-
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post berothbr edited 6 days agoIn the most respectful way possible, fearious making some edits that need review. These are just from the last couple of weeks.
Some problems:
They appear to have removed a bonus disc from multiple submissions and the resubmitted multiple versions of it separately (without even having a copy) contrary to RSG §1.1.4
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Free Bonus Album! With The Purchase Of "Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays"
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole And George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Appears to have swapped Keysor-Century Studios and Keysor Century Corp. as a recording/mastering studio: E.g.:
Various - The Drug King's Last Stand
The Miracle Voices - Have It Your Way, Lord!
Inventing Plant IDs not printed on the release:
Buddy Collette, Abbey Lincoln And Les Thompson (3) - Sessions, Live
Jack Teagarden / Teddy Buckner - Sessions, Live
Caroline Wolf - Wayside
Shirley Bassey - This Is My Life
Johnny Cash - The Singing Storyteller
Bishop R.W. McMurray* - Sermon: There Is Hope For Me (this also has other issues as noted by hudsonia )
Roberta Flack - First Take
Ornette Coleman - Crisis
The Clara Ward Singers - The Clara Ward Singers
Patent# as Plant ID:
Dick Stabile - Dick Stabile Plays For You
Mel Tormé - Gene Norman Presents Mel Torme At The Crescendo (this also has other issues)
Audrey Morris - The Voice Of Audrey Morris
The Australian Jazz Quintet + Osie Johnson - Australian Jazz Quintet +1
Other invented Plant IDs:
Diana Krall Featuring The Clayton-Hamilton Jazz Orchestra - Christmas Songs
Roberta Martin Singers - He Has Done Great Things For Me
Nat Adderley Quartets* - Naturally!
George Cables - Cables' Vision
Chris Connor - Chris In Person
Bill Evans (3) - Living In The Crest Of A Wave
Saint (14) - Warriors Of The Son
Andraé Crouch & The Disciples - Take The Message Everywhere
Diahann Carroll And The André Previn Trio - Porgy And Bess
Jody Webb And The Round-Up Boys - The Honey Jump
Woody Shaw - Rosewood
Dave McKenna - A Celebration Of Hoagy Carmichael
Don Cherry - Cherry Jam
Various - Save The Children
Stanley Turrentine - Betcha
Gene Ammons All Stars* - The Happy Blues
Invented a pressing plant name: Springboard Custom Pressing
Similar: Mastercraft Record Plating Co. (this might be ok)
Pressing Plant?:
Takeda Record Service
Raleigh Records, Inc.
Questionable Pressed By adds:
Ruth Olay - Olay! The New Sound Of Ruth Olay
The Marian McPartland Trio* - Ambiance
George Shearing & Barry Tuckwell - Play The Music Of Cole Porter
Dinah Washington - Unforgettable
(they seem to have added Pressed By - National Record Pressings, Inc. to numerous Mercury releases without any evidence)
Dinah Washington - Unforgettable
Dinah Washington / Terry Gibbs / Max Roach / Don Elliott - Newport '58
George Freeman - Man And Woman
Buddy Collette And His Swinging Shepherds - At The Cinema!
Count Basie - At Newport
Shirley Scott - Queen Talk: Live At The Left Bank
Ahmad Jamal - Rhapsody
Thelma Houston & Jerry Butler - Two To One
Woody Herman And His Orchestra - The 3 Herds
Westlake College Quintet - College Goes To Jazz
Toshiko Akiyoshi-Lew Tabackin Big Band - Farewell To Mingus
Wayne Shorter - Moto Grosso Feio
Karen Hernandez - At The Money Tree
Harry James (2) - One Night Stand
Ralph Harrison - Free Spirit Movin'
George Cables - Cables' Vision
Stanley Turrentine - Don't Mess With Mister T.
Donna Summer - I Remember Yesterday
The Supremes - The Supremes Produced And Arranged By Jimmy Webb
Larry Vuckovich - City Sounds, Village Voices
Oscar Peterson - On A Clear Day: The Oscar Peterson Trio - Live In Zurich, 1971
The 2nd Chapter Of Acts* - In The Volume Of The Book
Roy Ayers - You Send Me
Lee Morgan - Memorial Album (cutting studio is questionable)
Redd Foxx - The Side-Splitter (Volume 2)
The Milt Jackson Quartet - Soul Route
Nelson Riddle - Come Blow Your Horn (Original Score From The Paramount Motion Picture)
Grant Green - Visions
Grant Green - Visions
George Shearing - More Grand Piano
Freddie Roach - Mocha Motion!
