#musicbrainz

PRAEst76, hmm got any good sites that musicbrainz considers authoritative? I use amazon mostly

Sometimes if there is doubt i'll take what is on the spine over what is on the cover.

discogs?

disciple_: take the cover, it the most trusted source we use

oh I see you're looking at the title in the amazon, image. ;)

sometimes you need to check a few difference sources and use you imagination.

your

ok, I'll edit the moderation, do you have any good online sources then better than amazon that I could use to check these thing that musicbrainz would consider authoritative?

but actually, here's another version of the cover: http://www.cover-paradies.to/?fCall=ShowImage&a...

oh that's annoying...

play.com concurs

I think we should vote it through.

It's at least more correct than it was.

yus, renaissance should be in there somewhere, it was a bugger to find without it

http://www.cover-paradies.to/?fCall=ShowImage&a... <- that's the track list that matches the one in musicbrainz, so at least your new name is correct :)

is it, in my defense I'm pulling the album title from the .nfo the amazon link was a quick grab to illustrate, I didn't check every track

the play.com link seems to accurate

yep

cheers guys, how many yes votes does it need for an accept?

3 yes

Just need one more then, anyone else here able todo a quick mod on these? http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3358563 http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3358564 http://musicbrainz.org/showmod.html?modid=3358565

..is the simple answer

right... i'm still trying to get picard running here. I'm getting the "ImportError: No module named wx" but i'm assming it's because PYTHONPATH isn't set correctly. what exactly is it looking for? eg where should i be pointing PYTHONPATH?

where you have installed wxPython?

No idea. I just let it use whatever the defaults where for make install. I'm going to try roberts build script

and which version of python? 2.4?

if 2.4, then default install path from source tarball is probably '/usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages'

Yep.

just try to run `python`

and then `import wx`

and if it's not working, then:

import sys

sys.path.append('/usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages')

and again `import wx`

Still get "ImportError: No module named wx"

it's like it's not there.

inhouseuk_ is now known as inhouseuk

how do I handle albums released in different languages?

I heard something about using an AR between albums of both versions before, but I didn't see any album-album AR that looked right

we don't, yet

So, uh

Is anybody working on translation issues right now?

catch link last night?

hi!

nope

[22:18 09/08/05] > _nikki: watched http://www.universal-music.co.jp/stream/tatu/UI... ?

nope

I can't watch windows media on osx

hmm.

wxPython makes me cry

aw

don't cry

you can do it!

i am wondering how python is finding wxpython here

I think python can find wxPython ok here. i think it's just lying to me because it hates me.

i think it's finding the wrong one here ;)

ubuntu has it, just too old a version

stupid ubuntu

even testing has a new enough version!

and picard works here.

Maybe I should write to mark shuttleworth and tell him to sort it out or I'm going to mail him dog turds

PRAEst76: ubuntu updated the version

anyway Oliver Grawert would be the person to threaten I think

dseomn: they did? I should hold the dog turds then...

is misinformation better than no information?

I don't think so.

neither do i

what's the misinfo? maybe we can help you sort it out

well

Though I think slightly inaccurate info is better than no info

theres a disc marked as Album, Official

and it's neither

so i changed it to "i don't know"

misinformation inplies a deliberate attempt to confuse

GURT: then what is it?

what is it?

and i cant find ANY information on the disc on google.. and an automod is telling me i shouldn't remove it, and that i should correct it

GURT: link?

those definitely look like albums to me

It's quite rare that a release can't be classed as something.

it could be a bootleg

it could be a compolation

what do you know about this release GURT?

i know that DMB has never put out any discs called Hometown

i know DMB like the back of my hand (unfortunitly)

if it's not official and not promotion, it's probably safe to say it's a bootleg

if the songs are on official album, it's probably compilation, bootleg

there are mentions of "hometown" concerts

on google.

*albums

Maybe a bootleg of some of theseshows

PRAEst76: hometown in those articles just refers to the hometown of DMB, the concerts don't seem to be actually called 'hometown'

is there a way to see if the TRMs on the discs are the same for other discs? you know what i mean? like if one of those matches with an album than it would be a compilation wouldn't it?

yeah, i see that now.

Perhaps a bootleg of this show?

GURT: TRMs aren't a good way to check

ok

there are too many duplicated and mis-TRMed tracks

i just don't see why information can't be removed if its wrong

i'd still guess it's a bootleg recording of such a concert, yes.

how do the length of the songs compare to the version of these tracks on other albums?

checking

Well the info can be changed if it's wrong but it's often considered good to do some research and find out what something *is* rather than what it *isn't*

right

and i have

Are there any lists online of DMB bootlegs? Trading sites and such?

i've seen plenty of discs on MB without that info.. and when i see them blank and KNOW wht they are i add the correct information.. and i figure thats what everyone else would do

yeah theres dmbalmanac.com

GURT: and it's ok to leave a comment that you're not certain that the information you're changing it too is correct -- but more likely than what is is there currently.

the tracks are not album versions

they are of different lengths

Then it's very likely a live bootleg

then how am i supposed to explain THAT when that is voted no as well..

i'll remove those mods and mod it to live bootleg

Hard to know in these situations. whoever added that release should have maked it better. some moderators would like to delete such releases, but i think through a process of elimination it can only be a live set. as a compilation it wouldn't make much sense except as a homebrew which should probably be deleted.

it seems like a lot of MB mods and such aren't really on the same page.. which is too bad.

er.. auto-mods i should say i guess

can i see my own mods for a certain artist? :)

nm, found it

the auto linking to mod numbers thing is weird

when you enter 'mod 3232258' in a note, MB creates a link to that moderation, and labels it 'edit #3232258'

can also write edit :)

so the next time i add a note i enter 'edit 3232258', which doesn't work :/

edit #123 that is

mod doesn't need the #,.. odd

well mod is BadTerminology :)

it would be easier to remember if the 'mod <number>' feature also requires a # :)

now i'm apparantly mixing two different bits of info and getting it wrong each time XD

I always use "mod #12345"