(i assume you have a physical disc + jewel case in front of you and are entering stuff based on that)
2007-04-04 09411, 2007
srotta
warp: Universal Music Group / Universal Music Oy.
2007-04-04 09424, 2007
warp
Oy?
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
srotta
Oy ~ Ltd.
2007-04-04 09440, 2007
warp
what's that?
2007-04-04 09452, 2007
mudcrow
> I sort of don't get why we the labels should be recorded so meticulously. Does it really matter what (country) subsidiary released the album, if they all are called (for example) Universal Music? - I agree
2007-04-04 09404, 2007
srotta
That's the Finnish daughter company of Universal Music Group.
2007-04-04 09412, 2007
Rondom has quit
2007-04-04 09431, 2007
warp
srotta: so shouldn't you add 'Universal Music Oy' and put your release under that?
2007-04-04 09453, 2007
srotta
warp: Ok, let's continue this.
2007-04-04 09408, 2007
srotta
warp: I have another record, by YUP.
2007-04-04 09425, 2007
srotta
It's published by Mercury Records / Universal Music Oy.
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
srotta
Where should I put that?
2007-04-04 09433, 2007
srotta
:P
2007-04-04 09453, 2007
warp
well, hard to say without more details :)
2007-04-04 09402, 2007
srotta
Ok, I'll open it up a bit more.
2007-04-04 09406, 2007
warp
does either of the own the copyright? has it been licensed to the other?
2007-04-04 09408, 2007
srotta
There's no "Mercury Finland".
2007-04-04 09425, 2007
srotta
Mercury is sublabel of Universal Music Group. The big one, not the Finnish one.
2007-04-04 09447, 2007
srotta
But because the band is Finnish, the publisher is still Universal Music Oy.
2007-04-04 09415, 2007
srotta
... Which, again, when using Universal label, says it's Universal Music Group, not Universal Music Oy.
2007-04-04 09436, 2007
srotta
Did I make that sound complex enough, or should I add some spices?-)
2007-04-04 09400, 2007
Shrike has quit
2007-04-04 09422, 2007
Shrike
Shrike has joined #MusicBrainz
2007-04-04 09407, 2007
srotta
So, the fact that the release is technically released by "Universal Music Oy" doesn't mean squat. That exists, because there has to be a legal entity in Finland if they have some business here.
2007-04-04 09416, 2007
warp
well, as a sidenote... Universal Music Oy is mentioned on those discs, and if we would conclude now that one of those releases should go under it, that label has a right to be in the DB as Universal Music Oy. not as something else like Universal Music Finland or whatever.
2007-04-04 09400, 2007
warp
srotta: it does mean a lot IMO, anyway.. can you answer the copyright question i asked earlier?
2007-04-04 09419, 2007
warp
srotta: what's the catalog # btw?
2007-04-04 09421, 2007
srotta
On the other hand, my guess is that if we go digging we'll find those Ltds, Gmbhs, ABs and other things from just about every record ever made.
2007-04-04 09447, 2007
srotta
But somehow I don't see them on label names.
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
srotta
warp: 985434-9
2007-04-04 09456, 2007
srotta
warp: Copyright Universal Music Oy.
2007-04-04 09445, 2007
mudcrow
a label is a brand name, I dont really see that the local company name has much to do with the brand name. Universal Music is the brand/label/inprint
2007-04-04 09410, 2007
srotta
mudcrow: Exactly my point.
2007-04-04 09417, 2007
warp
that 985 number looks like a Universal Music Oy catalog number, not a mercury number. for me a strong indication it should go under UM Oy.
2007-04-04 09440, 2007
srotta
warp: Sorry, that was for the Universal Music Oy release. I'll try again with the Mercury one 8)
luks: i was about to ask him of the multiple languages on those
2007-04-04 09459, 2007
juhae
one of the many artists in my subscription list..
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
luks
he probably just didn't find czech in the short list
2007-04-04 09424, 2007
luks
it happens a lot for czech/slovak releases
2007-04-04 09442, 2007
luks
then end up either without language or with multiple languages
2007-04-04 09445, 2007
luks
they
2007-04-04 09456, 2007
srotta
Mudcrow's Caroline / Real World Records answer on the forums sort of extends this problem into catalog numbers.
2007-04-04 09426, 2007
intgr
luks: What's "invalid new backstep"?
2007-04-04 09433, 2007
luks
huh?
2007-04-04 09436, 2007
luks
where?
2007-04-04 09448, 2007
intgr
Picard's spewing that out all the time while fingerprinting.
