Various - Halleluja... Halleluja (Berühmte Chöre)

    Deutsche Grammophon isn't mentioned as label no more on the release I updated in this MR.


    Thanks, same bug, is noted.

    zin
    Just to double check - all "self-released" labels are still Labels ?


    Not On Label Self Released can be continued for the moment yes.

    hmvh
    What of ANVs, especially those that include the country, such as -
    Recorded at Abbey Road, London

    - are we to stick to "Abbey Road", and kill the London part, or use that as the full name, creating a myriad of weird ANV/PANs?

    There are lots of similar situations, especially with location-based entities.


    No name variations, this is using the label system remember!

    Stick to the straightforward name, no locations. Locations in profile IMHO. Even with NV, I don't think we'd want locations unless part of the company name, would we?

    sanberg101
    and is it really needed to keep the same info twice in the "Companies etc" and "Notes" like here ?
    http://www.discogs.com/release/2174403


    Yes, it contains date info.

    mawiles
    What about name variations?


    Not at this time, later medium term hopefully.

    DaveRowat
    I got one: What about for Live songs? Recorded At: "Underground, The" (some club in Quebec that probably doesn't exsist anymore. Is that ok? Or maybe it should be The Underground?


    Yes, live venues we certainly want to catalog.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    asylum27
    The copyright in this owned by the band - the artist - and yet we now have a company or entity called Kraftwerk. These are the same thing. I guess this is something we need to live with and a case where the lines between company and artist are blurred


    Yes indeed.

    Artist / label / company merge anyone? That shouldn't be too complicated :-o

    psychonausea
    nik, in your update you have chosen not to add the 'manufactured by' data - please update as per labelscans ;-).
    If you would have, which entities would you have added? Capitol Records Inc., Capitol Industries Inc., or both?


    Don't know, was a quick n dirty update to see things working, too busy answering questions to do a neat job there!

    DaveRowat
    Do we maybe need a Remastered At? Apologies if this was discussed in that other thread... I get all ADD when these kind of updates are out. I've got about 30 tabs open right now...


    Only 30? Pff :-)

    Remastered At - just use Mastered at I think, Remastered is also a format description remember, better in there.
  • Luigi499 over 5 years ago

    Just wondering, shouldn't there be some kind of Company Name Variation?
    Look here: http://www.discogs.com/release/1926974
    Media Records Srl and Media Rec. Srl are the same company
    Or should we always add the complete company name?

    Edit:
    Just a thought, but wouldn't this be better?:
    Published By - Company 1, Company 2, Company 3

    Instead of:
    Published By - Company 1
    Published By - Company 2
    Published By - Company 3
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago


    Luigi499
    Just wondering, shouldn't there be some kind of Company Name Variation?
    Look here: http://www.discogs.com/release/1926974
    Media Records Srl and Media Rec. Srl are the same company
    Or should we always add the complete company name?


    If it is the same entity, use the adjusted name to fit it into the site. Name Variation would be cool for these, but that is for another day.
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago


    nik
    Artist / label / company merge anyone?

    why not? using the profile info to determine what is what is much more precise than choosing of a limited set of (2) choices.
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    nik
    Yes, live venues we certainly want to catalog.

    Ah, this pleases me. :)
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago


    nik
    Name Variation would be cool for these, but that is for another day.

    keep the variations in the notes, I'd say?
  • yuhann over 5 years ago


    yuhann
    if no data exists, is it required to enter "none", or do we leave the field blank?

    nik
    In which field?


    "Marketed By" & "Distributed By"

    Btw., I'm not sure whether the same entity should be used as "Label" also, since it is only credited for Marketing & Distribution duties - No other label showing up on release > http://iykeddononline.com/
  • 8m2stereo over 5 years ago

    8m2stereo edited over 5 years ago
    just in case anyone feels like cleanup,
    various of the 700+ profiles collected here needed cleanup of warning sign and profile updates:
    http://www.discogs.com/lists/recently-inspected-dead-end-artists-or-labels/12645

    & such entities as BMI, Gema, CBS Records Inc., NCB, ACUM, S.I.A.E.
    & many more as sabam, MCA Victor Inc., Decca Records

    i'm gone for today, will post an updated list tomorrow,
    & kill many of the entries on that list ..

    quite some will only be accessible via the dummy at first ..

    btw, GEMA will the need to live @ GEMA (6) ..
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Update has happened to pull in label cat# onto company pages when nothing is entered into the cat# field for the company. You need to do a blank update on any releases edited in the last hour to see this.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    yuhann
    yuhann
    if no data exists, is it required to enter "none", or do we leave the field blank?

    nik
    In which field?