Silverwind - Set Apart
Johnny Griffin - A Blowing Session
Sarah Vaughan - Close To You
The Dick Hyman Trio - The "Unforgettable" Sound Of The Dick Hyman Trio
The Supremes - Where Did Our Love Go (mastered at is questionable)
Terry Talbot - On Wings Of The Wind
Gid Tanner And His Skillet-Lickers* With Riley Puckett And Clayton McMichen - The Wreck Of The Southern Old '97 / John Henry (The Steel Drivin' Man)
John Michael Talbot - The God Of Life
John Michael Talbot - Beginnings ...
Cannonball Adderley Quintet* - In Chicago
Jeri Southern - Southern Breeze
Daniel Amos - Shotgun Angel
Joe Simon - Mood, Heart And Soul
Andraé Crouch And The Disciples* - Take Me Back
Buck Clayton And His All-Stars* - A Buck Clayton Jam Session
Jo Jones Trio* - Jo Jones Trio
Walter Hawkins - The Hawkins Family
Los Tropicanos (2) - Music Of The Caribbean Featuring Los Tropicanos
Don Gardner Trio featuring Jimmy Smith / The Wilson Lewes Quartet - Don Gardner Trio Featuring Jimmy Smith
See submission notes about studio: Sam Jones 12 Piece Band - Something New
See notes:
Marvin Gaye - Trouble Man
Ernestine Anderson - Sunshine
Phil Keaggy - Private Collection Volume 1 (Underground)
Ahmad Jamal - Rhapsody
Ahmad Jamal - Rhapsody
Terry Gibbs And His Orchestra - Swingin' With Terry Gibbs And His Orchestra
Harold Land Quintet - Jazz Impressions Of Folk Music
Gloria Lynne - Gloria, Marty & Strings
Love Song - Love Song
Art Farmer Benny Golson Jazztet* - Another Git Together
Antonio Carlos Jobim - The Composer Of Desafinado, Plays
Guy Fasciani - The Steinway Caper
Duke Ellington - All Star Road Band
Rev. Ernest Franklin* & Founder Herman Finley* - Presents And Performs With The South Central Gospel Music Conference
Wilton Felder - Inherit The Wind
Gato Barbieri - Gato... Para Los Amigos!!
The Victor Feldman Trio - To Chopin With Love
Weather Report - Mysterious Traveller
The Cannonball Adderley Quintet - 74 Miles Away / Walk Tall
Bennett* & Basie* - Strike Up The Band
The Incredible Jimmy Smith* - Christmas '64 (questionable date)
Eddie "Lockjaw" Davis With Johnny Griffin And Junior Mance - The Breakfast Show (Recorded Live At Mintons) as noticed by brianvy
The Ramsey Lewis Trio - Sound Of Christmas
Buddy Rich - Super Rich
Monty Alexander - Here Comes The Sun
Clare Fischer - Surging Ahead
Wes Montgomery - Bumpin'
Jo Ann Miller ,& Jerry Hitt - An Evening With Cole Porter
Michel Petrucciani - Power Of Three
Anita O'Day - In Berlin
Stan Getz - Reflections
Edwin Hawkins - The Edwin Hawkins Christmas Album
Sidney Bechet And Albert Nicholas - Creole Reeds
Miles Davis, Vikki Carr - "Here's to Veterans" Programs No. 1348 / No. 1349
Dusty Springfield - I Only Want To Be With You
Dusty Springfield - You Don't Have To Say You Love Me
Mose Allison - Autumn Song
K* + J.J.* - K + J.J.
Max Roach - We Insist! Max Roach's Freedom Now Suite
Adding US release dates to non-US versions of releases:
Ella Fitzgerald & Louis Armstrong - Porgy & Bess = as noted by Opdiner (there are many more of these)
Bill Evans - From The 70's
Bill Evans - From The 70's
Alex de Grassi - Southern Exposure
Alex De Grassi - Southern Exposure
Alex De Grassi - Southern Exposure
Alex de Grassi* - Southern Exposure
Alex De Grassi - Southern Exposure
Gato Barbieri - Gato... Para Los Amigos!!
