Several contradicting bits of info in this release

[Beckfield]

This release has some issues. There are some contradictions that, not having the release myself, I am uncomfortable deciding which way to go. So I thought I’d post it here so hopefully someone with the release, or more insight, can take a look.

Issues:

1. Links to two different Discogs releases. Even the Discogs releases are very closely matched, and may be duplicates.
2. The discrete CD image says “Made in USA,” but the PDF file has a disc image that says “Manufactured in Japan.”
3. Both the discrete back cover image, and the one in the PDF, have a statement saying the disc was mfg. in Japan. This seems at odds with the “Made in USA” disc, but the discrete images were uploaded by the same editor, so maybe that’s the way it is.

[Beckfield]

I just noticed the annotation which explains the Japan/USA oddity.

[jesus2099]

@Beckfield

The discrete CD image
the discrete back cover image

Slightly off-topic, I just wanted to understand what you meant by discrete?

[aerozol]

The discs have some slight differences (one has a leading 0 on the ‘DIDP’ number and the black triangle in a circle symbol on one) so you can split them into two releases.

The Discogs ones seem to have different DIDP ending numbers on the CD matrix/bottom but MB doesn’t have scans of those so not sure which matches this release.
Edit: oh no the PDF does include the matrix! So you can conclusively link that release to the Discogs release with DIDP … 19
Amazing work @EvilGnome6

[Beckfield]

Stand-alone. Meaning an individual image, rather than the ones in the PDF.

[Beckfield]

But minor differences in manufacturing details don’t necessarily mean ‘different release.’

I see this has been discussed before, without definitive conclusion, as far as I can tell.

Alternate CD matrix/runout inscriptions: enough for a new release?

Well, i think Discogs definition of a release is very near of MusicBrainz’s one in practice. But MusicBrainz doesn’t define it as clearly for now. Important points in Discogs definition is: 1.4.4. Manufacturing variations should not be counted as a unique release. For example; different stampers / matrix numbers for the same edition, manufacturing tolerance based variations in the shades of label paper or ink color, or unintended vinyl coloration caused by variation in vinyl stock, etc., wou…

[jesus2099]

If you upload some graphics that show a different packaging, then it’s a specific version.

We can choose to include several small matrix variations in the same MB release, but not when the matrix shows a different manufacturer.

[aerozol]

@Beckfield

But minor differences in manufacturing details don’t necessarily mean ‘different release.’

You don’t have to add a new release obviously, your time is your own

But this is one of the few cases where the guidelines are clear - the printed graphics on top of the CD (not just the matrix) are different, so it’s another release.