#musicbrainz

Hoping somebody can help me out with naming conventions... what's the difference when Picard labels a single as [non-album tracks] vs. the album metadata being the single's title?

To give a recent example I've had, Picard labeled Cardi B - Press as Album = "Press", but labeled Tyler, the Creator - OKRA as Album = [non-album tracks] even though they are both singles.

PiffWave: Picard tags only standalone recordings as [non-album tracks]

chaban: I did read that page and I was still a bit confused

There have been 'standalone recordings' published as singles, but belong to no album nor will they belong to an album that did NOT get classified as a [non-album tracks].

Even within the realm of that page, it says a single that is released before an album would still be classified as a standalone recording... yet it will still classify the id3 album tag as the single title

It seems to me that if Picard will classify any individual song release's album metadata with the song title, then standalone recordings are probably just meant for song remixes that don't belong to an album or compilation, but i could use some insight here

Piffwave: it depends on whether you load the recording or the release into Picard

You can tag every recording in the MB database as a standalone recording if you want to

that's hard to do.

anyway you can change the album tag in picard before yo usave

also, you can paste the musicbrainz release url into the picard interface to load a spesific one

finally if they are both supposed to be singles, it *may* be that there was an error on musicbrainz, try to load the musicbrainz releases from musicbrainz (there should be a "tagger" icon to click (if you try "look up on the internet" from picard))

if there is no button, try navigating to the right release, copy its url and paste that into picard

PiffWave: Basically it is the difference of either loading https://musicbrainz.org/release/8e9de955-2aac-4... or https://musicbrainz.org/recording/75156955-7d8d... into Picard. If you use Lookup or Scan usually Picard should load the release if one exists, though. How did you get the recording / releases into Picard?

SothoTalKer: bitbucket are removing their support for mercurial repos

I had a github repo as mirror of my mercurial bitbucket repo, so let's consider it as default now

I still have to take a look at the doc and see what to do with the tickets opened on bitbucket

loujine: you're moving to github?

:D

he’s doing his bitbuckexit

oh god can we stup calling things *thingyfirstpartofname*exit?

stop*

like not CatQuexit?

Oh no. https://musicbrainz.org/release/9c1eeba7-7e33-4...

At least Discogs have all the performer data

CatQuest: reluctantly

yvanzo: :p

My slave seems to have missed its hourly replication packet. It checked at 15:15:02 GMT+1. Just reporting in case there's an issue.

It's downloading it now, says it was produced (or begins) at 15:01:04, but I think that's UTC.

Yeah, it only downloaded and processed one packet this hour, so looks like one was missed.

No big deal for me, just mentioning it in case it points to a wider issue at your end.

bitmap ^

reosarevok: Thanks, it was brought to bitmap's attention on #metabrainz.

Wasn't sure whether here or there was best place to report.

Oh, ok :L)

* :)

There

Although in the end we see everything

△👁️

Ok cool, will try to remember that in future :)

outsidecontext: I will normally download a song from either redacted.ch (from part of an album if I can, otherwise as a single) and if the release is not available through that medium, then you i will download from youtube using youtube-dl

then i will put all downloaded songs into an "untagged" folder and load that folder into Picard followed by clustering all unmatched files, then using lookup. i will scan the acoustic fingerprint for files left over

PiffWave: It's indeed a bit strange that you get recordings loaded as non-album tracks then if there is an actual album. But one thing could be that there is actually a standalone recording in this special case, and this can of course get matched. Not for cluster lookups, but definitely for AcoustId scan or single file lookups.

But as catcat said earlier, you can always load specific releases into Picard from the website

outsidecontext: what is the proper naming convention in this case?

do individual song releases aka singles from any artist have their album tag as the single title?

just so I know how to tag music that doesn't appear in the MB database

they are remixes of songs that are not singles from the artist themselves? trying to keep the same naming convention as Picard for manually tagged stuff

PiffWave: there is no real convention how you name your local files, that depends on what you want.

PiffWave: whether the album is set to [nonalbum track] or not for Picard really just depends on whether it is tagging a track with or without album.

usually if it is what is commonly considered a single there will also be a release for it on MB. so called standalone-recordings AKA non-album tracks are usually something like additional songs that were available for download but not really considered a release

but of course with the growing number of youtube and otherwise single track releases there is kind of a gray area where it is debatable whether something is a single release or not

If available, they should probably be in MB, even if just as a standalone recording

My usual "is this a release" border is "did they bother to make a cover for it"

But that's not a guideline, that's me :)

at some pint i plan to go back and create singles of all the mashups that ghp, partyben, dj tripp and dj zebra made in the '00s and such. i think some of them had covers too

point not pint

Well you can do it after a pint if you want

outsidecontext, reosarevok: damn freenode client keeps disconnecting....thanks for the inputs guys

what am I chopped basil? 🙀

I hope not

Rosemary is much better

ikr?

:P

actually I love basil

sorry CatQuest :P the chat cut out before you talked...just reviewed the log and saw ur input. thanks :D

just to close out the thoughts and for the log if anybody will read it: i'll likely go the route of IDing any single's album tag with the single's title, even if just a youtube or soundcloud release. and i'll likely label any remix that doesn't belong to an album or compilation as [non-album tracks]. think that's pretty darn close to MBP behaviors

:D

:D

PiffWave: sounds good to me :) just for reference: I usually explicitly tag things without album (non-album track) if I only have a single track and don't care about the album. that's why I created the "Load as non-album track" plugin, which one can use to treat a track that is actually on an album as a non-album track

PiffWave: Also to make your use case easier you could add a script. Add a new script in Options > Scripting, name it e.g. "Tag as single" and use "$set(album,%title%)" as the script. Important: Do uncheck the checkbox for the script, so that it is not being run automatically.

then you can right click on selected files and choose "Tag as single" under the "Run script..." sub menu.

outsidecontext: i'm actually using a different program, mp3tag, to manually tag everything that MBP couldn't find in the database

hah, Picard does all sort of fancy stuff I don't know anything about

PiffWave: that's fine as well :D

reosarevok: yes, lot's of hidden details :D

all MBP tagged songs go in one folder and all manually tagged songs go in another folder so if there ever is an update to the MB db, i can easily run a search