Svend Asmussen - June Night
Svend Asmussen Featuring Derek Smith, Bucky Pizzarelli, Oliver Jackson, Jr.*, Milt Hinton - June Night
Earl Hines - The Legendary Little Theater Concert Of 1964, Vols. 1 & 2
The Victor Feldman Trio - To Chopin With Love
Jim Pepper - Comin' And Goin'
Jim Pepper - Comin' And Goin'
Jim Pepper - Comin' And Goin'
Jim Pepper - Comin' And Goin'
Max Bruel Quartette* - Cool Bruel
Various - For Jazz Lovers
Lonnie Smith - Think!
Inventing Lacquer Cut At role:
Johnny Hodges - Blue Hodge
John McLaughlin, Al Di Meola, Paco De Lucía - Passion, Grace & Fire
Cutting ANV invention:
Mose Allison - Creek Bank
Marlena Shaw - Yu-Ma / Go Away Little Boy
Unvetted runout-derived identification: Gladys Hopkowitz
Removed Mastered At even though it’s printed on the release: Eddie Osborn - Baldwin Organ And Bongos
Swapping BAOI data based on guesswork:
The Modern Jazz Quartet - European Concert: Volume One
The J.J. Johnson Quintet - J. J. In Person!
Swapping Reissue with Repress for questionable reasoning:
Santana - Santana
Santana - Santana III
Santana - Santana III
Santana - Santana
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays
Possible hijack:
Duke Ellington - Unknown Session
Wayne Shorter Featuring Milton Nascimento - Native Dancer
Bangles - Different Light
Bob Dylan - Desire
George Duke - Reach For It
LaBelle - Phoenix
Sarah Vaughan - Sassy
Crediting brands via the Objects credit role:
Bob Gibson - There's A Meetin' Here Tonight
Hammacher Schlemmer
Baccarat (8)
Incorrect crediting:
Martin Denny - Exotica Volume II
The International Jazz Orchestra* Under The Direction Of Benny Golson - Stockholm Sojourn (see notes)
Dionne Warwick - Soulful
Natalie Cole - Inseparable
Nina Simone - 'Nuff Said! (A&R coordinator is not release wide?)
John Michael Talbot ,with The National Philharmonic Orchestra Of London* - For The Bride
George Russell, Harold Shapero, Jimmy Giuffre, Charlie Mingus*, Milton Babbitt, Gunther Schuller - Modern Jazz Concert (Six Compositions)
Hiroshima (3) - Odori
Various - Flute Suite (this is actually for the main artist)
Various - Flute Suite
Hard to explain:
The Creative World of Stan Kenton via Stan Kenton - The Ballad Style Of Stan Kenton
Fatback* - Brite Lites, Big City
Questionable release dates:
Dick Stabile - Dick Stabile
Sonny Rollins - Newk's Time (Rainbo S###s are unreliable for a reissue release date. This has been discussed)
Nina Simone - It Is Finished
Mass edited to swap Stardust (6) + Stardust Records (25)
E.g., Julie Frances - Rockin' Flapper
Mass changing as on release London Records to not on release London Records, Inc. (the also seem to have swapped pressing plants on a bunch of these):
Helen Merrill - Helen Merrill
Gerry Mulligan - Night Lights
Dinah Washington - Dinah
Al Cohn - Zoot Sims Quintet - You 'N Me
Cannonball Adderley Quintet* - In Chicago
Buddy Rich And Max Roach - Rich Versus Roach
Jimmy Cleveland - Cleveland Style
Benny Golson - Turning Point
Oscar Peterson Trio* + Clark Terry - Oscar Peterson Trio + One
Sarah Vaughan - Sassy Swings The Tivoli
Dizzy Gillespie & The Double Six Of Paris* - Dizzy Gillespie & The Double Six Of Paris
Clifford Brown And Max Roach - Clifford Brown And Max Roach
Max Roach, Herb Geller, Walter Benton, Joe Maini, Clifford Brown - Best Coast Jazz
Clifford Brown And Max Roach - At Basin Street
The Gerry Mulligan Sextet* - Presenting The Gerry Mulligan Sextet
Maynard Ferguson - Hollywood Party
The Herb Geller Sextette* - The Herb Geller Sextette
Clifford Brown All Stars - Clifford Brown All Stars
Clifford Brown And Max Roach - Study In Brown
Sarah Vaughan - Sarah Vaughan
Brown And Roach Incorporated* - Brown And Roach Incorporated
Clifford Brown - Clifford Brown With Strings
Various - Jam Session
Dinah Washington - Dinah Jams
Herb Geller - Herb Geller Plays
Maynard Ferguson - Jam Session Featuring Maynard Ferguson
Charlie Mingus* - Pre Bird
Eric Dolphy - Last Date
Dizzy Gillespie - Jambo Caribe
The Three Sounds - Three Moods
