lately there was new re-release of the classic Doom games which also featured a new soundtrack by Andrew Hulshult called “IDKFA”. in 2016 however there was already a release called “IDKFA” but it only covers the tracks from Doom 1. while the new album features all tracks from Doom 2 as well, the old tracks (from the previous IDKFA) were re-recorded to match the overall style.
I guess this means, we need to separate the recordings from both versions (right now they use the same for the Doom 1 tracks).
does the new album also justify a new release group? I tend to say yes but wanted to hear your opinions on the matter.
3 Likes
I agree, especially about the new recordings but I’d also support the new release group.
5 Likes
Yes, a re-recording of an album results in a new release group, I think, too.
3 Likes
I would use a new release group when it’s a completely different recording. For sure in case of something that is essentially a .mid file using General MIDI instruments, meaning the exact sound depends on the sound card or sound library used. (At least that’s what I remember from playing Doom in the 1990’s on different computers, correct me if my memory is fooling me.)
Compare to a classical work performed by a different orchestra/conductor, or a new recording by the same orchestra/conductor.
I happened to be looking at this recently and the guidelines are ambiguous on whether redoing the same material constitutes a different release group, but I think the new tracks + new recordings tips the scale.
I think it might partially depend on the case.
For instance a re-recording of something that essentially has the same output (such as AMIGA based modules, as used by Epic a lot at that time, based on recorded samples) would probably fit the same release group.
But Doom were General MIDI compatible .mid files, which means they do not contain audio samples, only notes/sequences which would trigger a GM compatible device. The sounds on a Roland MT32, are completely different than those on a Yamaha OPL3 FM chip (as found on Sound Blasters), which are different from the RAM sounds loaded on a wavetable soundcard (such as the SB AWE-32 or GUS). In the latter case, one could even load a custom GM sound library in memory, possibly dependent on the amount of RAM the soundcard was loaded with. (I had a GUS with 4MB for instance, which had a custom GM library to replace the standard 1MB one.)
This means a different recording might sound completely different. General Midi is essentially a fixed preset list of simulated “real” instruments, always having the same positions, to be able to exchange midi music, regardless of the exact synthesizer playing them. But obviously, a GM compatible wavetable synth sounds completely different than a GM compatible FM synth.
In this case the fact Doom II is included, makes the decision easy.
But if it weren’t, it might be considered whether the exact same instrument was used or not.
thanks for the detailed input Aszazin. the question already came to my mind how even to deal with midi albums on musicbrainz.
notice however that in this case the original midi tracks are merely a template for a genuine metal cover album of these tracks. this is by no means a sound library render of the midi files.
1 Like
Ah, you mean it’s a real band playing the stuff?
I really missed that!
In classical music, it’s important to use a separate RG for a new recording, even by the same formation.
Whether it would also need a new RG outside the classical area? I guess it depends a bit on the artist’s intention. Guess we’re lucky the release also contains Doom II to make the judgement.
The description you provided made it sound more like a remix than a complete re-recording but that’s still a new recording in mb