    "Marketed By" & "Distributed By"


    For the catalog number fields belonging to these?

    4.7.2. A catalog number is required for every label entered. Where no catalog number exists, you must enter "none" into the catalog number field (note the lower case n). For other companies on the release you do not need to enter a catalog number unless there is one that relates directly to the company.

    http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-label-catalog.html#Catalog_Number
  • SickMF over 5 years ago

    Some quick thoughts:
    -> Why is it (c) (p), not the official © ℗ in the field titles?
    -> Arranging several companies that have the same role in one line, just like in the credit section, would make a more neat appearance IMO.
    -> A company mentioned in a (CD) matrix without any role is to be entered with "Manufactured By" as role?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    SickMF
    Why is it (c) (p), not the official © ℗ in the field titles?


    Compatibility, sometimes the special fonts are not available to a users machine.

    SickMF
    Arranging several companies that have the same role in one line, just like in the credit section, would make a more neat appearance IMO.


    yes, display issue only, we'll sand down the edges once the basic cabinet is hammered together :-)

    SickMF
    A company mentioned in a (CD) matrix without any role is to be entered with "Manufactured By" as role?


    Need to be discussed with the CD matrix experts.
  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    SickMF
    A company mentioned in a (CD) matrix without any role is to be entered with "Manufactured By" as role?

    Wouldn't it be Pressed By?
  • SickMF over 5 years ago

    SickMF edited over 5 years ago
    ChampionJames
    Wouldn't it be Pressed By?

    According to http://www.discogs.com/help/submission-guidelines-release-label-catalog.html#Label_And_Company_Definitions "Manufactured By" is the general role, the others apparently more specific / explicit ones.

    Edit: Just seeing "Manufactured By" is to be used as per explicit print as well. (The generality in the description refers to its use on releases, not in the DB). NVM.
  • DaveRowat over 5 years ago

    hehe, I'm coming across a few things which specifically say "no copyright"... would it be taking this function beyond it's indended use if I added Copyright (c) - No Copyright :)

    maybe we need a placeholder page for all of the "uncopyritten" items :)
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago


    ChampionJames
    Wouldn't it be Pressed By?

    Sure it can't be 'glass-mastered by' too?
    (I'm not sure at all!)
  • Eviltoastman over 5 years ago

    Great, but a query.

    Most modern albums are no longer made in one sitting and use multiple recording sessions at many recording facilities. How do we log what was recorded where as this doesn't just affect compilations.

    nik
    Compatibility, sometimes the special fonts are not available to a users machine.


    These are both standard on a windows character mapping. I'm pretty sure that macs have them too.
  • hmvh over 5 years ago


    nik
    Stick to the straightforward name, no locations. Locations in profile IMHO. Even with NV, I don't think we'd want locations unless part of the company name, would we?

    Excellent. Stamp of approval applied. RSG mention?

    Since locations are in as linked entities, how about about some for country of manufacture :)
  • 8m2stereo over 5 years ago

    printed by - Gebrüder Jänecke gets linked as "label" ?

    http://www.discogs.com/label/Gebr%C3%BCder+J%C3%A4necke

    Recorded At – Long Beach Civic Auditorium gets linked as "label" ?

    http://www.discogs.com/label/Long+Beach+Civic+Auditorium
  • yuhann over 5 years ago

    What to do with the following credit " Arranged at:" ?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Ok a fix has gone out for the labels not appearing on artist pages and Master Releases - please do a blank update to fix anything edited in the last hour, sorry for the inconvenience!
  • seek over 5 years ago

    nik
    Here is my pet example I just updated:
    Are the copyrights to remain in the Release Notes, too?
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=57526#latest
  • seek over 5 years ago

    I'd thought Capitol Inc wasn't to be used?
    http://www.discogs.com/label/Capitol+Records%2C+Inc.
  • thefoureyedfox over 5 years ago

    Why can't we just use that field to the right for copyright date info, instead of having to repeat the info twice?
    Example draft: http://www.discogs.com/release/3077970

    I imagine we could also use the same for publishing info (naming individual tracks for a compilation, for example).
  • 0frg over 5 years ago

    Can the series entity be used to group series of same-named compilations (generally numbered) such as for instance Rave Massacre, Rave Massacre Vol.II, Rave Massacre Vol. III... ?

    Does it matter if the compilation name is always written through a consistant artwork - would that qualify as a branding?

