• Registered: 2011-09-15

Topic: Importing from Discogs

Having browsed the forums, I know this has been discussed before, but I've not been entirely satisfied with the answers. So...

Is there any possibility of making Discogs releases easier to import?

As discogs links are now added to individual releases it seems logical to create a tool that allows importing of data using just that link. Obviously data needs to be checked and verified with other sources, but as a starting point this would surely speed up the process.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but discogs must be the source of a significant proportion of release additions. I certainly use it as the starting point of most of my additions.

I know that creating such a tool would require a significant use of resources, and there are concerns as to 'where to stop' in relation to tools for individual databases, but discogs seems to be set apart insofar as it has it's own category it the 'relate to url' list, and for the above reason.

Another big concern in this area relates to the fear that such a tool would lead to 'lazy' editing. This brings up a more general issue in relation to MB. Although I see how such a tool could result in users importing lots of data without checking against other sources, would this really cause a big problem? I presume that anyone who bothers enough to contribute regularly is going to take a reasonable amount of care in checking their sources. And if some data is incorrect, surely this is the kind of thing that other users will notice and correct.

It's also worth noting that many additions, in general, are not verified at all before being added; at least I presume that is the case when my edits are added with no votes for or against. If this is happening then I don't see how such tools could be making things worse: It would just make the process faster at the input end.

I understand that the intention is for MB to be accurate, but surely a balance has to be struck between accuracy and expediency. Moreover, what I'm proposing it the same principle that operated at MB's outset, when the core of the data was imported from Free.db. If you can import from free.db then why not from discogs, which to my mind is far more accurate?

I suppose the general point I'm trying to make it that discogs is a sizeable and generally reliable database, so it should be easier to import releases from it. Although this could well increase the amount of incorrect data in MB, I think this is justified by the amount of time it would save.

Is there another side to this I'm not seeing?

  • Registered: 2011-06-06

Re: Importing from Discogs

It's super easy to import using the Discogs import Greasemonkey script:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/External_Re … ey_scripts


There's various other import scripts there as well.
I think this answers your question/ hopefully covers your needs?

  • From: Tartu, EE
  • Registered: 2010-11-24

Re: Importing from Discogs

If you use Chrome, that won't work, but let me know and I can send you a version that will.

  • From: Trois-Rivières, Canada
  • Registered: 2010-09-18

Re: Importing from Discogs

It works in Chrome using the Tampermonkey extension

Lotheric's Website

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

Thanks all, got the script to work with tamper monkey through Chrome! This was exactly the kind of script I was looking for.

I'm still surprised it's not mentioned anywhere in the MB documentation, AFIK. I imagine a lot of users would find it very helpful. Does anyone know why it's not obviously advertised?

  • From: Singapore
  • Registered: 2007-02-13

Re: Importing from Discogs

Probably because it's not guaranteed to be supported by the MB developers. GreaseMonkey scripts are fickle and unreliable. As soon as Discogs change their web page, it may stop working in weird and possibly hard-to-detect ways. Such scripts should only really be used by savvy users who know the danger are are careful to check their edits.

voiceinsideyou's Website

  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Importing from Discogs

And also discogs is not reliable source. Better use physical release or, to the most, discogs’ scans.

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

OK, I see what you mean. I've used it a bit today and it seems to work fine if you check the data.

Where does Discogs source data from that is unreliable? I would have though a large proportion of data on there is uploaded from physical mediums, just as you suggest.

  • From: Tartu, EE
  • Registered: 2010-11-24

Re: Importing from Discogs

It's by definition less reliable than first-hand data (i.e. having the disc in your hands) which is what he says. That being said, for a lot of stuff it is the second best alternative (as long as you correct their All In Caps Obsession).

  • Registered: 2008-04-25

Re: Importing from Discogs

Using the same logic, Musicbrainz is just as unreliable. Though I think Musicbrainz places more emphasis on peer review, in reality most of our data is never reviewed.

mfmeulenbelt's Website

  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Importing from Discogs

mfmeulenbelt wrote:

Using the same logic, Musicbrainz is just as unreliable. Though I think Musicbrainz places more emphasis on peer review, in reality most of our data is never reviewed.

If a wabsite gets first-hand and referenced info, it’s better than copying something that we don’t know if it was, Réo got me right. :)
Discogs and MB are indeed on same level of quality imo, based on some people adding info.
But one such site shouldn’t rely the other, it would be a probable chain of mistakes instead of checking each time from real stuff.

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

Yes, I see that it will always be less reliable to transfer from one user-input database to another. But then again, in the absence of physical mediums (digital releases etc.) are there any sources more reliable than Discogs, with the obvious exceptions of label/artist sites?

I know Amazon is often incorrect, I get the impression that Itunes is better, not sure about Wikipedia. Fan sites can be quite reliable, but not always easy to find.

In the absence of physical media I do try to find info on reliable sites. But doing so takes a lot of time, so if you have a lot of releases to input you do sometimes have to strike a balance. Of course, the goal for MB is 100% accuracy, but practically you have accept that getting releases into the database that are 90% correct/reliable does have some benefit, particularly in relation to tagging of files. It's a good starting point, and once you have the whole of an artist's discography in MB it's easier to go over and review everything against better sources.

