it lists all artists and tracks separately and not the thing being 1 long mix with a cue list or something
2007-08-10 22201, 2007
deadchip
that thing has been VA forever o_O
2007-08-10 22206, 2007
deadchip
(well, since earliy 1999 ;)
2007-08-10 22228, 2007
deadchip
Kerensky97: there is also already an AR to Timecode being the remix DJ
2007-08-10 22238, 2007
deadchip
both together is kinda pointless to add to the previous issue
2007-08-10 22226, 2007
drsaunde
deadchip: was away...one sec and i'll check
2007-08-10 22251, 2007
trollomat has quit
2007-08-10 22256, 2007
drsaunde
deadchip: because Timecode is the release artist on both the cover and spine
2007-08-10 22235, 2007
deadchip
umm
2007-08-10 22252, 2007
deadchip
well i have the disc, i know that
2007-08-10 22213, 2007
deadchip
but it can not be sensibly argued that this is a work done by Timecode
2007-08-10 22220, 2007
deadchip
i mean, the terminology is getting vague here now
2007-08-10 22226, 2007
deadchip
but it's not an _art_work by Timecode
2007-08-10 22240, 2007
deadchip
he did a little crossfading on the tracks yeah
2007-08-10 22212, 2007
drsaunde
well..I only usually credit the DJ mixer as an album artist if they are credited as such on both the cover and spine
2007-08-10 22233, 2007
drsaunde
and in that case I think they should always be the release artist
2007-08-10 22254, 2007
drsaunde
but this example is a little different with the crediting of E-Z rollers for the disc 2 as well
2007-08-10 22219, 2007
drsaunde
technically to be correct you need to change the release artist of disc 2 to various artists as well
2007-08-10 22218, 2007
deadchip
well
2007-08-10 22231, 2007
deadchip
actually i would change the release artist for _both_ discs to Moving Shadow
2007-08-10 22239, 2007
deadchip
simply because this thing is a promo
2007-08-10 22254, 2007
drsaunde
moving shadow is a label not an aritist
2007-08-10 22206, 2007
deadchip
i know that this isn't normal practice and probably to make it sane there would be something needed to be estblished to allow labels to be direct release artists
2007-08-10 22211, 2007
deadchip
drsaunde: i know, and ^
2007-08-10 22238, 2007
deadchip
for a promo/showcase of their artists, the label can be for most purposes seen as the release artist
2007-08-10 22251, 2007
deadchip
that this is an -entirely- different matter on how to represent this on MB is, well, another matter
2007-08-10 22254, 2007
drsaunde
ok...i see your point...but as of right now that wouldn't be a good idea to create a label as an artists
2007-08-10 22258, 2007
deadchip
i was just talking about how it naturally is
2007-08-10 22207, 2007
deadchip
yeah i wouldn't do that yet
2007-08-10 22216, 2007
deadchip
more like, once labels get firmly into the new server
2007-08-10 22224, 2007
deadchip
then it could be thought about this
2007-08-10 22224, 2007
drsaunde
cool...so will you switch disc 2 to VA as well?
2007-08-10 22228, 2007
deadchip
maybe even a release class of "Promo"
2007-08-10 22239, 2007
drsaunde
(but keeping E-Z rollers as track artist)
2007-08-10 22259, 2007
deadchip
well, heh, actually i would switch it to hrm ok nvm that
2007-08-10 22207, 2007
deadchip
drsaunde: on disc2 all tracks are by e-z rollers
2007-08-10 22217, 2007
drsaunde
but the release as a whole is VA
2007-08-10 22218, 2007
deadchip
maybe i'm seeing it too simplicistic (?)