The Oscar Peterson Trio - Canadiana Suite
Oscar Peterson - Soul Español
Oscar Peterson Trio* - With Respect To Nat
Art Farmer Benny Golson Jazztet* - Another Git Together
The Herb Geller Sextette* - The Herb Geller Sextette
Clifford Brown All Stars - Clifford Brown All Stars
Clifford Brown And Max Roach - Study In Brown
Sarah Vaughan - Sarah Vaughan
Brown And Roach Incorporated* - Brown And Roach Incorporated
Clifford Brown - Clifford Brown With Strings
Various - Jam Session
Dinah Washington - Dinah Jams
Herb Geller - Herb Geller Plays
Maynard Ferguson - Jam Session Featuring Maynard Ferguson
Charlie Mingus* - Pre Bird
Eric Dolphy - Last Date
Dizzy Gillespie - Jambo Caribe
The Three Sounds - Three Moods
The Oscar Peterson Trio - Canadiana Suite
Oscar Peterson - Soul Español
Oscar Peterson Trio* - With Respect To Nat
Art Farmer Benny Golson Jazztet* - Another Git Together
Removing valid info:
Terry Gibbs Quartet - That Swing Thing!
Charles Mingus - Let My Children Hear Music
The 2nd Chapter Of Acts* - In The Volume Of The Book
Buddy Miles - Them Changes
Don Francisco (2) - Forgiven
Jack Sheldon - A Jazz Profile Of Ray Charles
Unvetted Printed By from back cover codes (there are a lot more of these that I initially overlooked):
(This probably needs a separate thread - a lot of people have been adding this info based on dubious sources)
The Dave Brubeck Quartet - The Riddle
The Howard Roberts Quartet - Whatever's Fair
Duke Ellington - Eastbourne Performance
June Christy - Something Broadway Something Latin With Ernie Freeman's Music
Peggy Lee - Guitars A là Lee
Lou Rawls - Too Much!
The Cannonball Adderley Quintet - Mercy, Mercy, Mercy! - Live At "The Club"
The Art Van Damme Quintet With Johnny Smith - A Perfect Match
Johnny Cash - I Walk The Line
Art Blakey's Jazz Messengers* with Barney Wilen - Les Liaisons Dangereuses
Javier Solís - Prisionero Del Mar
Nino & April* - All Strung Out -
Opdiner 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postThe Santana were all wrong edits so I’ve reverted all but one which needs a merge. It’s a stickered version of the earlier one so needs to be merged with that. -
rdvriese 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postAt first glance most of the research looks good, but as I mentioned before, they should present their research in the forums first before making any mass edits or changing any profiles. Adding a bit of history to the profiles is OK of course, but the pressing plant identifiers and so on can't be taken from the sources so must be inferred and need to be peer-reviewed first. And as mentioned, some aren't PPIDs at all.
The intentions seem good but there also appears to be a lack of knowledge about how things work here (also see the RE/RP thing) so it wouldn't hurt to have a look at the guidelines or ask in the forum rather than apply personal standards.
berothbr
Crediting brands via the Objects credit role:
Very much a no-no. Need to be reverted.
berothbr
Removed Mastered At even though it’s printed on the release: Eddie Osborn - Baldwin Organ And Bongos
Is it really? It seems to have been a left-over from draft where it appeared in the runouts. This looks OK to me.
berothbr
Inventing Lacquer Cut At role:
Johnny Hodges - Blue Hodge
Not sure about cutting, but if there are two pressing plant identifiers it's likely a case of Mastered At = Plated At.
berothbr
They appear to have removed a bonus disc from multiple submissions and the resubmitted multiple versions of it separately (without even having a copy) contrary to RSG §1.1.4
Not sure about this, should definitely have been discussed first. Probably warrants a separate thread. -
Jayfive 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postrdvriese
Is it really?
I think it’s on the back cover.rdvriese
This is the main thing that caused me to open a thread.
Not sure about this, should definitely have been discussed first. Probably warrants a separate thread.Opdiner
I suspect there are many more of those.