I suppose it's a question of whether to work painstakingly on each individual piece of focus on getting the whole into a decent shape.

  • Registered: 2011-06-06

Re: Importing from Discogs

Discogs often has pretty full scans, and checking those is super-reliable imo.
Rateyourmusic.com has some pretty heavy peer-review requirements for information as well, so I trust it quite a lot too.
But Discogs is probably your best bet if you don't have your mitts on a physical copy.

Just please make sure you note where the information's from in edit notes. That way if someone does want to correct it, they can follow it up. It's cool to enter releases just to get info into the database, to perhaps be fixed up later, as long as the next person to look at it can see where it's come from. Otherwise it can get frustrating/ lead to duplicates or false merges. If you're unsure about something, note it.

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

I always link all the sources I use in the edit note. These are viewable in the edit history, correct?

  • Registered: 2008-04-25

Re: Importing from Discogs

They are. And I often check the edit history to get an idea of the reliability of the data.

mfmeulenbelt's Website

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

Do you know whether it's possible to check the data sources of releases on Discogs?

  • Registered: 2008-04-25

Re: Importing from Discogs

When you're logged in to Discogs, you can view a release's history ("Show history / Edit" on the right).

mfmeulenbelt's Website

18 Reply by jesus2099 (edited by jesus2099 2012-04-11 09:36:24)

  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Importing from Discogs

Lixobix wrote:

in the absence of physical mediums (digital releases etc.) are there any sources more reliable than Discogs, with the obvious exceptions of label/artist sites?

No need to input stuff without good reference. Better nothing than mistakes imo.


Lixobix wrote:

I know Amazon is often incorrect

So is discogs

aerozol wrote:

Discogs often has pretty full scans, and checking those is super-reliable imo.

Taht’s good (best) reference indeed !

mfmeulenbelt wrote:

When you're logged in to Discogs, you can view a release's history ("Show history / Edit" on the right).

Often empty of reference. :)

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website

  • From: Tartu, EE
  • Registered: 2010-11-24

Re: Importing from Discogs

jesus2099 wrote:
Lixobix wrote:

in the absence of physical mediums (digital releases etc.) are there any sources more reliable than Discogs, with the obvious exceptions of label/artist sites?

No need to input stuff without good reference. Better nothing than mistakes imo.

I only agree partially. I would like to be able to mark my non-in-hand imports as a lower quality from the beginning, but I do think more info with a small chance of mistakes beats less info, and discogs *tends* to be good. The problem is just the lack of a decent quality system to mark this.

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

jesus2099 wrote:
Lixobix wrote:

in the absence of physical mediums (digital releases etc.) are there any sources more reliable than Discogs, with the obvious exceptions of label/artist sites?

No need to input stuff without good reference. Better nothing than mistakes imo.

Which non-physical sources do you use, if any?

reosarevok wrote:

I only agree partially. I would like to be able to mark my non-in-hand imports as a lower quality from the beginning, but I do think more info with a small chance of mistakes beats less info, and discogs *tends* to be good. The problem is just the lack of a decent quality system to mark this.

I agree, perhaps there ought to be a system of 'grading' of release data according to sources. So physical mediums would be the best, followed by label/artist sites etc., then Discogs/Wikipedia etc. By putting an obvious indication of the data quality on the releases it would be much easier to see which areas need checking. I think Discogs has some kind of quality indicator.

The information is mostly there in release edits, I believe, so it would just be a case of evaluating it. I'm not a programmer so I've no idea whether that's difficult to do.

Additionally, putting a 'source' drop down box at the end of the edit process listing some commonly used sources could make such a process easier in future.

  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Importing from Discogs

Lixobix wrote:
jesus2099 wrote:
Lixobix wrote:

in the absence of physical mediums (digital releases etc.) are there any sources more reliable than Discogs, with the obvious exceptions of label/artist sites?

No need to input stuff without good reference. Better nothing than mistakes imo.

Which non-physical sources do you use, if any?

I edit my owned stuff 1st.
Then, for artists I’m interested in and really want to input something, I can usually use exclusively scans (like frant/back front/back front/back) or if none, I would have to use a combination of official website + label check + JAN check at least (never anonymous user wikis like discogs (only their scans) or MB-likes except for very old LP etc. but usually find scans :).

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

Thanks. I've always wondered whether there are any other sites that contain data input by labels etc. other than their own. A lot of labels/artists don't keep details of old releases on their own sites. But I imagine there must be some such sites, at least that are accessible to those working in the music industry. Soundscan perhaps? Would be nice if the public could view them...

  • From: Tartu, EE
  • Registered: 2010-11-24

Re: Importing from Discogs

We've been told by some label people that they use MusicBrainz, Discogs and the like to find info rather than their own data sometimes. So I wouldn't bet on their stuff not being shit.

  • Registered: 2011-09-15

Re: Importing from Discogs

reosarevok wrote:

We've been told by some label people that they use MusicBrainz, Discogs and the like to find info rather than their own data sometimes. So I wouldn't bet on their stuff not being shit.

...so it all comes full circle! I guess in some cases it will come down to an approximate consensus at best. Surprising that some labels aren't keeping such detailed records though.