    Sorry if these questions have already been answered, I didn't follow all the pre-update discussions.
  • boogie666 over 5 years ago

    first bug (nik is already informed): http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/274065
  • eusebius over 5 years ago

    What about using the fields for descriptions as I've (boldly) done here?

    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1054942#latest

    Thanks
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Eviltoastman
    Most modern albums are no longer made in one sitting and use multiple recording sessions at many recording facilities. How do we log what was recorded where as this doesn't just affect compilations.


    That is ok IMHO. The exact tracks an entity is involved in can go in notes. This is a compromise for the moment.

    Eviltoastman
    These are both standard on a windows character mapping. I'm pretty sure that macs have them too.


    Some browsers gag on them, also mobile devices etc. We are just KISS for the moment, it can be updated later.

    hmvh
    RSG mention?


    Yes we can pick through the guidelines once the dust has settled!

    hmvh
    Since locations are in as linked entities, how about about some for country of manufacture :)


    Sorry, I don't understand. Getting late here!

    8m2stereo
    printed by - Gebrüder Jänecke gets linked as "label" ?

    http://www.discogs.com/label/Gebr%C3%BCder+J%C3%A4necke

    Recorded At – Long Beach Civic Auditorium gets linked as "label" ?

    http://www.discogs.com/label/Long+Beach+Civic+Auditorium


    nik
    At the moment, these new tags will still point to pages with the URL http://www.discogs.com/label/ , and there will be references to 'Label'. We plan to continue to update things as we start to see data getting entered with the new tags.

  • hmvh over 5 years ago


    seek
    I'd thought Capitol Inc wasn't to be used?
    http://www.discogs.com/label/Capitol+Records%2C+Inc.

    Not as label, but now valid as company. Looks right to me, profile probably needs an update.
  • 8m2stereo over 5 years ago

    seek
    I'd thought Capitol Inc wasn't to be used?

    quite some similar previously unused/"forbidden" pages will now be reactivated
    and need checks & updates then ..
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago

    just noticed, isn't it better to display the companies under the credits? I'd rather read the artist information first...

    (bug fix worked!)
  • maxxyme over 5 years ago

    nik
    Here is my pet example I just updated:

    http://www.discogs.com/release/57526

    Post yours!

    Nik, can you please explain me why you put each copyrights (c) & (p) for both companies?
    While in the notes it's written:
    ℗1977 Capitol Records, Inc.
    ©1993 CEMA Special Markets
  • asylum27 over 5 years ago


    hmvh
    Not as label, but now valid as company. Looks right to me, profile probably needs an update.


    Quick one done. It will need a more formal one added.
  • mirva over 5 years ago

    maxxyme
    Nik, can you please explain me why you put each copyrights (c) & (p) for both companies?

    nik
    On the back cover, both entities get (p) and (c).
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    yuhann
    What to do with the following credit " Arranged at:" ?


    To be honest, I don't know. I'm not sure why the place that something is arranged is important, unless there is a deeper credit that appears at face value here.

    seek
    Are the copyrights to remain in the Release Notes, too?
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=57526#latest


    Yes, it includes date information.

    seek
    I'd thought Capitol Inc wasn't to be used?
    http://www.discogs.com/label/Capitol+Records%2C+Inc.


    It's fine, http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/227529

    thefoureyedfox
    Why can't we just use that field to the right for copyright date info, instead of having to repeat the info twice?
    Example draft: http://www.discogs.com/release/3077970

    I imagine we could also use the same for publishing info (naming individual tracks for a compilation, for example).


    Because that is a catalog number field.

    0frg
    Can the series entity be used to group series of same-named compilations (generally numbered) such as for instance Rave Massacre, Rave Massacre Vol.II, Rave Massacre Vol. III... ?

    Does it matter if the compilation name is always written through a consistant artwork - would that qualify as a branding?


    I'd discuss that in adding & updating.

    The most common and sure way of knowing if something is a series is when the word 'series' appears in the name, for example, "The Silver Spotlight Series". The word can also appear on the back of the release, or externally on official websites or publications.

    Releases that are not a series include numbered or otherwise ordered works from 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.

    eusebius
    What about using the fields for descriptions as I've (boldly) done here?

    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1054942#latest


    No no please don't, that field is strictly catalog number only.
  • seek over 5 years ago


    hmvh
    Not as label, but now valid as company. Looks right to me, profile probably needs an update.
    Makes sense. Makes sense.

