As I like to edit my live videos (obviously, I even more so love to watch them), I often stumble upon this choice of merging or not merging video and audio release groups of an otherwise similar releases.
Same time release AJICO SHOW (audio edition is the usual concert record while video edition is kind of mix of 80% concert video intertwined with 20% documentary like video â backstage, rehearsal, travel, etc.)
I have never really decided on this.
I would be glad merging them but as it is a little bit of work to revert, I hardly dared to do it, as I donât have any strong preference (or my preference changes with time).
â» I am speaking of release groups, we donât merge video and audio recordings or releases, of course.
In general Iâd say merge, if it is considered the same release. It is not uncommon that a label issues a live release in both an audio only CD and a video DVD version. I would say they are the same release, if they were released together (or nearly together) by the same label and share a common name and branding (e.g. use similar artwork, are advertised together etc.).
But I must admit the cases you linked are not so easy to categorize. E.g. the AJICO SHOW looks to me as if it belongs into one RG first,but it clearly violates the branding rule I made up above.
(I added the word group in brackets, in the otherwise verbatim citation above.
Itâs a good guideline.
Yes, they have same name, same release date, same label but the artworks are completely different â what you call the branding, right ?
â
The purpose of those (audio on the left, video on the right), being very slightly different, is not that much different IMO for the buyer (me)âŠ
With your definition, most RG would be merged but not those ones⊠Actually itâs quite clever because I think itâs those 2 RG that have always blocked me merging any RG, including 95% the other ones that are more obvious.
So maybe letâs merge except when in doubt like those.
I chose the word âbrandingâ because it is more then just the artwork. It can be a similar artistic style, the same naming, both releases advertised together (âAwesome live release, out now on CD and DVDâ) etc. So itâs more subtle than just comparing the artwork. Same artwork is a strong indicator that the releases belong in the same RG, but in general there are cases where same artwork is not the same RG (e.g. singles often have similar artwork as the album) and where completely different artwork is the same RG (e.g. re-releases, or different artwork for different regions).
Now I still have not made up my mind on your specific examples
Hey you couldnât be more opportunate !
Those video and audio releases were bearing the same promotion text on the labelâs discography pages (archived VHS VIVL-261, archived DVD VIBL-35 and online CD VICL-60761ă2):
Hello. I tend to agree with outsidecontext. I would even not expect that the video and the audio be released âtogether (or nearly together)â .
After all (and especially for a concert) a video release is to an audio release what a stereo release is to a mono release: the same thing with an extra track. That track being audio, video or text doesnât change anything in my opinion.
So it all boils down to the definition of release group, and the problem you have with AJICO SHOW isnât due to one release being a video. You can have the same corner cases with audio-only releases.
Oh, by âYou can have the same corner cases with audio-only releasesâ I didnât mean mono/stereo releases. I rather meant a reissue, several years later, with the same band and release title, but with a completely different cover, a different label, and sometimes a remastering and/or a slight change in the track list.
Itâs not uncommon. Take for example an artist that eventually decides to not renew their contract with their former label, and to reissue their past releases using their own label. This is the kind of corner case I was referring to. Despite the time gap, a change in cover, a change in label and a remastering, few would create a new release group.
As for AJICO SHOW, your question is difficult, mostly because I donât read Japanese. What puzzles me is that, although there are a lot pf tracks in common, the track order differs. On the other hand, the releases have the same title and label, and above all, they refer to the same concert. In my opinion, this is the same RG.
Here is an English example, David Bowieâs A Reality Tour merge edit.
Why I would not merge them (now after years of collecting) is the usual @Freso reason, that should really be added in the release group guidelines: Owning the audio concert album, would you consider owning the concert video? If the answer is no, donât merge.
For me the answer is no. I would still like to find the video, if I only had the audio.
