#musicbrainz

nothing disregard

in case there's a best practice for podcasts i'd like to know about it

I don't think there's any clear thing for release groups and podcasts (which is why I'd be conservative and keep them separate like I would any other different release)

There is http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Specific_types... which you might have seen already

some time ago i think

do you think it applies to podcasts too?

seems a bit old fashoned btw ^^

i mean the date and location should be specified but not in the release name

Heh - it was done last year, but it's probably more oriented to real radio

thats what i mean

i think the whole data model of musicbrainz hardly applies to podcasts in general

It isn't meant/designed for podcasts. :)

Like it isn't meant/designed for audiobooks.

But since they're audio, they're still allowed.

i have vocalists credited simply as "Jennifer" and "Soni". my intuition tells me to put this as an annotation rather than a new artist. any thoughts?

(they would only appear as vocal relationships rather than tracklist ACs)

Depends

Do you have any info at all? If you can give something like "drum and bass vocalist from Hungary", the chances of there being several are reasonably low, I guess

If it's just "vocalist" it's trickier

I'd ideally add them anyway, but...

they're native american so maybe thats enough disambig

oh nevermind. they're in a group with a wikipedia page ;P

:)

i have one release (release A) that indicates that a recording has been taken from release B. is it okay to merge recordings even though release B and associated recordings do not have fingerprints?

Mostly yes

(sometimes the durations will be quite different, because of the recording having been cut, but if not, yes)

okay

Especially if it's classical since that's rarely mixed or edited I guesss

-s

there is a release-level mastering credit, i'm not sure how the mastering process works or if it indicates edited recordings, or cases in which merging might not be appropriate

Every release is mastered, different masters are still the same recording

Spain, Chile, Australia, Netherlands. Poor Australians...

reosarevok: regarding your change to the feat. artist clarification — I re-added 'composers' to that list of artist types that can be main artists. But do we really want/need to list them all explicitly?

vs. 'any artist can also be the main artist of release'

hawke_1: I counted composers as part of "songwriters" but fine

And dunno

I'd be fine with that too I guess

I just wouldn’t want to be misused to suggest that only the listed roles could be main artists.

reosarevok: you guys are starting to pull away from us in footy EE = 96, CAN = 114

we are officially worse than Equatorial Guinea

hawke_1: fair enough

drsaunde: You have 35 million people in there! What are they all doing, playing hockey? :p

someone said hockey ?

:)

some of us curl

hurry hard!

haha

a lot of them come here to act in bad tv shows

and if you want to know what curling is...my answer is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQF5xuLrjpY

aha. so it's frog jumping without frogs.

Wait. Am I hearing a pop punk song about curling?

Oh, no, just rock

hurrrrry hard!

Oh, ok, at least you win at that

Here we generally lose at everything, so...

Well, sometimes not at orienteering ski, but that might be because nobody else does it :p

you win at losing :)

you have to see the positivie in all things

hehe

how do you add a place that is composed of two venues ? (2 rooms where they hold concert/shows)

same building, same address

th e 2 rooms have different numbers of seats

Three places linked with "part of"

2nd and third image to the right

cool, thanks

drsaunde: Haha. Everyone in Denmark who were in their teens or older in the early 2000's know what curling is, since the Danish national team actually made it to the OL or something. :p

Almost no one had heart about it before, and suddenly it was everywhere.

That shit cray.

I still do not fully understand curling.

"No one does, but it's provocative!"

"It gets the people _going_!"

any olympic "sport" where you play better after a few brown pops is a-okay in my books

As a Sports Science student though, I'd readily accept curling as a sport.

It definitely fulfills all of the criteria for that term.

What about darts?

Chess?

Golf?

reosarevok, asking the important questions

the hokey-pokey?

(not that I disagree with curling being a sport, mind)

reosarevok: The criteria depends on which sports sociologist you ask. ;)

Some of the common one are that they're competitive but within a regulated frame so they can be objectively judged (e.g., the winner is the one with most points; points are given by having the disc closest to a given area on an ice track).

I'd be sad if Denmark beat us in frog jumping. But also kinda happy.

Some require varying levels of physical activity for something to be a sport. Curling I'd say have enough of this.

(The competitiveness is the main reason parkour cannot be a sport while still being parkour; the objective judging criteria is the primary reason b-boying/break cannot be defined as a sport.)

Well, of course, the English language is limited in this regard, so I guess b-boying/breaking could be considered a sport in English. They couldn't in Danish though. :p

Synchronised swimming, diving and ski jumping are all non-objective olympic sports though

I don't know enough about any of those to be able to tell.

(I've never really cared much for most disciplines part of the OL...)

Ooh, Opus 1.1…

skateboarding is clearly a sport.. ?

hawke_1: ?

derwin: no, it's clearly a crime! :p

reosarevok: http://www.opus-codec.org/

despite what the sticker says, skateboarding in most places in SF is in fact a crime

Oh, bah

I was hoping it would be about classical

Ah, no. :-)

derwin: Clearly?

Freso: claro

derwin: I'm interested in your reasoning.

indeed, there's a range of handy, sharp spiked products meant to keep pigeons and skaters off of things.

(Also, as I said, English "sport" is much broader than the Danish "sport".)

looks to me like the most interesting/important new thing in Opus 1.1 is autodetection of speech vs. music., and speed improvements. Oh, and it encodes harpsichord better now.

Harpsichord <3

I need more recordings with harpsichord.

The instrument

Apparently 1.0 was bad at encoding recordings of harpsichords; they’ve fixed that.

Freso: I think there's one used on the Portal 2 soundtrack (it might be synthesized)

lol at “Temporal VBR” comment: “Nevertheless, listening tests show a substantial advantage on a number of samples. I'll be the first to admit we haven't completely determined why, but my best theory…”

:p

(It is, for the record, also entirely Ultima IX's fault that I know the tune of Rule, Britannia by heart.)