Currently there isn’t a standardized approach to handling Rough Trade bonus discs on MB with some releases adding them as an additional bonus disc to whatever release it was packaged with and some handling it as its own EP release. I was hoping to get people’s thoughts on how to approach this.
That’s because Rough Trade bonus discs are packaged alongside the release, not really packaged inside of it as a new cat entry, so in a way it’s less like a limited edition and more like a pack in.
My inclination is to treat Rough Trade releases as their own EP and link them to the releases they packed in for. For me it keeps the database cleaner and also how I organize my music. But it may not be technically correct as they were distributed together.
It sounds like they might be a bonus disk, but included with more than one release? Kind of like sending out a label promo flyer with releases, except it’s a CD? Also does the bonus CD change depending on when you put in your order (like a flyer would)?
If that’s the case (a real wriggly can of worms) I would maybe bend the rules rather than duplicating it across multiple Rough Trade releases, and add it as its own EP and then link it.
Anecdote 1:
Cleopatra Records used to (I think/rumor has it) throw random overstock CDs into their compilation box-sets. I have one or two box-sets that were labeled as 2-cd compilation of a specific (sub-) genre, and they turned out to have a “bonus CD” of some relatively unrelated other sub-genre. (Like, the main 2 CDs were trance, and the “bonus” was industrial, or something like that)
Anecdote 2:
On one occasion I bought a single CD (in a labeled jewel case) at a second-hand store, and added it to Discogs. I got a response that “hey – that’s part of a box set, you shouldn’t add it as a separate release”, and another response of “Discogs is about tracking your music collection, and this is useful for people who only have one of the set in their collection; It should be allowed” (this was before discogs added a marketplace and became all about the marketplace) It’s still in there, having survived what appears to be one or two attempts to merge it into a single release–I’ve not gotten involved in any of the later attempts to reorganize it (not even voting/commenting)
“Random overstock” shows those CDs were also available as stand alone items. So I’d call them two Releases. That sounds like a “Buy one, get one free” deal.
If the packaging changes, and a new barcode applied, then it gets confusing as it would be a compilation.
If a second hand shop had split a boxset then it should still be a boxset. The original release was a boxset and that’s really what MB would want added.
Following Discogs is often a bad idea as they have a strange set of rules and no common sense. MB have the sense to keep their guidelines more flexible. The more you read the Discogs forums, the weirder it gets.
If I could buy a copy of one of those EPs from Rough Trade, then I’d say EP. If their answer was “only if you buy another album”, then I’d still see it as a separate EP. They are putting two items in the envelope. It also seems more sensible to add them as separate EPs otherwise it would get a headache keeping all the “Bonus CDs” in sync. As long as they not changing the packaging
Best to my knowledge you cannot buy it separately from Rough Trade. Instead when you buy this particular album from Rough Trade it comes with an “exclusive” bonus that has its own packaging and insert. So for example with Washed Out you can see on Discogs they added the separate packaging here: https://www.discogs.com/Washed-Out-Within-And-Without/release/2990821/image/SW1hZ2U6NTUzMTg0OQ==
Also this bonus disc is a separate media. Usually CDr and very homemade.
Sounds like we are on the same page in which case I’ll start updating the Rough Trade releases in my library.
I don’t know if this is relevant, but it is also not unusual for people to trade the Rough Trade bonus discs separately from the actual album release.
Sorry for the 180 but if the bonus disc is specific to this album (it doesn’t come with any others) I would add it to the album release and not make a new release group
I think disambiguations + annotations with the relevant ‘purchase here’ links should be be enough.
But I would wait to see what others say. I thought I had an example of where I packaged something similar with the album but turns out I actually did split it… But not sure I would do the same again.
I understand.