This happens when two releases have different recordings. In this case, the CD release has stereo mixes, while the LP has mono mixes. Maybe someone can recommend a working userscript to import the personnel credits? Otherwise, you would have to manually re-add those relationships.
In cases where the recordings are identical (as MB defines it), you can merge them and acquire the credits that way, but in this case the recordings are substantially different, so don’t do that.
That script will clone selected recording data. It works from the “Edit Release Relationships” page and you may need to do each track one by one, especially as the recordings have different dates, but a huge time saver. Please check the data you copy as it will copy everything and sometimes some data is not relevant.
In the example you have it will copy all the musicians, producer and location data for you.
That whole page of scripts is a goldmine of quality.
Thank you for the link to the scripts. I will have a look at using it to tag my files short term.
You mention to be careful copying the data. Good advice as usual! But, I wonder why some data isn’t automatically the same across all of the releases in a release group:
Each release in a release group will have a number of common recordings of works.
The title of a recording of a work should be the same
The composer of a work doesn’t change
Can the date of a recording change?
I think the recording of a work can be different? so perhaps who played the instruments can be different?
Because the tracks of two releases often differ, and MusicBrainz leaves it up to the editor to match tracks with existing recordings. The word recording is misleading: It doesn’t necessarily mean a distinct studio recording or live recording, but any edit, mix, or other significant variation. And yes, relationships on these recordings can differ! A karaoke mix doesn’t have vocals; an a cappella mix has only vocals. The dates of an original mix and a re-edit could be years apart. And so on.
Some releases have such variations, either as bonus tracks or replacements, and of course it’s commonplace for a release to add and subtract other tracks. I know of one label that has several MP3 releases in which the tracks are cut short due to some processing error. I’ve run into one or two releases in which some track names are transposed (track A is misnamed as track B, and vice versa).
Composer is a work-level credit. We can offer answers as to why works, recordings, and tracks aren’t pre-matched or auto-matched, but I’ll leave that aside for now because my reply is becoming a wall of text.
First time I used the script I didn’t notice a few extras in there that were not actually relevant to the recordings I was targeting. Can’t remember exact details now. Think it was links to videos. Or remixes.
Do note that Works are not copied. Not everything is copied.
And yes, recording dates change. You could have copied one recording to all the recordings on the target release, but in this case you’d then need to adjust dates of each recording. And drop instruments that are not on that track.
Just a quick glance at that release I assume keyboard players change between tracks. As well as the recording dates. So not a simple bulk copy there.
This can be a massive time saver… but also can cause a HUGE mess if you don’t check and verify the data you copy.
I read and re-read the style guide on release groups. It is of course the agreed definition, but it’s not one that ‘rings true’ to me. My view is that it is too broad and includes releases that it shouldn’t. I’d narrow it to:
The original release
Releases in different countries
Releases on different formats
Only if the number of tracks stays the same, the recordings are the same date etc, musicians, I’d allow:
Promotional versions
Re-issues
Remasters
Special/limited editions
Unsure about Mono vs Stereo vs Quad etc.
Not included:
Pirated versions
Pseudo-releases
Different bootleg recordings of the same concert
Many of the releases I work on tagging are the CD version of a vinyl release and it’s frustrating when the metadata isn’t in musicbrainz for my release, but it is for another. For example Highway 61 Revisited, first issued on vinyl. My copy is on CD.
I know I’m being lazy, but in the end, I just want to get everything tagged correctly by using what’s there. A more narrow definition of release group would allow metadata to be automatically made consistent between releases.
Sorry. Misunderstood. You just want to tag and not add to the database. That script will not help you in Picard.
Simplest answer for you - In Picard select the release with the extra data (the vinyl). SAVE that data to your tracks.
Go into Picard’s options and make sure TAGS \ CLEAR EXISTING TAGS is NOT ticked.
Now you can select your correct CD version and overwrite that data to your tags. This way you have got all the performer credit data of the vinyl, but over written the MBIDs and other data from the CD.
The only way the meta data will ever get into the database is if someone adds it. Which is why using the script I quoted above is a nice thing to be able to do for other people.
