How Should Disc + Bonus Sampler be Done?

MusicBrainz
, ,
1

I’m working on this release.

What’s different about it versus the existing Copland/SLSO release is it came packaged with a sampler disc that had been used by itself as well. The sampler was missing entirely from MB. Over at Discogs, the notation said the sampler had come with Copland/SLSO, but did not note that it had come stand-alone as well.

I created a separate release for the sampler. But!!! I didn’t supply a Disc ID because I’m not absolutely positive it would be the same as the version I have.

This I could use some advice on. I don’t have any reason to think the Disc IDs would be different, but I don’t KNOW them to be the same. What’s wanted in MB?

I re-ripped my two discs to see how the tags would come out. I didn’t get what I expected or what I really wanted

This might be a ripper question – I’m using ARM (Automatic Ripping Machine). But at first here I want to know whether I got MB right.

The Copland/SLSO/Slatkin disc came out with the correct album artist.
The trouble, from my point of view, is the name of “album” – it came out Symphony no. 3
I’d have preferred “Symphony no. 3 + Music for a Great City” – that would be a reasonable name for the program. But I don’t see a straightforward way to get that in the tags.

The Bonus Sampler is what’s really got me confused. It has Copland/SLSO/Slatkin for the Album Artist (which is wrong) but it has a reasonable name for the disc “Symphony no. 3 - Music for a Great City”. The problem is THIS is wrong.

What I personally would want is;

Copland, SLSO, Slatkin
    Symphony no. 3 - Music for a Great City
        01 - Title
        02 - Title
        ...

SLSO, Slatkin
     Conductor's Choice
        01 - Title
        02 - Title
        ...

But the release in MB as it stands looks like it has one Album Artist, and two discs, so I can perfectly well imagine having the disc number in front of the track number, and understand why it did what the ARM did what it did.

I might want to make it do something else though. But getting it correct will depend on what’s the correct and proper thing to do in MB.

Classical Editors – any hints for me? What should I read?

2

I assume you are talking about sub-channel information/CD text. This information is unreliable and often incorrect. I would not rely on it and would rather use the printed information.

First, the title: you should use " / " for separating the works (like other versions)

Regarding Bonus CD: Was there really a standalone release? Notes on Discogs say: “Limited release, bonus sampler, part of two-box set with Copland Symphony No. 3 & Music for a Great City.”

This is generally a good approach, but in this case I doubt if there is another version at all (see above)

I’m not a “classical editor” (only entered a few), but recording artist should be the (most important) performing artists - not the composer → Recording Artist, for the bonus disc there’s at least the conductor :slight_smile:

3

I’ll first off point you to the Classical Style Guide, specifically the page on track titles. based on the scans provided, it seems the tracklisting should be something like:

1. Symphony no. 3: Molto Moderato - Aaron Copland (10:26)
2. Symphony no. 3: Allegro Molto - Aaron Copland (8:02)
3. Symphony no. 3: Andantino Quasi Allegretto - Aaron Copland (10:28)
4. Symphony no. 3: Molto Deliberato - Aaron Copland (13:20)
5. Music for a Great City: Skyline - Aaron Copland (7:26)
6. Music for a Great City: Night Thoughts - Aaron Copland (7:15)
7. Music for a Great City: Subway Jam - Aaron Copland (3:04)
8. Music for a Great City: Toward The Bridge - Aaron Copland (6:36)

I’ll second this~ an easy way to make this correction is to edit the release to change the track artists, on the Recordings page, check the box that says “Copy all track artist credits to associated recordings.”, and once the edit is in, cancel the track list edit, as the track artists (different from the recording artist) should be the composer

the join phrase between the composer and the performers should also be a semicolon + space ; , and not a comma + space , .

if an example of this would help:

1 Like
4

OK, thanks, I’ll look into it.

I had seemed to me somebody had spent lots of time getting the track information for the Copland program right and I didn’t want to foul it up. I’m not good at this. But when I’m getting a lot out I try to put a bit back in :wink: This one’s killing me though.

The Conductor’s Choice Bonus Disc had APPARENTLY come also as a stand-alone sampler – you can see examples on eBay, here, for example.

5

A sampler is just that - a sample from a shop of other releases. It should really just live as a separate item and not part of the USA release like you have done it. I expect the shop added it to many releases for a while.

Other notes: Capitals are handled differently here to Discogs. I fixed that for you (a tip - click the Guess Case button under the track list) ( Style / Language / English - MusicBrainz and Style / Classical / Language / English - MusicBrainz )

When you have added a discID also click the Set Track Durations link to update the track lengths. The lengths MB wants listed are the ones from the actual CD and the Set Track Lengths will set these to 1000ths of a second.

Also when adding a release it is a good idea to link to the recordings of the other releases in the same release group if all the tracks and lengths look the same. If they are the same recordings, then link them up. I’ve put in an edit to fix that for you too. :slight_smile:

6

What I understood from @trleith’s description is that this disc came as part of this release, in the same package, that it’s not just an extra disc the store threw in with the purchase. So, as I understand it, it would be a bonus disc for this release. If you look at the cover, it says “limited edition”, has a specific catalogue number, and mentions the bonus disc.

1 Like
7

Yes, exactly right – it was the record company that did it, not a record shop. The “limited edition” notation is printed right on the cover art – it isn’t a sticker added by a local distributor or something like that. It’s in a fatboy case.

The Catalog Number on the “main” disc is exactly the same as the Catalog Number on every other version of this Release. As best I can tell, so is the Catalog Number for the “Bonus Disc”. It appears they didn’t bother to give the “Limited Edition” release so much as a different barcode. This is astonishing.

I do not like the way my rippers/taggers are dealing with it. I understand why, but it isn’t what I want. My purpose here is to get it correct from MB’s POV (even if it’s goofy).

And then I have another “special edition” from Lorrie Morgan, but that’ll be the subject of another thread.

1 Like
8

Thank you; I’ll look at what you’ve done. I hadn’t wanted to change the other Releases or their track lists – I figured they were done right. I was hoping simply to link them so a correction anywhere makes a correction everywhere.

1 Like
9

Missed that part as I skimmed some of your words. Correct to post it as a pair then. Guess they printed a pile of them and pushed others out as standard promo samplers.

All you can do at MB is straighten up their source data. Assuming they are using MusicBrainz. Picard gives you a lot of control over how you personally tag your own music. (Classical is outside of my understanding… so others can explain the various Classical Extras Plugin that I think you’ll be able to twist to your exact needs.

Likely they are, but one thing you can do is make the most of their work by linking to their recordings. This then gives you all that other data like the conductors, etc. for free.

When adding a release, after the Tracklist page is the Recordings page. Here you can use the edit buttons next to each of your recordings to link to previous recordings from the same albums in the same release group. You would then have ended up with a Release that looks a lot more like other releases.

As you made all new recordings I instead have Merged your recordings with the older ones as the whole albums clearly matched.

We can be pretty certain that your Release is full of all the same recordings as the other Releases in the same Release Group as it was pressed at the same time as them and shares all the same track lengths in the same order.

1 Like