#musicbrainz

40 minutes! better than average

ls

[some file info here]

thanks! thank god that wasn't an rm -rf / or irc would be gone :/

why am I like.. suddenly wondering if Nicolas Cage is related to John Cage :/

his real surname is coppola

and yes, he's his nephew

that was unclear. he's francis ford coppola's nephew. he is unrelated to john cage

John Cage's real name is John Coppola?!

it should have been obvious i was referring to nicolas cage

given a choice between talking about nicolas cage and talking about anyone else, i will always choose the former

except maybe steven seagal

#include <meme/youdontsay.gif>

Nicolas Cage could use 4:33 of silence.

Hey everyone, I could use some advice. I've been looking at this release: https://musicbrainz.org/release/04a14638-c321-4...

It concerns me that the track times don't make a lot of sense.

I have done a fair bit of checking around and I can find no external confiemation for these track timings

However, I have lots of confirmations of what I think the actual track timings should be.

Now, if I try to edit the track timings, I run into a problem because they are tied in with Disc ID.

So what is the correct approach here?

Well, seems like someone ripped a SACD with those timings then

why do you believe they are wrong?

For example, this: http://www.jpophelp.com/cdscans/JPN-OVXL-13_bac...

I could give you a good number of web pages that show these same track timings. But not a single one that confirms the timings on the release.

that's a different release though, isn't it?

Not really. The image is from the Japanese release of the same disc.

it is a different release because one is in Dutch while the other is in Japanese :P

possibly same release group but definitely different release

How about this then: http://www.challengerecords.com/products/127626...

and then this: http://blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=ckshi...

Here's a russian one: https://music.yandex.ru/album/2906839

Discogs: https://www.discogs.com/Bruckner-Netherlands-Ra...

iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/bruckner-symp...

etc.

https://musicbrainz.org/edit/27753594 i assume that was probably added via picard from the CD layer on the SACD.

I can't see any reason why the track timings would differ so dramatically on the CD layer

hmm, how accurate is disc id generations?

hmm, that predates the changes from CD→SACD, it might ahve not been the SACD release at all

well, the source http://www.challengerecords.com/products/127626... lists that release as SACD

there's no other releases e.g. on a different label with similar title, artists which it could be?

The total time difference is 6 minutes. And I haven't found any evident of a CD-only release.

do you have the disc handy to check what disc id you get?

the japanese one seems to be SACD too

Me, I don't have the disc.

hmm, lists an earlier recording date than MB though

it would be kind of strange, but the CDDA layer could simply be different from the SACD layer

oh look at this https://musicbrainz.org/edit/43803779

kind of odd tho, that disk id lists it as 65 minutes, and CDDA can hold 74 minutes normally, so there's no reason to cut it

The Neighbour never added any data claiming they had the SACD, BitPerfectRichard did that based on the challengerecords page

reosarevok, just not sure what to do with it. Rename that work to one of the constituents and add the others?

Probably, unless it's a work medley I guess

I don't really know when that would apply, but there's only one recording (I believe the two attached to it need to be merged) and it's just an arrangement by the band of the three constituents.

There is no indicatiion I can find that Exton ever released that recording on CD.

was this ever released on a different label? The original submitter didn't include any label info, that was added by someone else

Challenge Classics released it as a SACD as well (CC72702). BTW, Challenge Classics actually recorded the performance.

Some of Zweden's Bruckner cycle recordings were also released by Northstar Recordings, but not this one.

hmm, track times are wrong for http://www.challengerecords.com/products/146773... too

lacking any other info, I'll just have to guess that the edits for the 2-channel CDDA version resulted in different track lengths from the multichannel SACD tracks

Right.

(btw, which means that the CDDA and SACD layers shouldn't have the same recordings in musicbrainz anyways)

whoa, SACDs support a sampling frequency of 2.8224 Megahertz

I'm wondering why the version for iTunes would have the same track times as the SACD layer, and not the same as the CD layer (if the two were radically different)

If the two were different, then there is either 6 minutes of music missing from the CD layer, or 6 minuts of silence on the SACD layer :)

Leo_Verto[m]: it's DSD encoding, not PCM, so the sampling frequency doesn't really mean the same thing

ah, true

lets see, from wikipedia - SACD SDS encoding is approximately similar in resolution to PCM audio with bit depth of 20 bits and a sampling frequency of 96 kHz

DSD*

DSD relies on noise shaping to get the noise floor down to ~-120dB acrioss the audio band, which is approximately equivalent to 20-bit PCM.

I assume most SACD recordings are actually done in PCM (since that's what most equipment works with internally) at 24bit, 96kHz and then converted during mastering.

Actually, most modern DSD recordings are done natively in DSD.

Especially for clasical music

the thing with DSD is that you can't do any sort of edits with it, so for studio-based recordings that rely on their suite of Pro-Tools gizmos, the recording is done in PCM and then converted to DSD for release (if there is a plan to release it at all in that format).

not that you'd actually be able to hear the difference of course, but it's kind of neat that some newer software appears to be able to do at least some editing on DSD (or some lossless conversion of DSD)

I imagine that doing a fourier transform on DSD encoded data is harder than PCM, which is where a lot of the editing problems come in :)

There is no such thing as lossless conversion of DSD to PCM. You can argue that the loss can be negligible, but lossless - no.

Likewise PCM to DSD.

This is why editing doesn't work. And why DSD purists don't edit.

Or (like Blue Coast Records) they record to analog tape and edit there.

lol analog tape. What's even the point, a cheap 16bit/48kHz recording setup would probably sound better (less noise) :/

Ha! You're treading in murky waters there. Digital audio sound a *LOT* simpler than it really is :)

Anyway, bottom line before I sign off on my original question - do I understand that there is no appetite to edit the track times on the Bruckner 7 release?

Tykling: In case you know something I don't know: https://musicbrainz.org/user/Freso/edits/open

Is the "add recording comments" userscript broken?

aw damn.

:/

+1

sure, I don't mind

\o/

let me know if it's done and I'll redirect my repo there

I need to figure out how to retain the license bit for your scripts. (Doesn't seem like the couple of userscript in the murdos repos had a license in them, so see how they did. :| Worst case, I guess, is to add a comment blurb.)

bitmap: Sure. Thanks. :)

Oh. bitmap has a freedb importer userscript.

I do?

Oh, no.

It's an untracked file.

So I guess maybe it's something I thought I'd be working on. Or maybe I fetched it from somewhere, thinking to add it. :shrug:

maybe 2017 is the year i learn to javascript and create userscripts my self

.. nah

maye 2018?

2017, yes you can!

.. ykw?

YES

2017 is Year of the Instrument backlog

2018 will be Year of Learning Javascript!

\o/

taking things slow ;)

festina lente

SchrodingersCatQuest can do it... or not (until you open the box you don't know!

damn

Is there a way to denote that some artist's vocals on a recording are for the chorus (with relationships) ?