The Santana were all wrong edits so I’ve reverted all but one which needs a merge -
Opdiner 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postTBH I've had a few encounters with fearious and I've found him to be a pretty good editor as a rule and always happy to correct. Hopefully, he explains a few of the issues raised here or corrects them if not. He's accepted the Santana error. -
fearious 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postHey guys, maybe I should start more forums. It's a lot of work and usually only a few people participate (and sometimes no one). Feel free to edit anything you would like.
As for Springboard, please see the massive detailed ad from a Billboard magazine which explains all the aspects of their fairly large operation. I went through several Springboard releases and noticed trends and put them in there. It didn't seem like a radical move but a forum post may have helped. I don't feel like I made up the name. It's on the ad taken from Billboard.
As far as the Nat King Cole one. I did message back and forth with j_lit about if we should put it in a forum and we both agreed it was pretty straighforward that it didn't meet the requirements to be in with the Sheraing/Cole MR.
It has a different catalog number, it's a compilation disc and did not come packaged in the original release. It was given in a separate paper sleeve and not all record stores participated in the program. It says this on the ad and I put all of this info in the MR that was set up for the bonus disc. We felt like it was a black and white case using the Guidelines and didn't need a forum discussion.
I've gone back in many of these mentioned and reverted edits.
Anyways, this is fun - good times. :) -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
As far as the Nat King Cole one. I did message back and forth with j_lit about if we should put it in a forum and we both agreed it was pretty straighforward that it didn't meet the requirements to be in with the Sheraing/Cole MR.
It has a different catalog number, it's a compilation disc and did not come packaged in the original release. It was given in a separate paper sleeve and not all record stores participated in the program. It says this on the ad and I put all of this info in the MR that was set up for the bonus disc. We felt like it was a black and white case using the Guidelines and didn't need a forum discussion.
Just to confirm, yes - fearious and I discussed this extensively via PM. There seemed no logic to why a wholly different release (a "bonus album" optionally given out by retailers, with completely different track selection) should sit in the same MR. The only alternative we could see was to sub the "bonus album" appended to a standard release, which in some cases could hijack those subs (my copy received directly from the distributor at the time, for example, didn't have the bonus album). This seemed potentially way too problematic and controversial.
RSG §16.2.2.: Releases shouldn't be forced into a Master release: If the addition of a release to a MR is contentious, confusing or difficult, then it should probably not be part of the Master release in question.
I also advised that it didn't seem a thread was necessary, IMO, as it was not considered a mass edit to correct a misassigned MR.
As to the rest of the items in the OP, I haven't come across them. And yes, in general fearious seems to me to always be a conscientious contributor here and always willing to listen to feedback.
And for repress vs. reissue, as long as fearious and everyone else follows *my definition* of these tags, it's all good :-) -
fearious 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postJust a heads up, I'm heading out of town for 3 days so if the interaction is limited - that's why?
I've wrestled with the whole repress/reissue thing a lot and read many of the forum discussions on it. If something is reissued by another label, that's a no brainer.
Repress seems like a fair tag for when it hasn't gone out of print and because it's so popular they keep repressing the album.
Reissue seems fair when that hasn't happened and it's been a while and the label puts it out again. But I know, it's all different and would be nice if Discogs would make it more definitive.
I knew I shouldn't have waded into the waters of that Santana album. I usually deal with jazz and I was in over my head with the different covers, so please make appropriate changes. About to leave for the airport -
rdvriese 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post rdvriese edited 13 days agofearious
Hey guys, maybe I should start more forums. It's a lot of work and usually only a few people participate (and sometimes no one)
I think everybody who's a forum regular knows the feeling. Still, for impactful changes it's always good to get a few more pairs of eyes on stuff. You can always ping some people, preferably who might be familiair with the subject. I think nobody who's responded in this thread would mind being pinged.
fearious
I don't feel like I made up the name.
It's not that, but also that you are adding identifiers and job numbers to the profiles. This should always be discussed first. Things like this probably don't come from the sources but from original research.
fearious
I've wrestled with the whole repress/reissue thing a lot
It is - or can be very simple. The tags are not mutually exclusive. In fact, a repress is almost always a reissue per definition.
Reissue = not the first issue of the work.
Repress = if the reissue is pressed from the original masters.
Hope that helps.
Edit: Typo -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
The issue wasn’t that it was in a master release, it was that they removed the bonus disc from a bunch of releases and then created new web submissions for the bonus disc. RSG §1.1.4 Was the bonus’s disc not packaged with the other record?
