• Registered: 2010-12-03

Topic: Recording relationships

How should I ling recordings that can't be merged but contains the same audio material, but with minor editing?

As far as I could find there is 3 possible relationships for the same audio material:
1. is the earliest release of (?can't be used since it's deprecated?) then why this relationship still exists?
2. is a remaster of (can't be used, since it's not a remaster)
3. has a karaoke version (can't be used, since it's the same audio with the same vocal parts)

the difference between recordings are: one is analoge other digital, several digital releases have gifferent editors.
Some of the relationships I can't find in MB:
* Edited By
* Transferred By (for example, analog tape to digital)

Is there any way I can link such recordings?

tnx :)

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

Re: Recording relationships

Edited is there (transferred isn't).

And 1) is still there because we can't remove a relationship until it has 0 uses, so we've been slowly removing them or merging the recordings, depending on what's appropriate. It was meant for stuff that was exactly the same, anyway, so it wouldn't apply to this case.

About how to link them though... I don't really know :/

  • Registered: 2010-12-03

Re: Recording relationships

so, there should be one more relationship, something like:
* is a edit of (this could even include radio edits and other major edits that is linked so far as remixes but it shouldn't, since remix means "altered and mixed together with other material to form a new track", but edits are cut, shortened, censored, digitalised etc edited versions of the same material)

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

Re: Recording relationships

I can't really disagree with that :) (but I also don't care enough about it to propose it myself - feel free to do so, though: http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Proposals )

  • Registered: 2010-12-03

Re: Recording relationships

done:

http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-151

  • Registered: 2010-12-03

Re: Recording relationships

How long will it take to close this ticket? Or there is even possibility that it will fail?

7 Reply by caller#6 (edited by caller#6 2012-09-15 15:06:34)

  • From: Oakland
  • Registered: 2009-04-07

Re: Recording relationships

salutaurs wrote:

How long will it take to close this ticket? Or there is even possibility that it will fail?

The proposal process requires somebody else to "second" or "+1" your proposal before it can move ahead.

Probably everybody is busy with other things. It's totally fine to bump the [mb-style] thread with a message like "Hey, can I get a +1? Or some feedback that would get me closer to a +1?".

edit: Personally, I'd prefer to see a proposed set of relationships rather than have them added one-at-a-time, so that it's easier to see how they're meant to fit together. I don't know if other people feel that way, and I don't want to derail your proposal. I'm just making an excuse for why I haven't had any input on [mb-style].

8 Reply by jesus2099 (edited by jesus2099 2012-09-16 15:26:21)

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

Re: Recording relationships

Anyway in the mean time your two recordings will be linked to same work. And you can dis ambiguity them with the comment. That's for preventing merges and also readability. :)

☞ 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