Oh, probably so. At least it makes sense if you put it that way
I wanted to extend that to later company names like MADE IN GERMANY BY PMDC, …BY UNIVERSAL M&L, …BY EDC … it’s the same company renamed and if it still has unchanged artwork→ repress of the same release.
Yes, though that’s more important on Discogs where you can buy these copies. But you will get detailed information on determining the original version if you read my annotations. And that information is even more detailed than on Discogs, because minor matrix code changes will be noted, e.g. I would note that “MADE BY…” instead of “Made by… EDC” indicates a later pressing, although it’s in the same Discogs release.
But even small artwork changes cause a new release, even if only a manufacturer code in small print is missing in a corner.
I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing. It is quite common in my experience for discogs to have separate releases by manufacturer (or even by matrix), one of which gets imported in MB. So it’s a “catch-all” in terms of data populated in MB, but linked to a more specific version on discogs.
…or of several specific versions on Discogs, if appropriate. But I would not mix up different manufacturers (= manufacturing places) and would like to have 1 discID per release medium. It’s company names I don’t care about. These “catch all releases” have no useful information to distinguish it from any release.
Sorry, but you are mixing two things up, I think.
A ‘repress’ is made from the same glass master, afaik.
The releases from PMDC, UML, EDC in general are pressed from own new glass masters.
Could you please provide an example with the disambiguation of those releases in the annotation. Maybe I could follow your argument then.
Btw from own contributions on Discogs I know about reissues keeping the complete artwork/cover identical.
To me that’s one of the main problems on MB. You can import/create releases without ever having seen them, not to talk about ‘release in hand’. There’s an artist, a title and a track list often linked to new recordings instead of existing ones and that’s it.
But that’s off topic, I think.
In principle you are right. But new glass master versions of the same plant are usually exact copies and have the same discID. Exceptions are rare and more often there are minor artwork changes on reissues. (I will look for a good example)¹
These I would merge into one MB release. There are numerous examples of this constellation in my collection too.
Unfortunately, that is all too true.
¹) EDIT: Examples
Annotation distinguishing originally released discs from later represses with 2 Discogs versions linked.
→ Mystical Adventures
→ The Köln Concert (an old one)
Two MB releases sharing the same Discogs link: Debut and Debut (to distinguishing Björk’s Debut Special Editions see also the release group page Debut )