Looking for help cleaning up the Jamendo "label"

yep that’s what I was angling at, as you can then have Jamendo - ##### with that being the “cat” number (which I believe is just an entry number in their system)

Honestly there’s a few examples of these existing, but my belief is that the community in general dislike these.

Some examples are:

NOW is a series, of which there are many different sub-series and location specific series. But the “NOW” label doesn’t exist, not even as an imprint.

From what I understand The Daily Mail never actually “produced” any of these, they were often done by other organizations - but sometimes its quite hard to find out who exactly did that

1 Like

on this theres a tag that tracks bogus labels

https://musicbrainz.org/tag/bogus%20label

I saw data that seems to be getting lost. If Jamendo had a real role in making some artists visible, it would be good for history to have some kind of relationship where they still appear on the Jamendo page.

I just feel like setting releases to [no label] is casting them loose to be lost in the database.

But if they are just “yet another digital shop like Spotify\Bandcamp” then they have no place to still be associated and and my comment should be ignored.

„adding [no label] entry to these releases would imply that there is none however. can you say that for certain for all these releases?“

Yes, I think we can say that for certain because that’s exactly what Jamendo was made for.
As in my examples, some netlabels may have been involved in uploading music that they released elsewhere under their label and with their cat# but at Jamendo there’s no mention of this info. So these releases should have 2 release events: netlabel/cat# (plus their URL) and [no label]/[none] (plus Jamendo URL). Removing the [no label]/[none] RE would incorrectly imply that the netlabel released music under their name and with their cat# at Jamendo.

2 Likes

I think the “distributed” relationship would be okay for this. imo that relationship could also be correctly applied for all other digital platforms, Spotify etc, it’s just that nobody’s seen the value in doing so.

Otherwise I’ve been doing Steam/Valve wrong :stuck_out_tongue: (which is def. possible, it’s never gone on the forums for discussion)

Now I do understand the Steam/Valve option. Music is being sold on there as that is the market the artist has. And much of the time they would not sell it anywhere else. So it jumps it up in important as a distributor and kinda does take it up to label status. It also makes a lot of sense to keep this unique collection of music together with the theme that makes them common.

If the music on Jamendo equally would not exist without them as a partner to make their music available then that needs crediting in some form. If they do the work of a label it seems they are almost a label.

1 Like

I just wanna emphasize that I only removed the [no label] entry for releases where I previously added them. I haven’t touched it if it was already there to begin with - and there are cases were [no label] and Jamendo were both listed.

I get that this might have been the original purpose of Jamendo but I’ve found at least one example of a music label offering their albums on this platform. We surely can’t add [no label] to these albums, even though they are available on Jamendo.

For this album for example the album artist is Federico Pulina and the label is OnClassical. It’s evident that Pulina didn’t upload his music to Jamendo himself.

Since at least one user is interested in following the releases from this platform, I created a new release series and added all the releases with their respective identifiers to it from which I previously removed the Jamendo label. I hope this is satisfactory moving forward.

edit:

I agree that in such a case the two releases should be separated. but I don’t agree with converting missing information to knowing that the information doesn’t exist. if we are uncertain that the label responsible for other platform publications is not involved here as well, how can we set it to [no label] in good conscious?

I’m mainly focused on digital releases and I only set a release to [no label] if the provided information does prove that it is self-published.

4 Likes

I updated my script to include automatically parsing the catno of the removed Jamendo label and then use it to add a series relation to this release. I’d appreciate it if someone with playwright experience could have a look at it:

user = "user"
pw = "pass"

mblabel = "https://musicbrainz.org/label/c80d3a32-73d9-4c2a-b591-115edd0fa65b"
mbseries = "5d53fddf-527c-42a8-aff3-0b8c8de0eca5"
editnote = "Jamendo is not a label but a digital distribution platform. Removing label entry and adding it to the Jamendo release series.\n\nhttps://community.metabrainz.org/t/739889"


from playwright.sync_api import sync_playwright, TimeoutError as PlaywrightTimeoutError

with sync_playwright() as playwright:
	browser = playwright.firefox.launch(headless=True)
	context = browser.new_context()
	page = context.new_page()

	# Login with provided credentials
	page.goto("https://musicbrainz.org/login")
	page.locator("#id-username").fill(user)
	page.locator("#id-password").fill(pw)
	page.locator("span.buttons.login").click()


	# outer loop - fetch releases from first page
	while True:

		try:
			# pick up all links
			print("Fetching new page")
			page.goto(mblabel)
			links = page.locator("tr > td:nth-child(2) > a:nth-child(2)").element_handles()

			releases = []

			# abort if there are no releases
			if len(links) == 0:
				print("No more releases")
				break
			else:
				for link in links:
					releases.append("https://musicbrainz.org" + link.get_attribute("href"))


			# inner loop - remove Jamendo label from all releases
			i = 0
			while i < len(releases):

				try:

					# go to edit page of release
					page.goto(releases[i] + "/edit")

					# prepare status message
					album = page.locator("#name").input_value()
					artist = page.locator("#ac-source-single-artist").input_value()
					print("Processing: \"" + album + "\" by \"" + artist + "\"")

					# find all label inputs, catnos and remove buttons
					labels = page.locator("[id^='label-']").element_handles()
					catnos = page.locator("[id^='catno-']").element_handles()
					buttons = page.locator(".remove-release-label").element_handles()

					numbers = []
					
