I am a bit confused about identifying releases. For instance should these two be considered two different releases or the same release:
Looks like one release to me. What’s the actual difference?
I think most people agree that if the packaging (art, etc.) is different, it’s a different release. And of course if it had a different tracklist, that’s definitely a different release.
The same thing sold in a different store is not.
You often can’t tell from an online database. You sort of need the discs in front of you.
Different packaging = different release.
Also one is worth NZ$0.70 and the other is worth NZ$2.31 on the Discogs marketplace
Maybe I’m just blind, but could somebody explain to me the packaging difference here?
One of the two is a BMG Music Club release (see back cover)
Ah, yes. Must have been blind In that case clearly different releases. But the info should be put in the annotation. I would even add a disambiguation “BMG Music Club release” to make this clear and prevent later merging.
I can’t remember how we decided to handle BMG releases but shouldn’t it be on there as a label making the disambiguation unnecessary?
Are you referring to the discussion here ( looking at it I think this topic and the linked one really are about the same issue):
There it is suggested to add the “BMG Direct Marketing, Inc.” label. But really I would still add the disambiguation, doesn’t hurt and makes things much clearer.
Yes, that seems right. It does seem a bit odd to note the label in the disambig only for this one label but I agree that it wouldn’t really hurt anything.
Probably right, too, looks a bit duplicated. But it ads a bit more information: This was purchased via the BMG Music Club is maybe something people know about their release, while they do not immediately associate “BMG Direct Marketing, Inc.” with it.
But I have no strong opinion about this. I just personally add a disambiguation if in doubt to avoid later trouble