Personal interest in adding data


It looks a bit frustrating for me now. I just added titles to nearly 80 files by doing a lot of clicking (thats another problem mentioned here). Now I have to wait for maybe 7 days until the data is free available in the database and I can use it for my own purposes. That means, I can’t benefit myself from the work I have done (only in 7 days) and my data keeps untagged and unordered for now. Of course I find it much more important to support the database and I accept the procedure of waiting to keep the data clear.

But it would be much more motivating for the next edits if I could also use Picard in some way to fetch this new data that is still in queue, I really don’t want to do all the editing again locally and waiting ist unlovely because it blocks my work with my local data.


You are a brand new editor, welcome to the community.
Your edits are queued up and will be automatically applied after 7 days or 3 unanimous votes.
This is mainly done to reduce spam and allow destructive edits to be reviewed before they become live.

You can save the files with the current tags so the musicbrainz id’s are saved in the file.
When you load the files again next week it will find these id’s and be able to match these to the new track titles.


sorry, but either you didn’t read my question properly or it was my lack of writing proper english sentences. But everything you said I’am already aware of what could be read from my text, for example this sentence:

your text sounds like a standard text/boilerplate to me, is that possible? I wanted to point out, that it might not only to me be frustrating to put data in the DB without having the benefit to use it then instantly. So having the option to access this new data that is still in the queue would be a worthwhile option for Picard.


I do like this idea.
Anyone know if it is do-able?


This is not currently supported by the API and would need changes.
There would also need to be changes to picard.
It has been suggested before and there may already be a ticket to add this.


I definitely agree, this is a major issue for new users who either want the data/tags now, or are confused by not seeing their changes appear.
There has been discussions about letting Picard retrieve ‘open’ edits, but also eventually removing votes altogether and going towards a Wikipedia style ‘revert to earlier version’ style instead (instant edits).

Musicbrainz is an open-source non profit so it wont realistically happen that soon. But while MB moves ever forward at a slow but steady pace, many commercial databases rise and inevitably fall (after selling out the work of their contributors) - danke vielmals for your contribution to open information!


I agree too. It is quite a barrier to the encouragement of people to contribute to MB rather than just tag their own files. Conceptually, it would seem feasible to allow a Picard user, who is an editor and who is logged in on Picard, to pick up their own open edits. Obviously there would be some technical issues, but surely worth a ticket?


I’ve had a look at
but nothing looks hopeful.
What language would such a ticket use?


How about:
"When a MusicBrainz editor is logged in on Picard, include their open edits in the metadata, as if these edits had been applied"
Alternatively, add:
“Provide this as an option in Options->General->MusicBrainz account”


Instant edits and ease of use allows for spam to run rampant.

While the option to allow “in the queue” changes to be displayed is a nice option, it probably shouldn’t be the default choice. And after seeing the history of WP, I would rather learn from their mistakes than follow in their path.


If you mean, "“When a MusicBrainz editor is logged in on Picard, include their open edits in the metadata available for them to use on Picard”, then that would seem to work for new users wanting to tag, while at the same time isolating any errors/misinformation to their own tagging.


That is what I meant.


Quite. Hence the suggestion that only the editor gets the instant updates in Picard (and loses them if they get voted down :wink:)


Hi @Muzzer, and welcome to MusicBrainz - and thank you for your contributions so far! :slight_smile:

Yep, as the other posts have said, we’re aware of this. There are a number of issues though, first and foremost that our API/web service does not currently have any way to expose non-applied data/edits. There’s MBS-5628 for this. However, even when that is applied, there will need to be changes made to Picard (I couldn’t find any open ticket for this), and even then, what do you do if there are multiple open edits to a given entity and they conflict? (This can be by both multiple editors or a single editor can have made it so, likely without realising this (there’s at least MBS-7511 to try and lessen this).) Unfortunately, these are all rather large and complicated changes, and will thus not be likely to come around anytime soon. The edit exposing will likely not happen until we’re at “ws/4”, which is at least 2 years in the future.

In the meantime, you may want to look forward to MBS-9505 which will make it so you have 24 hours to make (non-destructive) fixes/touch-ups to releases you add yourself get applied instantly (currently you have 1 hour, which has proven to be too short). It will not help with fixing up releases added by others, unfortunately, but it may function as enough of a bandaid for now! :bowing_man:

(If you make an account on our ticket tracker, you can vote for the tickets, which may (but may not as well though, due to lots of other factors (e.g., how complicated it is or prerequisites)) make them more likely to get worked on sooner.)

How long does it take for info that is entered into the site to appear in Picard?

Thanks for the informations.

Can still someone explain me, why the titles (even after one week) are not shown in the Release list and not even in table row “title” of the recording but in the head of the recording page and also in the name field of the editing page? Is name something else than title of a recording?


That column marked “Title” is the track name on that particular release. Those can be different to handle cases where the song is titled differently on (for example) the original album and a later compilation. The underlying recording retains the “canonical” name, while the track names reflect what’s printed on the various releases.

It looks like you changed the names of these songs on the recordings without changing them on the release. You’ll need to put in another edit to change the release.

In the future, if you change track names on a release, you can check a box to copy those changes to the recordings if the recordings need to be changed also. Be careful using that checkbox though, what’s printed on a certain release may not always be the best name for the recording.


and is it possible, to copy the recording names to the release? Or do I have to do all again by hand?


You’ll have to do it by hand. If you have the track titles in your .mp3 files, I have a script for mp3tag that will produce a text file that can be copied and pasted into the track parser.


no, but its in the database already, just in each recording and not in the release… So, is there a way to get the raw data of the recording titles, and a way to add new release data without using the website interface? Then I might build a script for that change. You said something about a track parser?


The track parser is on the Tracklist tab when you edit the release. You can prepare the tracklist ahead of time in Notepad or another editor, then just paste it into the track parser and hit OK. It’s usually easier than editing each track individually. Especially if you have a source for the track names, like discogs or something.

Just create a file that reads:

  1. (title 1)
  2. (title 2) … etc.

Uncheck “Use track artists” and “Use track lengths” in the parser since you don’t need to change those.