#musicbrainz

I've put in "Huge Hits 2000" to picard0.9 and it put each song in every matching album except huge hits. I'm not correcting this manually in picard, dragging each song into the huge hits album 2000 I tagged of the website. how can I submit this correct, is that possible?

I'm guessing my local original tagging wasn't quite enough to identify huge hits 2000

so maybe there isn't anything for me to do here to help musicbrainz? not sure.

you could add Huge Hits 2000 to the database, which helps you tag to it, and helps MB by adding data...

its already in there

just didn't match up my files

how long has it been in there?

conan: what you can do is this

I had Huge Hits (CD1) as the album name

I assume most files have puids already, since you scanned and it matched the tracks, albeit to different releases.

which si why it probably couldn't identify it in my local tags.

yeah

ok

load that release into picard manually, manually match up the files, then save - and "submit puids", whcih will add those puids to those tracks in the database

ok, I'll finish doing that locally and give it a try

if I delete an album from the picard view taht I've already classified, I can add it to picard again and puid's will be hte same and I can submit them, rigth?

yes and no

the puids would be the same

and thr no?

but picard won't submit them - if you delete it from picard, you'll have to 1) reload the files, 2) drag them back to the unidentified side, 3) rescan them, 4) re-match them manually, then 5) you can submit puids

I just open a blank picard and drag in folders. I'm hoping that now its retagged them correctly, if I did it again it'll find those albums as I have them now. then its just a matter of re-adding hte pids.

yes

I'm guessing the incorrect albums was becaus the puids are new, and it then just tried it off the incorrect taggined as before.

I'll do it an album at a time, to make sure I don't screw anything up.

well, you're also dealing with a VA release,

so those same puids could map to many different releases

you're just adding one more match to each track, not *the* match

ok

I'll see how it goes

Totally off-topic, but what are the freaking odds that J.D. Drew comes up with the bases loaded in the first inning with two straight games?!

baseball dosen't matter when the yankees aren't playing

Hahahaha.

Poor BrianG.

As a Cincinnati guy, I halfway want the Indians to make the World Series just so the Rockies can wipe the floor with them, extending the misery of Cleveland sports fans altogether

You could have Elway throw out the first pitch in Denver

Bring out Marty Schottenheimer, since he's not busy

like i said.. baseball dosen't matter :)

hi ruaok :)

wb :)

hi kids!

lol

I live in Alabama ... this concept of heating being necessary is but a vague memory to me

btw ruaok... an idea I've been mulling, for CSG-made-easy...

at least for the more well known composers, some way to simply enter a work indication, and auto-populate the correct CSG string, ala lookup to something like http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/CSGStandard/Mozart

denver requires heating. :)

(which I'm slowly building up)

@ruaok Precisely why I want to move! Been in the South since 1991 and have forgotten what winter is

brianfreud: thats pretty clever.

its like guess case, but guess classical.

forget having to learn CSG, you have a KV or K. work #, as long as someone else has already formed the string once, you're simply importing it from there...

would save having to evaluate every single classical entry for CSG correctness, instead just fix the master listing

figured I'm working on the complete works set anyhow, so I have to make the list anyhow, might as well make it useful again for the next Mozart CD :P

I gotta wrap my head around fully what you're suggesting...

well, the idea stemmed from the "generic instance" concept for tracks I was throwing around with luks after you guys finished the NGS schema

basically, some way to have a master listing of all works by a composer, and then the equivalent of "track lookup", ala "artist lookup" on a VA release

sup all

hi svak

so when is the drag and drop thing going to be corrected?

it's driving me nuts

lol

give luks time - it's a problem from the QT programmers; luks is trying to work around their borkings

and luks is in the hospital, so be patient.

it's just one guy writing the program?

! Hope he's better soon.

svak: mostly.

and he also does massive server coding too.

duly noted

oh crap, time for me to go to government

is that a euphemism for taking a shit?

or going to class? :)

you know, dropping the kids off at government

lol

upper tanker!

no, i'm actually on student government

lol: http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/aaa/425529...

ah.

i'm sure you all care about that

and so i told you

now you know

annoyed the shit out of most everyone ;)

our meetings are awesome

we get next to nothing done, mostly just insult each other

anyways, back in like an hour

I loved government... student, then school board

bored the hell out of everyone else, but I loved it

My friends here encourage me to run for city government, and I just stare at them balefully

I love the sound of this instrument... so very haunting sounding... Glass Harmonica

crap, I'm falling way behind in mb-users messages.

I've been paying too much attention to mb-bugs and trying to stay ahead of it.

It's okay ... we still love you :)

:-)

I'll catch up tomorrow.

Well, I'm off ... need some more sleep to fight this crap off so I don't miss work

Hasta :)

night

Shepard` is now known as Shepard

[1]conan is now known as conan

I'm trying to update an album listed as "various artists" when it should be "stanton warriors". I applied the edit, but I don't see the change yet, does it take time to update?

the edit would need to pass before it appears under standton

ok

is there a way to over-ride locally?

not really

I'm not sure that I agree with your edit though

17 tracks, all remixes, if I understand correctly. It's set to remix, and your sense is that as a remix release, it ought to be under the original artist whose works were remixed. Correct?

I'm not a remix expert, but as I understand the ObjectModel, that would break the logic behind Remixes in the ObjectModel.

"That means that a remix can be represented as a performance done by the remixer, that combines audio material from different original performances." at http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ObjectModel/Represe...

"The original performers are not related to the performance representing the remix, but only to the performances that the remixis based on."

and thus, with only 4 of the tracks remixed by the Stanton Brothers, out of 17, it would seem best under VA, not the Stanton Brothjers

brianfreud: not really its an aristic creation by the stanton warriors

they themselves are a group, like massive attack

the original tracks yes, but the overall release?

you wouldn't put a massive attack album under various artists.