    And this?:
    seek
    Are the copyrights to remain in the Release Notes, too?
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=57526#latest

  • ChampionJames over 5 years ago

    maxxyme
    Nik, can you please explain me why you put each copyrights (c) & (p) for both companies?
    While in the notes it's written:
    ℗1977 Capitol Records, Inc.
    ©1993 CEMA Special Markets

    Asked and answered, above.
  • consort over 5 years ago

    What about - Mixed By xxx Studios, tracks 3 5 7 and 9?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Dr.SultanAszazin
    just noticed, isn't it better to display the companies under the credits? I'd rather read the artist information first...


    Maybe. Display issue -> can be tweaked later :-)

    maxxyme
    Nik, can you please explain me why you put each copyrights (c) & (p) for both companies?
    While in the notes it's written:
    ℗1977 Capitol Records, Inc.
    ©1993 CEMA Special Markets


    I refer the right honorable gentleman to the answer I gave previously -http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/274056?page=1#2966163
  • thefoureyedfox over 5 years ago

    nik
    No no please don't, that field is strictly catalog number only.


    Fair enough. I still think it's kinda stupid to have to show the into twice on the page. When I heard about this update I assumed that there would be a Description field (like for BAOI) for these kinds of things.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    consort
    What about - Mixed By xxx Studios, tracks 3 5 7 and 9?


    Tracks go in notes for now.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago


    thefoureyedfox
    Fair enough. I still think it's kinda stupid to have to show the into twice on the page. When I heard about this update I assumed that there would be a Description field (like for BAOI) for these kinds of things.


    Perhaps, yes.

    nik
    We can expect to be changing and improving things as we go, code, layout, guidelines, our own concepts. This is just the beginning...

  • zevulon over 5 years ago

    Remixed At - The sound studio where the music / audio was remixed
    Silly Q - should we enter
    Remixed At (A1)
    Remixed At (A2)

    etc.?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago


    zevulon
    Remixed At - The sound studio where the music / audio was remixed
    Silly Q - should we enter
    Remixed At (A1)
    Remixed At (A2)

    etc.?


    No, only entity name please, that info has to go in notes for now.
  • mirva over 5 years ago

    I ran into 'additional studios': Sonny Landreth - From The Reach

    Should I leave them to Notes, or what? It's not indicated what was done in those locations. Engineered at?
  • thefoureyedfox over 5 years ago

    With all that being said, I'm super-stoked about this addition to the process. It just needs some shaping up, and I'm sure we are capable of shaping it into something that'll work for everyone.
  • yuhann over 5 years ago

    "Replicated by" from CD matrix = Duplicated by ?
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    Revert bug fixed

    Collection extra comma fixed, this needs another blank edit to clear it, sorry!
  • Tokeowave over 5 years ago

    wow, let the games being!
  • maxxyme over 5 years ago

    nik
    I refer the right honorable gentleman to the answer I gave previously -http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/topic/274056?page=1#2966163

    Apologize, I missed that sentence.

    BTW, what about "Copyright Control" e.g. in Tiki (4) - Funki Fing?
  • lorangrecords over 5 years ago

    Biggest and best thing in Discogs history.
    THANKS.
  • Staff 2.6k

    nik over 5 years ago

    mirva
    I ran into 'additional studios': Sonny Landreth - From The Reach

    Should I leave them to Notes, or what? It's not indicated what was done in those locations. Engineered at?


    I'd use "Recorded At".

    yuhann
    "Replicated by" from CD matrix = Duplicated by ?


    Pressed By
  • Dr.SultanAszazin over 5 years ago


    maxxyme
    "Copyright Control"

    rights society (in the Barcode & others)
  • zevulon over 5 years ago

    Pressed By - The manufacturing plant that presses vinyl, CDs etc
    Do we use simply Damont (The name that appears in 99,9% of the cases)
    and the one "We" use here
    or the official Damont Audio Limited
    ?
  • seek over 5 years ago

    Still wondering...

    Are the copyrights to remain in the Release Notes, too?
    http://www.discogs.com/history?release=57526#latest

    Notes
    ℗1977 Capitol Records, Inc.
    ©1993 CEMA Special Markets
  • Tokeowave over 5 years ago

    nik
    http://www.discogs.com/release/57526


    Umm is there a reason © and ℗ can't appear when used? it looks icky like that.
  • hompahey over 5 years ago

    Nice development :)

    Just submitted this one:
    http://www.discogs.com/Daryl-Braithwaite-The-Horses/release/3077987
    and it looks ok,

    but on MR page:
    http://www.discogs.com/Daryl-Braithwaite-The-Horses/master/132566
    it shows in the cat# field:
    1991: Entered as year of Copyright
    A, B: Publisher specified by track

    Where is such info meant to be added, if not in the field right to them?

Log In You must be logged in to post.