#musicbrainz

hmm. https://www.kepstin.ca/dump/lastfmremux.png was kind of fun

I'd say "remember when last.fm looked like that", except that it never actually looked like that ;)

For a while, I made a crazy userscript for last.fm that restyled it :)

I miss last.fm :/

Hi, did you hear about the discogs issue, where they respond with 404 to the artist URLS stored in MB? E.g. http://www.discogs.com/artist/82730 vs. http://www.discogs.com/artist/82730-Beatles-The Is this a bug or are they shutting us out?

Seems that they just changed how their site's code looks up artists, it's probably nothing so conspiracy-filled :P

We think it’s a bug, see http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-7201

so http://www.discogs.com/artist/82730- works, I guess that's simple enough to fix...

Yeah, they ignore everything after the -, it’s just for search engine optimization: http://www.discogs.com/artist/82730-discogs-lin...

ok, so it's been taken care of. great.

Is there still a way to vote down edits before their normal expiry date?

Or did MBS-3663 remove that?

http://musicbrainz.org/release/5cb825dc-2bc7-41... has some messy open edits.

But things would get even more messy if I tried to fix the release while those edits are still in queue.

http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28975656 has 3 unaminous no votes and is still open.

IIRC they stay open for 24 or 48 h?

After the first No vote

So that the editor can react

But don't remember the details

From the code, it’s 72 hours after the first No vote.

Indeed, that's what I figured from search for edits with many no votes too.

Though I could just approve the edits (minus the one above) if we can deal with losing track MBIDs.

The editor could cancel the edit. They are new, so they may not know about this (and it hasn’t been mentioned yet).

The problematic stuff is turning disc 5 of the box set (only disc entered so far into disc 1), then re-adding disc 5 again.

Three edits total.

Well, the edits are going to fail anyway, so you could just ignore them and do your fixes, I think.

I don't like to have the release in an incorrect state with the pending disc, even if it's just for three days instead of seven.

So I thought it might have been better to just approve http://musicbrainz.org/edit/28975382.

i guess it’s probably know nbut i have many 502 Bad Gateway yesterday and today

yeah. i’m getting a lot of 502s right now

writing in english that i've double-checked gives reasonably accurate results in google translator :)

"Tim Vegas" is a pseudonym, I'm pretty sure he's not proficient in English; the tweet after that he says "google translate is my friend" or something to that effect :)

What am I to make of this? http://www.amazon.co.jp/%E3%80%90Amazon-co-jp%E...

"Format: Other" I assume?

i saw a commercial for toothbrushes that played music...and wondered if anyone would add to db

I mean, that one seems to list a 16-track tracklist

If a toothbrush contained a full album, we probably should add it :p

huh, so that's an mp3 player witha preloaded, unchangable music selection?

how odd.

and yeah, i remember those toothbrush commercials.

I think they used tracks cut down to 90-120 seconds or so, and they acted as a timer to ensure you spent at least that long brushing teeth.

So do I

They had lollipops called "SoundBites" that would play music whenever the candy was in your mouth

flight of the bumblebee?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UjFZiOAZKc ?

what's the policy with a release like this? http://musicbrainz.org/release/785fd1a7-bd32-4f...

it's got no disc ids, the release (as per cat no) contains another relase

should the disc id be attached accordingly?

entil: I wouldn't. DiscIDs differ between pressings.

that's strange, because I've found quite a few that match a different release

Sure. That /might/ be the case.

At the same time, the same exact release may have more than one DiscID.

for example Mandylion by The Gathering; I have the Sand and Mercury box and mb identifies five releases, all of them not the Sand and Mercury box ;)

That could be accurate. It could also be an artifact from before NGS, when releases were stored differently.

some releases are real messy, but I dunno... I'm collecting release uuids and disc ids for my flacs and I manually fudged that if_then_else release to match the collector box

kinda hate doing that because it's invalid, and musicbrainz is none the wiser because it doesn't have a real disc id there, just a comment saying "this release"

why isn't it better to store the disc id also in musicbrainz for that release? it's "kinda" there as an annotation anyway, but only screws up people who want to have their records straight :/

I'm not sure I follow you.

check it out: http://musicbrainz.org/release/785fd1a7-bd32-4f...

it contains digipak 77298-2, it says so in the annotation, but it doesn't have its disc id

and if I understood you correct, adding that disc id is not ok

it probably isn't even a different pressing from the vailla digipak release

*vanilla

This one might be a special case, since it does sound (from http://www.discogs.com/release/1070532 ) that it literally just has the original release inside a box

I just dug the digipak out, got it in front of me, and verified it as well

In that case I wouldn't be against adding that discID I guess

I stand by my advice. Unless you know for a fact that it's the same pressing, I don't think it's right to add the DiscID from a different release.

I just wanted to check because there's sometimes somewhat nasty data on mb and I'd rather contribute to something clean.. though sometimes I feel like I'm just especially good at finding broken stuff ;)

cNfrYa0BA1_jZWVyVhZAbNnjIHI- is the id it matches to

the data's a bit lacking but the cat no matches still

that's proof it's the same pressing, right?

If you have this specific release, then by all means do attach the discID :)

(the one with the box)

I'd also tend to add it because the disc id resolves to the release that's mentioned in the annotation anyway

If you have the other, please just fix the other one to have the missing data :)

(whether you attach the discID to the box one or not)

now I'm not sure I follow :D fixing the other one, as I understand it, means attaching the relevant disc id (of the digipak release inside) to the box release

because now my flac ripper thinks I have the digipak release, which is wrong; I have the box (containing the digipak and poster and sticker)

The only way to prove it's the same pressing is to have a copy of both releases (or find somebody who does)

hahaha

Ok

Then yes, please do add the discID!

really? why would it resolve to the same disc id if it's not the same pressing?

I can take pics if you want :D