There seemed no logic to why a wholly different release (a "bonus album" optionally given out by retailers, with completely different track selection) should sit in the same MR. -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
it was that they removed the bonus disc from a bunch of releases and then created new web submissions for the bonus disc.
Oh, I wasn't aware of that. We had only discussed the sub that I had previously edited: Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays (see the initial discussion there, which carried over to PMs).
Agreed, RSG §1.1.1. would apply here.
berothbr
RSG §1.1.4 Was the bonus’s disc not packaged with the other record?
No it was a completely separate item offered to retailers who could optionally give away the bonus album item when they sold the other record.
This Billboard promo shows how it was done:
https://www.worldradiohistory.com/hd2/IDX-Business/Music/Billboard-Index/IDX/1962/Billboard%201962-03-10-OCR-Page-0013.pdf#search=%22nat%20king%20cole%20sings%22
And they were issued in a company paper sleeve. Not in any way associated with the other release, other than by this promotion.
RSG §1.1.4.: List any items that were initially sold as a package (by the record company) as one release, no matter what the packaging.
Not sold as a package.
RSG §1.1.4.: Packaged items that are also released individually are treated as separate releases.
"Also" not operable here, it wasn't "also" released in any fashion.
RSG §1.1.4.: Items where we are uncertain if they were sold as a package can be entered as separate items.
Not uncertain here - we know for a fact based on the contemporary publication how this was issued.
RSG §1.1.4.: Items that are obtained after the sale via a coupon or other method should be entered as individual releases.
"Other method" -- to be given away at retail = "individual release."
I see this as an analog to Lou Reed - New York -- a cassette release that was given to retailers to give away when they sold the new deluxe set: Lou Reed - New York.
They were not packaged together in any fashion, only distributed to retailers with a set of instructions on what they expected to be done with them. -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post berothbr edited 14 days agoj_lit
People should actually look at the releases I linked to before posting an opinion. I know fearious is a good human and pleasant to interact with, but these edits are just chaos.
Oh, I wasn't aware of that.j_lit
Ok that's good. So we should focus on the websubbed bonus discs.
Not sold as a package.
Here's one example of the chaos: Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!) How is this Canadian? Where does the pressing plant info come from? Etc. -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Oh, I wasn't aware of that.
People should actually look at the releases I linked to before posting an opinion.
I was merely responding to fearious' ping to me explaining the background of that MR change. I hadn't had a chance to review the big list in the OP (yet).
And just to be clear, I had *no* idea there were any existing subs that had the bonus album tracks tacked on to the tracklist (see previous revision state of Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays). It was my understanding that the subs in the MR were separate releases entered with their own tracklist. The genesis of the discussion started in Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays. And the example that was discussed (and I helped edit) was Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!), which had its own bonus album tracklist, not commingled with the other primary release.
So my fault for not digging further into the existing data/sub situation before giving my advice. And my apologies to fearious for misdirecting.
I thought it was a similar situation to The Band - Rock Of Ages (The Band In Concert), where the later Rock Of Ages (Volume 1) and Rock Of Ages (Volume 2) split reissue versions were commingled in the same MR, and needed their own MR.
berothbr
Here's one example of the chaos: Nat King Cole And George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!) How is this Canadian? Where does the pressing plant info come from? Etc.
Fearious will have to explain the pressing lineage, as it seems it was derived from the original sub (Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays) from which r30494257 was split.
But it's definitely Canadian per the "vertical spire" text (Mfd. In Canada By Capitol Records Of Canada, LTD.").
Generally speaking, when there's a series of web subs that may be in violation of RSG §1.1.1., what's the best next step? Outright removal of the sub(s) is discouraged by RSG §15.1.3., since the releases are known to exist.
I've seen in some subs that there's at least one user in the past who states something along the lines of "Staff is aware that I did not have this release in my possession when submitting." I can't recall the user nor can I find an example at the moment.
Does anyone have any context for that? -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
Fearious will have to explain the pressing lineage, as it seems it was derived from the original sub (Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays) from which r30494257 was split.
But it's definitely Canadian per the "vertical spire" text (Mfd. In Canada By Capitol Records Of Canada, LTD.").
I was just referring to the bonus disc that was websubbed - it does not look Canadian AFAICT.j_lit
We just need to make sure the data matches the images and that there wasn’t any guesswork. If the runout data was not added by the same person who added the label images, it might be an issue.