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
srotta
I don't know what we're trying to record here. I think the "brand names", as mudcrow put it, are more meaningful than the legal entities behind them.
2007-04-04 09411, 2007
luks
that's probably a error message/warning from ffmpeg
2007-04-04 09402, 2007
AMurderofCrows joined the channel
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
srotta
Yeah, it's interesting to know the relationships between different labels, but I don't see the relevance of particular country subsidiaries.
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
Shrike
Shrike has joined #MusicBrainz
2007-04-04 09425, 2007
warp
srotta: i can see the 'brand names' thing as a valid point, but not strong enough to seperate the catalog id from the entity which determines what the catalog id is for a particular release.
2007-04-04 09428, 2007
srotta
And if I mark those YUP recordings as "Universal Music Oy", it's definitely wrong, since they are so plainly released under Mercury label.
2007-04-04 09444, 2007
intgr
luks: Harmless?
2007-04-04 09450, 2007
luks
most likely
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
warp
srotta: i guess we need to record both,.. in some fashion :S
2007-04-04 09422, 2007
warp
srotta: i'll have a look at the forum thread, thanks for pointing that out.
And then there's a compilation by Veeti & The Velvets.
2007-04-04 09457, 2007
srotta
The backcover mentions Seal on Velvet, Capitol and EMI.
2007-04-04 09449, 2007
srotta
Seal on Velvet is a sublabel of Poko Records. Which was bought by EMI.
2007-04-04 09440, 2007
srotta
So now we have four labels to pick from. And of course there's the big bad EMI Music Group behind the EMI Finland... Which, I'd guess, has more to do with Capitol Records than the local EMI Finland.
2007-04-04 09424, 2007
AMurderofCrows
how is it worded?
2007-04-04 09404, 2007
srotta
Well... :P
2007-04-04 09417, 2007
warp
EMI isn't bad!
2007-04-04 09439, 2007
warp
(well, they are ofcourse,.. but considering their announcement last monday, i'll defend them for a few days ;)
"In co-operation with Seal on Velvet" - which, I guess, was the label those tracks were originally released on) - then there's the Capitol Records logo, and the copyright is for EMI Music Finland.
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
AMurderofCrows
could be a joint release between Seal & Capitol
2007-04-04 09435, 2007
juhae
srotta: what album are you talking about?
2007-04-04 09413, 2007
srotta
juhae: Pick your choice. Most recently "All About Veeti & The Velvets".
2007-04-04 09423, 2007
The3_14ed|r has left the channel
2007-04-04 09437, 2007
aCiD2 has quit
2007-04-04 09408, 2007
warp
srotta: replied on the thread.
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
mudcrow has quit
2007-04-04 09450, 2007
srotta
warp: Ok.
2007-04-04 09414, 2007
Muz_ has quit
2007-04-04 09420, 2007
cooperaa
gotta love all the labels discussion going on these days :)
2007-04-04 09430, 2007
warp
cooperaa: haha, yeah.. what a mess :)
2007-04-04 09443, 2007
cooperaa
I think we're doing pretty well
2007-04-04 09448, 2007
srotta
Let's just remove them and be done with it.
2007-04-04 09451, 2007
cooperaa
hahaha
2007-04-04 09457, 2007
aCiD2 joined the channel
2007-04-04 09404, 2007
srotta
I'm leaning towards not adding any, since right now this make no sense whatsoever :P
2007-04-04 09414, 2007
warp
cooperaa: well... i think it takes a while before every agrees on all the details.
2007-04-04 09419, 2007
AMurderofCrows
nothing unexpected. the same questions are raised in discogs all the time
2007-04-04 09427, 2007
warp
s/every/everyone/
2007-04-04 09442, 2007
srotta
Even the damn wiki page is something you have to read twelve times to get your mind around it.
2007-04-04 09450, 2007
srotta
Doesn't make it any more sensible, though.
2007-04-04 09411, 2007
cooperaa
I still don't know how to categorize all the labels, so I just fill in their names, country, dates :)
2007-04-04 09452, 2007
AMurderofCrows
if its releasing original material its production
2007-04-04 09408, 2007
cooperaa
but there's original production underneath that
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
srotta
But, I'll quote the damn page anyway: "At that time, we don't think we should keep track of companies involved in the other aspects of the music industry (PR...), get into too much financial details, or try to represent exactly the socio-economic organization of labels."
2007-04-04 09420, 2007
srotta
And that's exactly what we're, IMO, doing now.
