What type of CD packaging is this?

musicbrainz
style
cd
packaging
Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f23c9e8bba8> #<Tag:0x00007f23c9e8ba68> #<Tag:0x00007f23c9e8b928> #<Tag:0x00007f23c9e8b7c0>

#1

What would you call this type of CD packaging? I’m leaning toward “digipack”. The relevant packaging options are:

Digipack: “A folded case, typically made of coated paperboard, with a plastic tray glued into it.” It’s basically this but with two plastic trays.

Gatefold Cover: “A cardboard sleeve that folds in halves, thirds, etc. It can hold multiple records or CDs as well as booklets, posters and other memorabilia.” This sounds right except perhaps for the word “sleeve”. If “sleeve” means the CDs slip inside the cardboard, then this is not the right category.

Other: It can always be this.


#2

I’d go with digipack.


#3

Yeah, that’s a digipak. Digipaks with more than one tray are quite common.


#4

[quote]
Digipack: “A folded case, typically made of coated paperboard, with a plastic tray glued into it.” It’s basically this but with two plastic trays.
[/unquote]

The packaging list description says ‘tray’ (singular), and the illustration in the list is of a single tray. I’ve been ticked off for calling examples such as yours ‘Other’.

My current solution is to call it Digipak but with an annotation saying ‘Packaging is a N-section Gatefold Digipak’, For your very clear illustration it would say ‘3-section’.

Your illustration (plus a clear description) would make a useful addition to the packaging list.


#5

Perhaps the description for the Digipack should be modified to include a note to the effect that “Multiple trays my be included when the case folds in half, thirds, etc.”

I agree.


#6

I have updated the wiki with a new definition.


#7

Thanks for making that clearer. I have a couple of releases I entered into the database like this. I had called them “gatefold” as I had seen that used in a couple of other places. I can now rattle through and correct these to “digipak”.


#9

This is confusing. I have a “collection” here at MB which lists the physical CDs I own. I went through that list and updated the packaging types as much as possible. Specifically looking for those I mis-categorised as “digibook” or “gatefold” when they were really “digipaks”.

What I don’t understand is why most of these edits have now failed to go into the database. I come back today to have a look and all that work is just sitting there “expired” and has not been merged into the database. I have no down votes on these as they were mainly obscure albums.

Here is one example. How do I get this corrected to Digipak? Do I need to go back through all my edits, re-do them, and then paste them into that “I need votes” post?

Notice the scans of my copy show the plastic tray of the digipak, yet the edit was rejected.


#10

Help the noob to get these to work. Here is a little list of those that failed to get applied. Looking at the pattern it seems to be any release that already had a “Packaging” type were not changed. Those where the Packaging type was not set did allow me to change them.

https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440192
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440211
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440224
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440225
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440261
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440413 (comically this one is in the annotation but was still rejected)
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440485
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/50440492

I also have many of these disks heaped up next to my scanner so covers can be scanned to prove the changes if needed. But look at that Radiohead book - there is a ton of artwork here already, the descriptions all say “book”, but attempts at changing the packaging type are rejected. Puzzling.


#11

All of those edits seem to have been applied now.


#12

This is the status that accepted edits get before really applying, some minutes or hours later.
Don’t worry, next time. :slight_smile:


#13

Thanks for explaining. Some of the colours and language are a bit confusing at times. So if it is yellow and expired it means it will get sorted at some point when the Database Hamsters get round to it. Only if it clearly says it was rejected should I look back at it again.