This is completely false. I encourage you to read a bit more closely. Bit depth, yes, also container, ISRC, etc. The barcode and “imprint” are not commonly found in metadata. Yes on some it is there. But looking at the market share of the common retailers … Amazon, iTunes, Deezer, etc, the norm is that barcode and “imprint” are not in metadata.
This is possible, yes, but not false. Just a possibility of multiple. On the digital releases I have been working on, I have yet to see any issues. Works quite well, no issues for iTunes purchases, promotional material, a few lossless releases here and there, etc. Not a single issue. I do however see an ISRC issue more common on older releases and recordings. But as I have said, MB is great when it comes to old stuff.
EDIT: sorry, I missed your question. What I mean by this. For example, I tag a digital release. From this tag, my release is populated with a barcode. Many times, there is no real way as a regular non API type user to verify that barcode. So, MB is now populating my metadata with assumed information. At least for me, this is not acceptable. When I populate metadata, I expect the data to be verified to the release. Onus is on the user to compare their release to the ones in MB and find the proper one to match. Once that selection is made, I would expect that all the data on the release to be valid. But when things like barcodes are used to distinguish digital releases and most digital releases do not include a barcode, how do I choose when I need to pick between barcodes? On the recording level, yes, there is an issue. There can be more than one ISRC. There is also a potential issue on the source of the ISRC. I can tell you from my experience that when using ISRC’s that are in the metadata, I have yet to see an issue. Again, I do realize that for older releases this is more an issue.
You guys can do as you wish. I am only trying to help and have the same opinion as the others who are looking for MB alternatives. MB is the most common source of data on taggers. There is good reason for this, the CD content is top notch. However, you will find that others are writing plugins for these tagging programmers to get data from elsewhere, especially for digital releases. If you take a step back, look at why people would want another source of data, that implies that MB is not fitting the need as it once did. You can call it opinion, which is somewhat correct. But when a company stops listening to user issues that go beyond a handful of people, that is now market share is lost. I continue to bring up these points as I would personally prefer to not see that happen. For me, if I query my digital releases, I would estimate that no more than 5% have a barcode associated with them in the metadata. My digital collection is made up of iTunes, FLAC, some Amazon purchased material, then some minor random sources. I do not use rips in this because I am referring to actual digital releases, with original metadata. Just like a CD, you refer to the CD, case, stickers, artwork, etc that originally came with the release. In both CD and digital, the user can always modify things, yes, so that is not a real factor as it is there regardless… copies of CDs, mix CDs, metadata that is all scrambled (very common with those that grab mp3s off the internet), etc. Those items should not be cataloged anyway, as they are not the actual release.