Generally speaking, when there's a series of web subs that may be in violation of RSG §1.1.1., what's the best next step? Outright removal of the sub(s) is discouraged by RSG §15.1.3., since the releases are known to exist. -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
I've seen in some subs that there's at least one user in the past who states something along the lines of "Staff is aware that I did not have this release in my possession when submitting." I can't recall the user nor can I find an example at the moment.
I know who you’re talking about. All of those subs were from a long time ago. -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
I was just referring to the bonus disc that was websubbed - it does not look Canadian AFAICT.
This sub, right? Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)
Yes, this is definitely Canadian -- you can see it in the vertical text that replaces the "spires" or "Long Playing High-Fidelity" design elements in label design 58 and 60 here:
https://www.friktech.com/btls/capitol/capitollabels.pdf
Capitol in Canada continued using that old design well after Capitol in the U.S. switched to the revised designs.
berothbr
We just need to make sure the data matches the images and that there wasn’t any guesswork. If the runout data was not added by the same person who added the label images, it might be an issue.
Well, just on Nat King Cole / George Shearing - Nat King Cole Sings / George Shearing Plays (the original sub), it's the same contributor (OS) who added the runout data and images. So presumably that one is "safe" as far as corresponding accuracy.
However, as noted above, I can't see any justification for a pressing plant credit (in either sub).
If agreed here, I'm happy to edit both of those to correct the data.
And at least on the Cole/Shearing bonus subs, I'm happy to try to go through and review them for any further concerns, as it sounds like fearious will be unavailable for the Discogs salt mines for a few days.
berothbr
All of those subs were from a long time ago.
Yes, it did seem like a few years ago in histories, as far as I can recall. -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Sounds good to me. rdvriese had the same question about the pressing plant.
Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!) now edited based on available data. Please advise if any feedback. And I can move on from there if agreed. -
berothbr 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
Please advise if any feedback
That looks good to me. -
fearious 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
berothbrSounds good to me. rdvriese had the same question about the pressing plant.
Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!) now edited based on available data. Please advise if any feedback. And I can move on from there if agreed.
I apologize for using pressed by in addition to Mfg. by. I was under the assumption that Capitol used their own pressing plants, so it seemed safe since that's what actually happened there. But, I definitely should have just gone with what was on the label and stick to that.
On the other topic, the reason I moved all the bonus discs to one MR is that even though most of us found our disc in the jacket with the other album (because where else would you store it??), like shown above it didn't originally come that way. I honestly thought I was taking chaos out of the situation because there was an MR with conflicting catalog numbers, etc.
rdvriese thanks for the comments. I thought about doing a forum for the Springboard pressing plant like I have one currently in operation for Mid-South, but it seemed like such a slam dunk. Me and another user went through a ton of Springboard releases and they all had the same pressing ring with the same identifiers on the label and runouts that wasn't the same as the catalog number. BUT, I totally agree, should have just put it in a forum and it probably would have been pretty straightforward. It was one of those things where you make a discovery and it's so exciting that you blast ahead. lol, I do get excited about the history and discovery side of Discogs.
Well, back on another plane. Thanks! -
j_lit 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
I honestly thought I was taking chaos out of the situation because there was an MR with conflicting catalog numbers, etc.
To reiterate, I agree(d) with splitting them out of the MR, and you did it with the best of intentions. We all just need to be sure to mind RSG §1. (and RSG §1.1.1. in particular here) at all times when interacting with the database.
fearious
I was under the assumption that Capitol used their own pressing plants, so it seemed safe since that's what actually happened there. But, I definitely should have just gone with what was on the label and stick to that.
As recently discussed in Deriving pressing plant from test pressing in MR, there has to be some identifiable element to point to when crediting a pressing plant in LCCN.
It may be correct for that Canada sub, but some justification for it needs to be provided.
fearious
Well, back on another plane. Thanks!
Safe travels. -
cheebacheebakid 14 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
In this case it is not. Capitol didn't open a plant in Canada until 1976 under Capitol Records-EMI Of Canada Limited. Likely an RCA Smiths Falls pressing but unconfirrmable.
It may be correct for that Canada sub, but some justification for it needs to be provided. -
berothbr 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
How can inventing a name not on a release and not the actual name of the company be a slam dunk?
I thought about doing a forum for the Springboard pressing plant like I have one currently in operation for Mid-South, but it seemed like such a slam dunk.fearious
I was under the assumption that Capitol used their own pressing plants
This is the problem. How is an assumption like this even remotely factual? -
j_lit 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postcheebacheebakid
In this case it is not.
