I have a lot of surround sound (5.1) discs and as i go through the database i see that most of the 5.1 tracks don’t have related works. After doing about 5 of them i now know why.
For Jethro Tull’s “Minstrel in the Gallery” ( https://musicbrainz.org/release/270d7cd3-0f35-4268-b6d6-d5e4373237c4 ) i tried to add a related work for “Requiem”. I click the “add related work” and type “requiem” into the search box. I get this little dialog box that doesn’t yet contain the track i need. I hit “Show more …” and it puts more entries into the list. I scroll back up and look through again. Nope, not there. I hit “Show more …” again, scroll up to the top of the list and nope. I do this 8 more times and give up. Obviously, this is because “Requiem” is a very common title, while "Mother England Reverie: comes up right away.
You can only put a song title in here, and that’s the problem. Most of the time the results don’t indicate artists at all, so you don’t really know what you’re choosing.
Is there a better way to do this task? Is this actually a feature request? I can’t be the only one struggling with this.
Thanks.
4 Likes
What I usually do is open a second browser window (tab) with the artist displayed. Going to the Works tab shows me an alphabetical list of the works associated with the artist. If I find the work I’m looking for, I copy the link address and paste it in the search box on the editing window (tab). If I don’t find the work on the artist page, then I know I need to add a new one.
Edit: I sometimes use the same process when looking up recordings, if it’s a common title with a long list of unrelated entries.
7 Likes
Would be cool if that lookup did a match (or maybe a fuzzy match) on the Artist. Common names are a mess when there are lots of artists that have recorded a track with the same name and you are almost never looking for a recording/work by a different artists
5 Likes
I have been thinking exactly this for years.
I have each time been too lazy and used @rdswift technique without writing a ticket.
1 Like
A-ha! (the expletive, not the band) Thank you so much! Since there’s no indication that the search field takes anything other than a title, i didn’t even know you could do this. I’d bet most of us don’t know that either.
Thank you again, you’ve saved me hours of frustration.
Edit: i just noticed the words “or paste an” which are in light grey and cut off at my resolution, so i rescind some of this.
3 Likes
As a side note, i wish people would put related works for 5.1 tracks in as they are entering in the release.
Also @jesus2099, i’ll make a ticket up since you’re sooooo lazy 
(as soon as i figure out where to do that. Probably on a github account, unless Microsoft has ruined it since this morning)
2 Likes
So do I for (more or less) standard releases.
When it’s still hard to find –e.g. for classical sometimes– I use acoustID fingerprints from recordings, look if there are any other MB releases linked with this on LB and get to the related work(s).
1 Like
I’ll have to keep that in mind. I’ve done very little classical editing so far. I haven’t gotten to that part of my CD collection yet.
So did I (again 
) Just started with classical some month ago. The hardest part was at first, finding existing recordings (so much re-released compilations with other release group names). And later, how to find the possible correct work (e.g. recording is a partial [live] recording of work). @loujine GM tools did a great help for me to get the clue.
2 Likes
The same works than used on mono and stereo tracks should be ok, no?
Or you mean 5.1 tracks tend to be less often linked to works than other tracks?
Am I crazy or do I get better matching when I type in the work name + the artist?
I tried that out several times, but it didn’t seem to have any benefits on my particular searches, unfortunately.
1 Like
Yes, i meant that 5.1 tracks tend not to be linked properly. Most likely because it doesn’t auto-populate when you’re creating the listing initially, and folks can’t be bothered (unless they’re anal about their music collections).