at one point i had recorded all the little codes that every nintendo product has on it (systems, games, cords, everything)
2005-03-13 07248, 2005
cikkolata
the problem between no info and info that might not be accurate is trying to prove that the release date wasn't actually a correct one, whereas with no release date, you know it's "wrong"...
2005-03-13 07253, 2005
cikkolata shrugs
2005-03-13 07211, 2005
tma
cikkolata: good point
2005-03-13 07235, 2005
tma
cikkolata: I think the same principle applies to proving (or disproving) bootlegs
2005-03-13 07257, 2005
enjayhch
but if you want to hear music from the 90s, then being tagged with 1993 rather than 1994 is better than no tag at all
2005-03-13 07203, 2005
cikkolata
I don't really pay much attention to issues with bootlegs 'cause I stick to official stuff
2005-03-13 07215, 2005
tma
I hate bootlegs
2005-03-13 07227, 2005
cikkolata thinks something similar :)
2005-03-13 07243, 2005
tma
but, some things you just have to put up with. :)
2005-03-13 07257, 2005
cikkolata
yeah
2005-03-13 07206, 2005
tma
Mostly I hate the obvious homebrews that can't be disproved
2005-03-13 07209, 2005
SenRepus
i prefer to stay with original stuff too
2005-03-13 07225, 2005
SenRepus
official rather
2005-03-13 07237, 2005
tma
like an album which has a couple of remixes tacked on the end, and you know damn well that it was never an official release, but it's hard to prove it
2005-03-13 07238, 2005
SenRepus
but like, the beatles
2005-03-13 07205, 2005
enjayhch
is there any reason for not adding a 'Label' tag to Albums too ?
2005-03-13 07213, 2005
tma
"3. If you graph the numbers of any system, patterns emerge"
2005-03-13 07219, 2005
tma
What is that from
2005-03-13 07247, 2005
enjayhch
Pi ?
2005-03-13 07252, 2005
tma
yup
2005-03-13 07258, 2005
tma
you get a prize
2005-03-13 07204, 2005
tma
(yet to be determined)
2005-03-13 07220, 2005
enjayhch
more metadata fields added to MusicBrainz would be a great price
2005-03-13 07225, 2005
cikkolata looks oblivious
2005-03-13 07225, 2005
tma
(disclaimer: there may be no prize)
2005-03-13 07241, 2005
SenRepus
like what enjayhch
2005-03-13 07247, 2005
SenRepus
out of curiosity?
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
enjayhch
Record Label, URLs to official sites, UPC code, Catalogue No, Country of Origin,
2005-03-13 07253, 2005
enjayhch
some being more important than others
2005-03-13 07215, 2005
tma
Media Type, Language ...
2005-03-13 07223, 2005
tma
Part of a Set
2005-03-13 07223, 2005
cikkolata
AR has an URL thing...
2005-03-13 07225, 2005
enjayhch
:)
2005-03-13 07248, 2005
cikkolata
I've been told to ask djce about the language stuff, but haven't done so yet... :X
2005-03-13 07240, 2005
enjayhch
would be fantastic to make MusicBrainz the music db of IMDB
2005-03-13 07249, 2005
enjayhch
and would encourage people to use it for tagging
2005-03-13 07259, 2005
cikkolata
without the stupid comments? :P
2005-03-13 07205, 2005
tma
haha
2005-03-13 07224, 2005
tma
"man this album blows, does anyone think the same?"
2005-03-13 07225, 2005
enjayhch
well reviews would be interesting
2005-03-13 07239, 2005
tma
"nah man, it bites!!@#!"
2005-03-13 07244, 2005
enjayhch
but voting on quality of reviews would help :)
2005-03-13 07253, 2005
cikkolata
tma: your grammar is still too good ;)
2005-03-13 07206, 2005
tma
sorry. it's a bad habit.
