Mismatch of Cat. ID: Which should I use?

I have a DVD: “We Love Hexagon 2011” which have following mismatch:

The printing on the medium says its PCCA-03498-2.
The data in the medium says its PCCA_03497_2.

Which one should I use for musicbrainz Cat. ID value?

The similar is also happening in “We Love Hexagon 2009”; which the printing says PCCA-03032-2; though the data says PCCA_03033_2. So, this might be a common style for this label (FLIGHT MASTER; https://musicbrainz.org/label/8e52aae0-e856-4c01-bada-93b29946863c )

Add both? As both numbers are assigned that is kinda correct.

1 Like

Add the one that is printed.

For the other, it depends what you mean by the data in the medium, exactly?

Sometimes, several physical editions will reuse same CD1, inside, but different bonus discs.

Why didn’t I attach the image…
The data in the medium is a name shown in the property of the drive.
Attaching another example of Hexagon as following:
The printing of the medium is as following:

The data-side of the medium is as following; its not DVD-R. From here, Cat. ID matching with the data can be read.


Oh, I say. That is next level dedication. Well done! :smiley:

Question: is the catalog number not printed elsewhere on the artwork?

I think it is most prudent to use the printed catalog number and add the alternative numbers in the annotation, since I suspect few editors will share your meticulousness.

Pony Canyon does not add “-2” or any other additional characters to catalog numbers, even for releases with DVDs. This is different from the case where “/B” is attached to CD+DVD release by avex, etc.

As an example, the catalog numbers in HEXAGON2009 can be found in the archives:

The number on the DVD media is not a catalog number but a part number – in Japanese, “流通用のカタログ品番”ではなく“製品管理用の部材番号”, so there is no need to fill it on the MB.

*Note that according to the strict ISO 9660 specification, hyphen cannot be used for disc media/volume names, so underscore is used instead.


Thanks for the info.
But, I’m again confused when I tried to follow your opinion.
The CD has following printing; which says its PCCA-03032-1. Should I also ignore this by assuming this is a part number; not catalog number?

And, when I checked JASRAC ( a Japanese copyright collection society) database, its saying the 3rd pattern; CD Catalog number (カタログ番号) not including -001, but DVD having -002: as following:
So, at least the company who registered the data to JASRAC is thinking that the DVD has a catalog number.
Following is a table which organizes the situation.

1 Like

I would include all of them, if I was to add this release.

It would be nice to be able to mark main catalogue number, main barcode and main label.

「品番」on the Jasraq website is the cat. number in MB. 「カタログ番号」on the Jasraq web site is the part number. The number on the Obi/cover-art must be a cat. number (which is used for distribution), but the number on the disc surface cannot be seen from the outside, so it is not necessarily guaranteed to be a cat. number. So, if obi, cover art or official information is present, the number on the disc would not be preferred as the cat. number.

Based on experience so far, the Cat.Num and Part.Num of each HEXAGON2009 title would be:

HEXAGON2009 Cat.Num/品番 CDα CDβ DVDγ CD pat num DVD part num
Limited PCCA-3032 PCCA-3032(-1) PCCA3032-2
Std CD+DVD PCCA-3033 PCCA-3033(-1) PCCA3033-2*
Std CD only PCCA-3034 PCCA-3034** -

*Unlike the description on Jasrac, it would actually be labeled PCCA-3032-2 on the disc surface since common DVDγ with Limited edition.
**Unlike the description on Jasrac, it would actually be labeled PCCA-3033(-1) on the disc surface since common CDβ with Std CD+DVD edition.


Thanks, the table helped my understanding a lot!
I first thought to put all PCCA3032-x into the label info, as jesus2099 suggested.
But, as cat. no and part no. are different concept, I now think I should put only PCCA-3032 into cat. no of MB database.

Then, the next question will be: where should I put the part no. which other users might use for searching data?
I first thought of showing them in the title of the medium; but give up the idea because the title and part no. is also different concept. I think they should not be mixed up.
Next option is annotation or disambiguation; and decided to use disambiguation.
This is because it is a place to put information which help users distinguish between identically named releases, and the part no. is ofcourse an information which helps users to distinguish.

So, I think the best solution for this case is:

  • In Cat. No, set catalog number: PCCA 03032
  • In Disambiguation, include the part number information with other information.
    ex: Limited CD+DVD ver; CD: PCCA-03032-1, DVD: PCCA-03032-2

How about this?


IMO, using annotaion is recommended.

I note in the Annotation if there is any packaging other than discs. For example, a release that includes a photobook, such as PCCA3032, can be searched this way: Search results - MusicBrainz

Likewise, you can see the supplementary information in catalog number is entered in the Annotation: Search results - MusicBrainz

Therefore, it would be appropriate to use Annotaion for Part.Num information as well.