Right now, the first release of this EP and the subsequent releases under the same RG use different recordings (at least in their primary contents; the Bandcamp reissue uses the new recordings, but the old recordings are available as downloads). They sound radically different. Should I make a new RG for the subsequent releases?
1 Like
Yes. Re-recorded or different versions of works should be a new RG.
2 Likes
With the Bandcamp release containing both versions, it’s going to get quite complicated if you split them (e.g. what release group does the Bandcamp release go into?)
This one will be a third RG, compilation (includes relationship) of the 2 first RGs.
No way the artist intends it to be a “compilation”, but if the MB schema wants to make it crazy complicated then who am I to stand in the way 
1 Like
i disagree; first, the original version’s presence on the bandcamp release is limited to download-only bonus tracks (see Paraglow | Parannoul & Asian Glow). second, the bandcamp release was released before any of the other releases featuring the new version (10-04, bandcamp release vs 10-13, streaming release). it should be under the RG of the new version.
Sorry if I mistake because I have not studied in details.
But, if there is a full release (RG AB), then two half releases are later released, I would call them RG A and RG B, and link them both as excerpt of RG AB (RG-RG relationship).
RG A was released first, then AB (in B-A order, BUT “A” was released only as bonus tracks (!!!); they are not visible on the actual Bandcamp page, effectively making it B), then B.
2 Likes
Style / Release Group - MusicBrainz does say “re-recorded albums” is a grey area, FWIW.
1 Like