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
enjayhch
qualitative reviews rather than comments I guess
2005-03-13 07211, 2005
cikkolata
hehe
2005-03-13 07212, 2005
SenRepus
i disagree, reviews are to opinion based and non factual... who needs them
2005-03-13 07258, 2005
tma
not specifically reviews, but a system that suggests music based on what other people like has been proposed
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
cikkolata
like audioscrobbler is supposed to do?
2005-03-13 07258, 2005
tma
cikkolata: I think the aim was to merge/link Scrobbler and MB somehow
2005-03-13 07219, 2005
cikkolata
they plan to use mb for the data
2005-03-13 07251, 2005
tma
I bet you'd probably get some good results just by comparing MB members artist subscriptions ...
2005-03-13 07204, 2005
cikkolata
not me :X
2005-03-13 07222, 2005
cikkolata
my subscriptions count is going to hit 300 soon
2005-03-13 07231, 2005
tma
anomalies always get worked out with a large enough data-set
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
tma
:)
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
tma
have you subscribed to [unknown]? :)
2005-03-13 07223, 2005
cikkolata
and I still don't get many new mods on my subscribed artists :/
2005-03-13 07224, 2005
cikkolata
nope
2005-03-13 07246, 2005
tma
Mostly I'm just a yes-man for unknown artist to known artist mods
2005-03-13 07259, 2005
cikkolata
mine are mostly turkish, thai, eastern european, japanese, korean, etc.
2005-03-13 07210, 2005
SenRepus
>.< audioscrobbler recomends me crap music
2005-03-13 07227, 2005
SenRepus
i listen to like 20 death metal songs and they think its my favorite? wtf.
2005-03-13 07229, 2005
cikkolata
the turkish ones especially. omgi will not fix the titles of the turkish stuff he imports >_<
2005-03-13 07223, 2005
cikkolata
the japanese stuff to help thwart the attempts of people to remove all non-ascii stuff from the database ;)
2005-03-13 07257, 2005
tma
SenRepus: I've a feeling that scrobbler may only suit certain types of listeners. The more eclectic listeners (such as myself) don't quite fit any mold, and so suggestions from scrobbler probably aren't as suitable
2005-03-13 07231, 2005
cikkolata
I don't get very good suggestions 'cause my listening habits are all over the place.
2005-03-13 07251, 2005
tma
so we have three eclectics here, then
2005-03-13 07228, 2005
cikkolata
did we ever decide what to do about CD single numbers?
2005-03-13 07242, 2005
tma
My opinion was to allow numbers on CD singles. There was no consensus reached, even though I seemed to have the last word in that particular debate. I figure that if people support it, they'll enter mods following it.
2005-03-13 07205, 2005
tma
Often the editing community makes those sorts of decisions...
2005-03-13 07220, 2005
cikkolata
a couple of people do, other people vote them down based on the style guidelines...
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
cikkolata
I'm not sure that most people even rememebr there being a discussion on it
2005-03-13 07239, 2005
tma
hmm
2005-03-13 07235, 2005
tma
well, I'm quite torn about it because there was some serious dissention about it. I feel quite strongly that we should allow them, but others also feel as strongly that they shouldn't.
2005-03-13 07201, 2005
tma
Actually, sometimes I feel that people are very resistant to any change in the guidelines .. which makes things difficult.
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
cikkolata
and I'm just sat in the middle.
2005-03-13 07221, 2005
tma
it's hard to propose changes when change is a scary thing.
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
tma
people vote with their feet
2005-03-13 07250, 2005
cikkolata
I can't really decide what I think about it. I leave the album tags as the single names but put them in folders with "(CD x)".
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
cikkolata
there was also the problem that some people don't like using disc for CD single numbers as well as disc numbers
2005-03-13 07213, 2005
SenRepus
what do you guys mean single numbers?
2005-03-13 07226, 2005
cikkolata
here in the UK, at least, singles are often released as two versions
2005-03-13 07256, 2005
SenRepus
... go on?
2005-03-13 07204, 2005
cikkolata
like "1: single title 2: b side 3: something else" and "1: single title, 2: single title (remix 1), 3: single title (remix 2)"
2005-03-13 07217, 2005
cikkolata
where the first one is CD 1 and the second one is CD 2
2005-03-13 07244, 2005
SenRepus
so the single gets released twice?
