It’s very common that box sets of the label Disky (typically compilations) have discs (often jewel cases) with own catalog number and barcode. The box set usually has it’s own catalog number and barcode.
It’s not clear at all they also have been released and distributed separately or only as box set.
I think, they have been released only as box set.
How to handle it?
AFAIK it’s not possible to link mediums of releases into another release (only “RG includes/included in” relationship).
It’s just possible to “copy” a release medium to another release. It’s easy to do but with the disadvantage to have the data twice.
Since I can not say it definitely that the releases have not been releases separately, I just can make a new release group/release for the box set with copied data.
E.g.: I have the box set “The Music of Mantovani” (musik-sammler.de or Discogs).
In MusicBrainz we only have the separate releases (1, 2, 3, 4).
Discogs has it as separate releases and as box set. Musik-sammler.de only has it as box set.
I know other topics about box sets and merges. The problem is not how to do it technically, the question is what is correct and the best way here.
You have it correct. There is no boxset concept here at MB (yet). What you have described is how I have seen many boxset entered, and how I do them myself. A unique compilation RG that then uses the “RG includes” relationship to point at the other Releases inside.
The only deep way of linking is to make sure all the Recordings are linked fully. That way means less of that “having everything twice” issue. (Sometimes quicker to do after with the Mass Merge script)
There is no simple way of doing this task though. Some scripts can help, but it is a lot of manual work even then. I’ll often take most of a day to get a boxset added.
If there are multiple catalogue numbers, then I’ll list them all and make use of the Annotation to explain them. I have seen some people add all the catalogue numbers to the one release, but this causes confusion as there is no way to say “this is the important one on the outside”.
I would love to see a “boxset type” appear. But it is going to need a different type of some form. It needs to be an entity that can be optionally linked to multiple Releases (Not RGs).
I have boxsets where six of the CDs are reissues of other Releases with identical artwork, and then an extra CD popped into the box not available elsewhere.
I’ve got other boxes that later had their contents released as individual releases. So this can become quite a complex set of relationships.
I’m not sure if I understand you in a correct way but I think you are not talking about and empty RG (RG without releases, just with links to the separate RG’s with the R’s).
It’s also not clear to me what you mean with:
The only deep way of linking is to make sure all the Recordings are linked fully.
If I add an exisitng medium to a (new) release the linked recordings will be kept and both tracks are using the same recordings.
BTW: I’m actually not sure how entities of type Medium (and e.g. Track) are handled. This is not transparent by the web interface since it is focused to types like Release Group, Release and Recording.
A real, easy and transparent linking of Mediums would also be helpful for ordinary releases, e.g. a Deluxe Edition with an additional bonus disc (compared to the regular edition) or maybe also for different releases but with the same medium.
I wish I could help better, but this has confused me totally as to what I have now said. Or how you have read it.
A boxset is just a normal Release with multiple Mediums. A boxset is handled exactly the same as a two CD Release.
A boxset is added as a normal Release, and likely put into a new Release Group as it is a compilation.
You are copying the Medium and making a new one. It copies the Track titles and Artists. Copies the times. And then links to the same Recordings.
It is not sharing the Medium at this point. It will be a new unique Medium for the database.
BUT as both of the CDs hold copies of the same recordings, then the links in the database will go to just the one set of those recordings.
I am probably not the best person to explain things. It is often made clear to me I don’t understand the database and should let the database guys give you better details. They will come out later with their complex interlinking table diagrams.
Yes, that is clear to me!
And this is also a disadvantage (in my point of view), e.g. if you find an error, it must be fixed in both (all) releases (technically: on the implicitly linked mediums of those releases).
Yeah… every Release is unique and needs separate editing.
An advantage of this is typos found on a Release can be noted in the Track listings. Sometimes a Track will be named differently in the USA and UK.
As they then point to the same Recording, then details about who played on that Recording will be common to all the Mediums it appears on.
The original edits have been based off Discogs, so I don’t think the existence of them as seperate releases on MB is reason enough to just leave them.
(After leaving a comment on the original edit to check) I would just merge them into the box set, which you know is correct, and then if in future someone adds them separately the onus is on them to show that they were purchasable individually.
You are not really losing any data by merging them so I would go for it and feel good about it
OK: It’s only allowed to enter them again, if they bring an official receipt.
Let’s see if also others vote for merge.
Hehe - perfect. You now have advice to go both ways.
So just post any edit links here and we’ll help vote 'em through.
The key is to add lots of edit notes as to why you are cleaning up the mess.
I don’t understand why you say that.
@NeroA, here is an example:
Your 4 MB releases were added by same editor in 2017 so you can ask them if it was all bought as one package.
If so, merge them into one 4CD release.
Otherwise create a 4CD release by reusing these existing mediums (in the release editor tracklists tab).
Disky is funny. They even have single disc box sets, which have different barcodes for the disc and box.
It’s not really a boxset.
It’s something not that rare, either: standard jewel case with (additional) cardboard slipcase.
Which allows artwork on the whole surface of the release.
What I meant is that a boxset is just a multiple media set. One CD, Two CDs or Sixty CDs are added to a Release in the same way. There is no boxset entity or type.
I meant it is much easier than it looks.