					# check in reverse order if label is Jamendo then save catno and remove
					for j in reversed(range(len(labels))):
						if labels[j].input_value() == "Jamendo":
							numbers.append(catnos[j].input_value())
							buttons[j].click()

					page.locator("button:has-text('Finish')").click()

					# post forum link and finish edit
					page.locator("#edit-note-text").fill(editnote)
					page.wait_for_selector("div.edit-list > h2:nth-child(1)")
					page.locator("#enter-edit").click()

					# wait for redirect
					page.wait_for_url(releases[i], wait_until="commit")
					
					
					# nested loop - add releases to Jamendo series with their catnos as series number
					while True:
					
						try:
							
							# go to edit page of release
							page.goto(releases[i] + "/edit-relationships")

							# add release to Jamendo series
							for number in numbers:
								buttons = page.locator("#release-rels button.add-item")
								buttons.nth(buttons.count() - 1).click()
								page.locator("#add-relationship-dialog select.entity-type").select_option("series")
								page.locator("#add-relationship-dialog input.relationship-target").fill(mbseries)
								page.locator("#add-relationship-dialog [id^='text-attribute-']").fill(number)
								page.locator("#add-relationship-dialog button.positive").click()

							# post forum link and finish edit
							page.locator("#edit-note-text").fill(editnote)
							page.locator("button.submit.positive").click()

							# wait for redirect
							page.wait_for_url(releases[i], wait_until="commit")
							break
						
						except PlaywrightTimeoutError:
							print("Timeout error, retrying series addition")
							continue
					
					i += 1							


				except PlaywrightTimeoutError:
					print("Timout error, retrying label removal")
					continue

		except PlaywrightTimeoutError:
			print("Timeout error, retrying fetching releases")
			continue

	browser.close()
1 Like

From About us | Jamendo Music :
„the first platform to legally share music for free from any creator under Creative Commons licenses.“
„Jamendo is all about connecting musicians and music lovers from all over the world“
„the perfect platform for all independent artists wishing to share their creations as easily as possible“
So Jamendo was made to allow artists to publish their music easily themselves. No labels involved.
I probably added 100+ releases and there was not a single one where a label was even mentioned.
However, your example shows that I was wrong to assume that it’s always like that.
But still, I think for the vast majority of Jamendo releases [no label]/[none] is correct so I‘m still very much in favor of replacing the existing REs with this (and fixing a few special cases like your example afterwards) instead of just deleting label and cat#.

„I agree that in such a case the two releases should be separated. but I don’t agree with converting missing information to knowing that the information doesn’t exist. if we are uncertain that the label responsible for other platform publications is not involved here as well, how can we set it to [no label] in good conscious?“
I don’t think that we are uncertain.
On physical releases we look for an imprint. In the same way we can check the information that is presented to the user on the Jamendo album pages. If a label is mentioned then it’s a release by that label. Otherwise it’s not.
E.g. we know that the netlabel afmusic is behind Release “Adam” by Shearer - MusicBrainz but I think the fact that this information is not available on the Jamendo album page makes this a [no label]/[none] release.

One of the OnClassical releases is here:

Currently, there are 2 REs: OnClassical without a cat# and Jamendo with the typical URL based cat#.
In this case, I agree that deleting the latter is correct.
BTW, the misuse of Jamendo by OnClassical is very obvious: There’s no label entity there. Instead OnClassical appears as an artist and the original artist is neither mentioned on the Jamendo album page nor on the cover art.

1 Like

I’m with you there that probably nearly all of the releases on this platform are self-published. After aerozols comment I just didn’t feel comfortable anymore to add [no label] in a batch manor when I actually don’t know anything about these releases. While removing the pseudo label entry and adding the release to the new series I created seemed unintrusive.

I agree on your observation with the OnClassical label, which made me question if I should even post it as an example. Because of the original idea of this platform there is probably no way to even list label information aside from just noting it in the info text. For my decision making I usually look for a corresponding copyright notice, which of course is also not here on this platform.

Okay, so what would you suggest going forward? I’m willing to help with more scripting. Since all releases I removed the Jamendo label from are now listed in the new series I created it should be rather easy to batch process them. I’m unsure however how to deal with releases that still have a label entry. Should I skip them, should I add [no label] regardless? And what do the other users think here about this?

Cheers!

Incorrect data (vs no data) is something to avoid at almost any cost.

That said, for me, it’s not at any cost… if it’s a extremely small fraction of releases that will be labelled wrong, I’m not going to lose sleep about it. Some others here may be more hard-line.

+1 for [no label]/[none] of course :slight_smile:

1 Like

I remember you were able to order releases as CDs. Did anybody ever do, so is there any label specific on physical releases?

Are you sure? E.g. CDBaby had this option but I don’t remember Jamendo offering this and it’s not mentioned anywhere: Jamendo - Wikipedia.

Yes, indeed. I think I mixed up those.

As it was written in their FAQ, it is a repository for music:

Still, they publish music: Jamendo : Our rules

In my opinion, Jamendo was a publisher in a time where there was no easy way to self-publish your music in the Internet. They even provided service to people to get their music published from other media. There is more info on the artist pages: Jamendo : Why join jamendo?

Similarly, The Pirate Bay promoted and published exclusively some releases by different artists on their service, with catalogue numbers.

2 Likes

done. I haven’t touched releases however that already had a proper label.