2007-08-10 22231, 2007
deadchip
ok, in that case, then yes, if you see it as a whole
2007-08-10 22233, 2007
drsaunde
disc 1 is not available without disc 2 and vice-versa
2007-08-10 22242, 2007
deadchip
but then, why did you split it into Timecode and E-Z Rollers in the first place :P
2007-08-10 22253, 2007
drsaunde
i will call that an oversight
2007-08-10 22258, 2007
drsaunde
or fuckup
2007-08-10 22202, 2007
deadchip
haha
2007-08-10 22206, 2007
deadchip
ok i'll add an edit
2007-08-10 22219, 2007
deadchip
and i'll remember to bring the labels-as-artists-for-promo-discs up in .. october
2007-08-10 22228, 2007
deadchip
maybe there could be even a release type category Promotional
2007-08-10 22238, 2007
drsaunde
just remember there are many single-artist promos which that wouldn't apply
2007-08-10 22241, 2007
deadchip
it wouldn't be 10ths of thousands of releases but some would
2007-08-10 22248, 2007
deadchip
hmm
2007-08-10 22249, 2007
drsaunde
would have to be VA promos
2007-08-10 22253, 2007
deadchip
yeah
2007-08-10 22258, 2007
deadchip
label showcases basically
2007-08-10 22220, 2007
drsaunde
also another possible problem is that these label promos are often a combination of a few different labels which normally have nothing to do with each other
2007-08-10 22255, 2007
drsaunde
i hope the rest of the moving shadow stuff holds up...i've done a lot of work there
2007-08-10 22202, 2007
deadchip
hmm
2007-08-10 22207, 2007
deadchip
i think i can check
2007-08-10 22213, 2007
deadchip
i have a tonload of moving shadow stuff myself
2007-08-10 22220, 2007
deadchip
that's why this caught my eye in the first place heh
That release has 3 ASINs, but B00000008DVO is a customer image, not an Amazon one - the other two ASINs have Amazon art
2007-08-10 22215, 2007
BrianFreud
For the Common one, I do see art
2007-08-10 22211, 2007
BrianG
gmm
2007-08-10 22212, 2007
BrianG
hmm
2007-08-10 22215, 2007
BrianFreud
You running linux or Win?
2007-08-10 22218, 2007
BrianG
linux
2007-08-10 22259, 2007
BrianFreud
Not sure, though I have more of the python packages installed on my Win system - each time someone has art issues, I never seem to, I wonder if it's related...
2007-08-10 22217, 2007
BrianFreud
You have mutagen and pyqt installed, for example?
2007-08-10 22228, 2007
BrianG
yeah i have all that junk
2007-08-10 22233, 2007
BrianFreud
as well as real python itself?
2007-08-10 22238, 2007
BrianG
it worked yesterday
2007-08-10 22244, 2007
BrianFreud
hmmm
2007-08-10 22231, 2007
BrianFreud
Well, I think for the Ultimate one, it's a flaw in the plugin - it ought to be able to get art from any of the ASINs, and not fail if just one doesn't have art
2007-08-10 22236, 2007
BrianFreud
For the other, let's see...
2007-08-10 22213, 2007
BrianFreud
ok, url is properly formatted, nothing wierd in it
2007-08-10 22241, 2007
BrianFreud
wait
2007-08-10 22249, 2007
BrianFreud
you said you re-downloaded the coverart plugin?
2007-08-10 22252, 2007
BrianG
yeah
2007-08-10 22205, 2007
BrianFreud
ok, let me send you mine
2007-08-10 22207, 2007
BrianG
from the url in the wiki
2007-08-10 22225, 2007
BrianFreud
I know coverart was one of the 2 things most affected by the plugin coding change between 11 and a12
2007-08-10 22231, 2007
BrianFreud
perhaps that's why you're having issues
2007-08-10 22214, 2007
BrianG
ah so i might have a plugin for a version of picard that i dont have yet
2007-08-10 22217, 2007
BrianFreud
Try that version instead
2007-08-10 22218, 2007
BrianFreud
yes
2007-08-10 22220, 2007
BrianFreud
exactly
2007-08-10 22222, 2007
BrianG
thanks
2007-08-10 22224, 2007
rpedro has quit
2007-08-10 22236, 2007
BrianG
now to remember where it goes.. .picard or .config/MusicBrainz/blahblahblah
2007-08-10 22258, 2007
BrianFreud
a12 and a14 both had some plugin changes - and the path changed too, so what's one the wiki now would NOT be the right path for a11
2007-08-10 22248, 2007
BrianG
that did the trick
2007-08-10 22250, 2007
BrianG
thanks
2007-08-10 22216, 2007
rpedro joined the channel
2007-08-10 22218, 2007
BrianFreud
:)
2007-08-10 22242, 2007
BrianFreud
One of the things I think luks added in a14 was plugin versioning, so it'll eventually be clearer what the problem is
