#musicbrainz

If anyone feels like weighing in on ambiguous naming, I left https://musicbrainz.org/edit/124019630 open for voting.

Punchline: digital track, tags have a name in English, filename has a name in Russian.

RYM users please take my survey! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSelL_y... (i know its not directly about MB, but I'll be comparing the results to a similar study done in 2011 on MB as well as another study on Discogs)

I think it would be nice to be able to relate an album cover to another

live cover A is a tribute to cover B

~like

This thing on?

Lotheric: I don't think MB has any relationships that link cover art to something

wulfgang (IRC): yes

Hi. I have a CD in hand that matches an existing release ( https://musicbrainz.org/release/3dc05510-b81b-4... ), barcode, titles, catalog number all match. BUT my copy has a different cover than the one in the release. The existing cover also has the correct catalog number. What should I do? Scan my cover and upload it additionally to the same release, or create a new release that

would be identical except the cover?

@Vacuity: Any difference in artwork means a separate release, even if all the identifiers remain the same

you can save yourself most of the work by reusing the existing release during the process

elomatreb[m]: thanks for the reply. Then I will add a release for it.

elomatreb[m]: " by reusing the existing release during the process" <-- do you mean the "Release duplicates tab, where I can select an existing release to get the tracklist pre-filled? Or is there another way to copy a release, so all other fields are prefilled as well?

in this case the "release duplicates" tab is what you want, yeah

you can also reuse just the medium (i.e. the tracklist + recordings) from the "Add medium" dialog on the Tracklist tab

useful for compilation releases sometimes

I don't think there is a way to prefill the release information (i.e. the first tab) as well though

ok, thanks again for helping!

guys usually how long does it take for a new release or something like that to get approved in MB?

I imported some using Harmony recently and when I went to check, some edits that I had made back in February have still not been voted up or down

Is this because I'm new or does it usually take around this much time to get votes?

I'm really new to the music managing community please forgive me if i seem ignorant

Edits don't need votes to be applied, it's only if you get more no votes than yes votes that they won't be applied

If an edit gets 0 votes it'll be accepted

Adding releases normally doesn't even have a voting period besides the cover art, most of those edits are accepted immediately

"app" now means:

application (.app)

program (.prg)

executable (.exe)

command (.com)

batch file (.bat)

(executable) script (.py etc)

android program (apk)

application (as in to apply for something)

the fact that is NEVER specified which is meant is regular parlance or even tech circuits boggles me.

you're just supposed to magically *know* which is meant, ...like through osmosis or something? :D

If only some performers are known for a live recording, is it appropriate to join [unknown] at the end to indicate there are others? Or should I just add the known performers and leave a note in the annotation?

If an artist has a bunch of releases from a new project with a recent name, and they're all under that name on most digital stores, but Apple Music shows the same releases (with matching UPC and other details) under the artist's different/earlier name, do you think those Apple Music ones need to be separate releases? Or would you say that's acceptable error correction, since it's probably just Apple/distributor/whoever being

sloppy? It feels a bit silly to enter many releases twice just because Apple didn't bother making a separate page for the new name, assuming that's what's going on.

* going on, but it also doesn't really fit in the "minor differences in artist name" critera for when to add just a single digital release.