2007-04-04 09458, 2007
warp
srotta: haha, no way :)
2007-04-04 09429, 2007
srotta
Well, if we're losing information about the actual label to add information about the (in my opinion insignificant) local office that decides the Cat#, then there's something wrong.
2007-04-04 09400, 2007
srotta
And no, I'm not about to add anything on Universal Music Oy, I think it's just plain wrong :P
2007-04-04 09440, 2007
aCiD2 has quit
2007-04-04 09427, 2007
cooperaa
srotta: I don't know what kind of label edits you've been making, but all of mine have been adding more information (cat#, label, barcode, media)
2007-04-04 09410, 2007
cooperaa
...things that weren' there before
2007-04-04 09422, 2007
AMurderofCrows
its working out the actual label from all the buff that record companies put on releases nowadays is the problem
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
cooperaa
yea that's the hard part
2007-04-04 09438, 2007
srotta
cooperaa: Of course it adds some information. The point was, what is the label.
2007-04-04 09407, 2007
cooperaa
for all intents and purposes, what ever comes after "(c)1998.." is the label for me
2007-04-04 09426, 2007
srotta
As I said, I have a release in front of me that has a pretty good case of choosing one out of four record companies. Should I just toss the coin?
2007-04-04 09427, 2007
cooperaa
then it will say "distributed by x" and so I link x to the label as a distributor
2007-04-04 09440, 2007
AMurderofCrows
no thats the copyright owner, doesnt have to be anything to do with the label that released it
2007-04-04 09444, 2007
cooperaa
well, not everything is that simple
2007-04-04 09409, 2007
cooperaa
srotta: does it have more than one catalog number?
2007-04-04 09424, 2007
srotta
cooperaa: Derek and the Dominos' "Layla etc." has copyright by PolyGram for 1970. The disc was released in 1996 by Polydor.
2007-04-04 09402, 2007
srotta
cooperaa: Nope, just single one.
2007-04-04 09412, 2007
cooperaa
what label does the catalog # correspond to?
2007-04-04 09423, 2007
yllona joined the channel
2007-04-04 09424, 2007
srotta
Where do I see that?
2007-04-04 09431, 2007
srotta
And more to the point, should I care?
2007-04-04 09433, 2007
cooperaa
the label pages?
2007-04-04 09436, 2007
cooperaa
yes
2007-04-04 09446, 2007
srotta
All the labels are subsidiaries of EMI.
2007-04-04 09449, 2007
cooperaa
because you can possibly tell which label to sort it under by the catalog #
2007-04-04 09459, 2007
srotta
All point to single page.
2007-04-04 09402, 2007
srotta
:P
2007-04-04 09450, 2007
cooperaa
boooo
2007-04-04 09400, 2007
srotta
My guess would be that they use the same label code scheme, no matter what the label they're using to publish the record.
2007-04-04 09414, 2007
Muz_ joined the channel
2007-04-04 09433, 2007
cooperaa
yllona knows a lot and might be able to help out here :)
2007-04-04 09434, 2007
srotta
Ok, Poko Records has its own pages and labeling. It's also the only one that's not mentioned in the actual disc.
2007-04-04 09438, 2007
srotta
8)
2007-04-04 09454, 2007
yllona
srotta: correct. labe/catalog numbering schemes, are very similar (within a decade, for instance). AFAIK, there is no published "standard"
2007-04-04 09427, 2007
Muz_ has quit
2007-04-04 09432, 2007
yllona
remember a decade (for instance) might include multiple media formats -- LP (vinyl), Cassette, 8-track, and compact disc (CD)
2007-04-04 09429, 2007
srotta
Yeah.
2007-04-04 09429, 2007
yllona
for the young'uns, you'll have to deal with re-issues on CD, which due to the mergers among the labels, may have concatenated/conflated label/catalog numbers
allmusic.com (AMG) isn't always accurate (for old folks like me), but it's a good starting point for research
2007-04-04 09408, 2007
srotta
The one release I'm holding has three label names on it, and one of them was a subsidiary of a fourth one. Which was Poko, the only one with distinguishing label codes. EMI uses just UPC of part of it as Cat#.
2007-04-04 09419, 2007
yllona
wikipedia can be grossly inaccurate, sometimes a complete waste of time....
2007-04-04 09435, 2007
yllona
srotta: i don't know that "imprint" (or the band it applies to)... i've got a few minutes -- it's lunchtime. send me a link
2007-04-04 09407, 2007
srotta
And yeah, I have (Finnish) albums that are released at least under EMI, Herodes and Capitol labels (that Seal on Velvet is still waiting for the jury) - and they all have the same Cat# scheme.
