#musicbrainz

user accounts might not be there

Jugdish: Sorry to take so long replying! Thanks for the kind words :) The extra search panel is a theory thing when we were experimenting with other ways to present the search fields

Some people in fact, were unaware of the extra search options (ie annotations) – I'd like to make it a user preference which search boxes they want, but haven't touched that code yet, and want to get feedback on whether it's worth doing or not

acid2: ah i see. i gotta say i like the drop-down menu version with the "Go" button better than the multiple text fields with no "Go" button :)

and ruaok, ping?

Jugdish: Yea, me too, less spare, and more intuitive imo

yllona: track 7 is roll with my baby

especially since entering something for both an artist and a release in those text fields doesn't do what you would expect!

we won't find that release

I like multiple fields myself. I like to have quick access to anything I want to find, which is why I like the idea of a single search field :)

deadchip: What'd I say is track 6 on the 1963 EP....

if we're going to have multiple text fields like that, it would be cool to have it use the advanced query syntax to submit both

yllona: yeah it can't be that

let's see if i can find it on amazon

Jugdish: Yea, that's why I feel the dropdown is more intuitive :)

acid2: could we get a checkbox for "advanced query syntax" next to the "direct search" checkbox?

Sure can

woo! :)

when rob is around, I'm gonna make a blog post, which explains the double search options, cause I've had a lot of questions (mainly, "Huh whaaa?" :P)

unfindable

eh

deadchip: according to my journal: what i'd say was orginally released as a 45 rpm (pts. 1 & 2) in 1959 on atlantic

it's not a reissue of that one

i almost think by now it's a bootleg

but it looks totally legit and i bought it in a totally normal music 'warehouse'

first LP (actually EP) release was 1963 on "I can't stop loving you" now released as cat no. # HMV 8781

well as all my real CDs are still in the cellar of my previous aptmt. i can't check

here's what's in my notes, as i don't have access to the vinyl atm. track listing on the 1963 EP: 1) Hit the road jack, 2) hallelujah, i love her so 3) mess around 4) Let's get stoned 5) don't let the sun catch you crying 6) What'd I say 7) Georgia on my mind 8) I got a woman 9) Drown in my own tearas 10) Night time is the right time 11) Eleanor Rigby 12) I can't stop Loving you

but it was a CD, 10 tracks, first track is what'd i say and it was some sort of compilation

yllona: it's not that one

oh, i wouldn't know in that case

there's bazillion compilatins that include "what'd i say"

yeah..

hey mo/CatCat ping?

that's why i brak my compilations out to original release, if in fact the comliatiion includes the original recording

the problem is just

*compliation includes

luks: if picard would find that this PUID appears on > 1 release, what would it do?

or what will it do..

compare the metadata to all of them

sort by similarity

ok

pick the best match if the similarity > user's threshold

so since no other release with that PUID is on MB

it assumed it must be that one

deadchip: the studio recording is about 6:30 minutes long in duration, which is why in had to be released as two 45 rpm sides back in the 1950's-60s.

there are 2 "old" recordings i know from

know of*

i have seen/heard compilations with only the "A" side of the 45 rpms

they have the same arrangement, the same backing, etc

the "live" version is more famous now (thanks to the movie), that's from 1965

and 1973

but the one is shorter and doesn't have this instrumental part in between

aCiD2: one CSS bug for you - http://users.musicbrainz.org/~luks/tmp/submenu.png

I think the submenu shouldn't do this

yllona: well i really only like the original one

luks: has been fixed on raccoonz

ah, cool

same as i don't really like gospel from, let's say the 80ies, 90ies

I may have do a commit, lemme check

i like 40ies, 50ies gospel, then from the 80ies, maybe gwen mccrae

deadchip: so there are at least two live versions, that have been re-released numerous times

although gwen is not really gospel but she has that kind of vibe to her music

ii believe she just made an actual gospel album or sth

gewn is classic :) "rock me baby"

*gwen is, rather

ok luks , updated, hopefully that fixes it

deadchip: nope. not pure gospel, but a new recording of old-skool R & B hiits from the legendary TK label.

aCiD2: yes, thanks

yllona: harr sec

yllona: "In 2004 she released her first gospel album." http://www.last.fm/music/Gwen+McCrae/+wiki

no mention what it's called though

deadchip: i haven't seen that released here... let me check AMZN

deadchip: oh yes, it's "I'm Not Worried" ...

lol what a title

deadchip: "I'm Not Worried" - 2004: http://www.amazon.com/Im-Not-Worried-Gwen-McCra...

yllona: does amazon have prelisten links?

ah

Do we have any style guidelines on ellipses btw?

deadchip: not for this album

Unicode contains an entry (…), or should we use "..." ? I have some albums with 4 periods, sometimes more

allmusic.com: has the 30 second clips tho

ah

deadchip: AMG clips active for this album

last I heard, we're to use '...' rather than the unicode character until the tools can be made to play nice... there's a style guide somewhere about that.

I think it's a note in the wiki particularly in reference to the << and >> symbols

I've been pretty good. I've gotten a haircut and a real job, it's been keeping me busy recently. =) how've you been?

MartinRudat: Play nice?

As in, our media players reading metadata correctly?

or the tagger being kind to the media players, iirc.

Hum, ok

MartinRudat: well, i've moved house, recovered from illness, and still need a haircut :P

aCiD2: pong

ow, careful mo!

:)

Jugdishacid2: could we get a checkbox for "advanced query syntax" next to the "direct search" checkbox? yarr: http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/2820 <--

aCiD2: pong

Well I'll be, I thought it was already on the normal one!

argh, pongs everyone :P

ruaok, CatCat : either of you free to post something on the blog/review my post?

hmm?

can do.

yllona: but girls are allowed to have long hair... and at work, apparenly blokes too... hair isn't mentioned in the dress code, but t-shirts are...

do you want blog rights aCiD2 ?

yea, ru do it

hmm, I don't think I really need rights rob

dude, its easy for me to do...

The only thing I want to do on the blog other than this post is reformat some so they're valid xhtml, but that's pedantic :P

well, sure then :)

"apparenly blokes too", what'd you mean apparently?! Of course they're allowed long hair!

ha. :)

thry *should* have long hair!

blog login same as IRC nick?

Muz: depends on the dress code I'd've thought...

I don't have a blog login :P

what do you want your blog login to be?

oh

hah

yes, acid2 is fine

k.

in which caps scheme? :)

Ironical, no I'm not :P I'm far to weak mentally and would trip the helll out if I tried it :P

acid2 will be ok

k

could I get a quick proof read of http://rafb.net/p/oSULBl81.html ? (sorry rafb doesn't line wrap :( )

one sec.

Muz: there are more blokes with long hair at work than there were at uni... and none of them are of the younger generation, either...

sure

Balding prog rockers/hair metal addicts?

:P

Muz: not balding near as I can tell, though one has a nice head of long grey hair. I haven't asked 'em what sort of music they're into, though.

\o/ music

:DDD

Ha

lol