2005-03-13 07246, 2005
cikkolata
they're not disc 1 and 2 of a set, so some people don't like (disc 1) and (disc 2)
2005-03-13 07249, 2005
cikkolata
pretty much
2005-03-13 07257, 2005
SenRepus
i see
2005-03-13 07220, 2005
SenRepus
i think SOME kind of distinction between same titled releases needs to be allowed
2005-03-13 07238, 2005
cikkolata
I tend to see (CD 1), (CD 2), but if we used those, people would change them to (disc 1) and (disc 2)
2005-03-13 07244, 2005
SenRepus
yea
2005-03-13 07201, 2005
cikkolata
we don't distinguish between releases with bonus tracks, rereleases, special editions, etc.
no doubt has 4 different listings for the single "Simple Kind of Life"
2005-03-13 07214, 2005
SenRepus
im not sure
2005-03-13 07215, 2005
tma
my issue with it is that (more often than not in my experience) the two singles will actually be numbered and mention a set. ie: "cd 1 of a 2 cd set"
2005-03-13 07238, 2005
cikkolata
but you seem to be the only person who's seen that
2005-03-13 07245, 2005
tma
NIN and Radiohead singles are good examples ...
2005-03-13 07252, 2005
SenRepus
was that at me or tma
2005-03-13 07258, 2005
cikkolata
tma.
2005-03-13 07201, 2005
tma
I gave links in the thread at the time
2005-03-13 07202, 2005
SenRepus
k.
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
cikkolata
all of the ones I have only say CD 1 or CD 2
2005-03-13 07251, 2005
tma
my argument was that if the discs themselves define the two as a set, then we should allow for that
2005-03-13 07256, 2005
SenRepus
am i the only one who thinks it would be useful to have a way to lock MB entries for things that look wrong and get changed by people who dont know what they are doing
2005-03-13 07215, 2005
cikkolata
no.
2005-03-13 07221, 2005
cikkolata
that's been suggested before
2005-03-13 07224, 2005
cikkolata
I like it too
2005-03-13 07229, 2005
tma
cikkolata: the fact they say "cd 1" and "cd 2" implies they are part of a set, no?
2005-03-13 07233, 2005
cikkolata
maybe...
2005-03-13 07245, 2005
cikkolata
I have a couple that don't say CD 1 and CD 2 on them
2005-03-13 07203, 2005
cikkolata
and another couple that only have a sticker on the case saying which number they are.
2005-03-13 07208, 2005
tma
and they should probably be left without adding "(disc x)"
2005-03-13 07217, 2005
tma
(the non stickered ones)
2005-03-13 07252, 2005
cikkolata
and another couple that don't say the numbers on them
2005-03-13 07210, 2005
cikkolata
whether the CDs say which number they are seems to be completely random
2005-03-13 07236, 2005
cikkolata
those manics ones I linked to are probably the only ones I have that blatantly say which is which
2005-03-13 07257, 2005
tma
cikkolata: probably. But if they _do_, then it should be recorded... _particularly_ as a lot of people are going to want to tag those albums with the disc number intact
2005-03-13 07245, 2005
tma
I've got the NIN's Closer and March of the Pigs pairs, and I had links to the cover images of the Radiohead ones
2005-03-13 07229, 2005
tma
at any rate, it was acknowledged that a two part single was common in the UK. The argument was whether they should be considered a set.
2005-03-13 07202, 2005
cikkolata
I'm not really for or against it, I'd rather they all have the same style (and I'm sure I could find a two disc set which doesn't say which disc is which)
2005-03-13 07226, 2005
cikkolata
I was just saying that not everything explicitly says which one is which
2005-03-13 07201, 2005
cikkolata
(even though they're clearly the same as the ones that do)
2005-03-13 07217, 2005
tma
I think the fact the some singles don't distinguish themselves like that was the core argument against applying a style at all. I think that if a single pair defines itself as a set, then we should label it just as we label volumes.
