I just uploaded my first new album/ disc and I’m pretty sure I butchered the process:
Things I know I messed up:
I added the wrong performer (there are two Jean-Philippe Collard’s who are pianist, one has the last name Collard-Neven and I didn’t catch that I picked the wrong one until I had updated everything).
When I created the recording, somehow the composer was populated into the Artist field, but I understand it should be the performer instead. So I went through and corrected that. The notes make it seem like you should never have to do this, but I’m not sure what I did wrong.
I added the wrong coverart files at first, but I removed them and re-uploaded the correct ones.
I’m confused by the relationship I need to do for the Work. When I go to search, I see the work that I want, but the artists are other pianist. Is that the right process? I thought I would be linking it to the work itself, not to the performance by another pianist. If I select a work and bring it into the edit page, I also see all kinds of arrangers and orchestrations. None of which apply to this recording. So do I add that work and then delete those lines from each track?
I’ll add a few notes, but I don’t do Classical editing as I always get it wrong. And there are some very unforgiving editors on the classical side.
You have set Jean-Phillpe as “performer”. If you click a bit more on the list you’ll find “Instruments” and that opens up a box to allow you to select “Piano”.
Making lots of mistakes is the best way to learn really. Making corrections of your data is allowed. It can just seem odd that your corrections can take a week but this is just due to the voting system. So the wrong Jean-Phillipe will disappear after a few days.
With the “Work” relationship, there isn’t going to be a pianist already attached. What you see in grey on the search are other performances associated with the work to help you know you have the correct work. When you actually select the work you’ll see just the Work name and the other performers are not on the page.
As to arrangers and orchestrations - out of my comfort zone again. Sorry.
we all make mistakes i for one have made plenty. the more you do it the better you will get. if your not sure about something just come back and ask the community you will be able to get help with most thing even if they can not help people will give you guidance and hope it puts you on the right path. remember there are no stupid questions
A mess, but not yours. This is system default from which CSG deviates. (Typically, Chopin is not recording artist because he died before audio recording was born.) As there is no setting for ‘Release entry mode: classical’, you will have to “correct” stuff.
You do it right. That other stuff applies to the work, not your recording of it. Do not delete.
Notice that now you do have your works linked all those other performance hints are not there. If you click through to the Work you’ll see your performance listed alongside the others in the expected way.
The only comment I would make is that PDF. It is better to upload JPGs or PNG images. This is what the cover page section is really designed for as they are quicker to look at and easier to reuse elsewhere.
Maybe keep a PDF for just the booklet, but personally I am not a fan of that either. It is better to see that as separate pages as per standard guidelines.
I made a few edits here to improve the data (performer => instrument, piano, added works, moved Chopin from the release title to the release artist), and approved the recording artist changes If you have any doubts about any of that, do let me know!
Also, this uses different numbering for the posthumous works than the one we have in the DB. I think I got the works linked properly, but if you can review it, that’d be great!
I find a PDF booklet super useful personally, so I’d certainly say keep it!
Yes, I used it while fixing stuff up For that, it’s actually helpful to have all stuff in one place, but I agree ideally medium and rear cover would be separate files.
I find being able to look at things on the MB website itself without loading up a different application is easier. Especially as the artwork is more usable by more people that way.
When the rear and medium is not uploaded correctly it makes it unclear if they are even available.
PDFs are an illogical backward step that lock data out of reach of the database, but we are taking this discussion off topic. I’ll take my thoughts elsewhere.
That’s what has drawn me to MusicBrainz and using Picard. That consistency is really hard to do with classical music, so I appreciate the work that the editors have put it!
This makes sense to me. Typically I make a single PDF because when I’m listening to the music, the software I use makes it easy to open one file. So this way it feels to me like opening the liner booklet. But I certainly see your point. I should at least split out the cover, CD scan and back of the jewelbox scan as images in the future.
The Quality Control level from the fussy editors is brilliant. It is why MB can be trusted as a reference so reliably.
There are a lot of fussy art editors too. Some people upload incredibly hi-res images. There are a lot of people who use MusicBrainz with their own audio collections and then download these images with something like Picard. I don’t think that handles PDFs. It would be really great if the Cover, CD and Rear are there are separate images as these are used by us to spot different versions. Thanks.
For example, looking at your images I can see that you have an FBI logo on the rear cover which implies that this must be a USA release. And your catalogue number is the number on the spine (0946 3 38966 2 8) Lots of details on those rear covers.
If you have any doubts about any of that, do let me know!