Thank you for shedding more light here. Mine was simply a suggestion to say, it may or may not be right (I know nothing of Canadian plants). But without "proof" to cite, there's no justification to add to LCCN.
Generally speaking, IMO -- if it's not on the master runout index, or in the least, documented on the pressing plant's label page for how to identify pressings there, I'm very uncomfortable with any pressing credit in LCCN. -
j_lit 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postFYI - I have checked source subs and then edited six of the seven subs in Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!) MR. I believe they are in good enough shape based on available data. If any feedback, please advise, thank you.
The one I did not edit (Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays (Free Bonus Album!)) has some conflicting info that needs sorting, or perhaps merging. Awaiting response there before proceeding. -
j_lit 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postcheebacheebakid
Likely an RCA Smiths Falls pressing but unconfirrmable.
FYI - I noticed when editing Free Bonus Album! With The Purchase Of "Nat King Cole Sings The George Shearing Quintet Plays" that the runout detail image shows a Scranton anvil stamp. Presumably this suggests origination at Scranton, but with that large (~70mm?) deep groove pressing ring, not pressed there.
The usual source https://vinyldiscovery.blogspot.com/2018/02/lp-pressing-rings.html
Does suggest Smith Falls here, with seemingly no other options. -
Opdiner 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
Repress seems like a fair tag for when it hasn't gone out of print and because it's so popular they keep repressing the album.
Any change in artwork is a reissue.
RSG §6.17.1The 'Reissue' tag can be used when used on the release itself, or the release is referred to as a reissue by the artist, label, or other official sources. It can also be used where the content of the release is not the first issue of the work.
Been discussed countless times. The content is any part of the whole release - art, media, format etc. It's broad. See for example:
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/699516?message_id=6979156#6979170
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/1010040?message_id=10322997#10322997
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/713626?message_id=7087732#7087732
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/696351?message_id=6954541#6954541
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/126417?message_id=1651386#1651386
Plus a release with a later price code printed on the release is definitely not the the first release of the work. How can it be?
But, it can still be a repress but only if the same master is used and you need some evidence of that. Saying it's never been out of print is not enough. -
cheebacheebakid 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
All Canadian plants have misinfo on that page, either incorrect date ranges or identifiers. Quality had the same deep groove ring in that era but isn't even present on the page despite being one of the largest volume pressers in the 50s through 70s. That is not a reliable source for Canadian pressings.
The usual source https://vinyldiscovery.blogspot.com/2018/02/lp-pressing-rings.html
Does suggest Smith Falls here, with seemingly no other options. -
j_lit 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post j_lit edited 13 days agoOpdiner
Any change in artwork is a reissue.
My understanding of repress vs. reissue in the cases I think fearious may have been referring to comes from this staff post:
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/746812?message_id=7408647&page=3#7421093
Where a release is otherwise identical but for a change in label stock. Per dtf there on using repress:
How do you use Repress?
[..] I may have used it a few times where a release goes out and the label immediately does a label design change within the same calendar year.
[..]
So, this means there's a zone where a release is different enough to be unique, has been pressed after the initial first batch stopped production, but, is not far away removed enough from that first pressing to be considered a flat reissue.
This scenario doesn't seem to be covered by the threads cited above as far as I can see (except maybe https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/1010040 ... which had some contention).
So take for example a Nat King Cole release on Capitol that is issued on two different label designs.
1962 was the changeover date for the label design from left logo with spires design, to logo at top design. (see https://www.friktech.com/btls/capitol/capitollabels.pdf )
If a release was issued in March 1961 on the left logo+spires label (e.g., The Touch Of Your Lips), but then is issued with all other elements identical (under the same catalog number, packaging, master, stampers, etc.), but on that new logo-at-top design (e.g., The Touch Of Your Lips), that's where the dtf post is suggesting that it's a "repress" without being a reissue.
Whether DTF's reasoning for *not* using the reissue tag here is because RSG §6.17.1. states "can also be used" (vs. "must also be used"), or because it doesn't meet the 18-month window in that GL, that's not clear.
But we can see from releases in this scenario DTF has contributed or edited are entered as repress but not as reissue, despite the different label stock:
Leo Kottke - Greenhouse (Vinyl, LP, Album, Repress)
The Johnny Otis Show - The Johnny Otis Show (Vinyl, LP, Album, Repress)
Duke Ellington - The Duke Plays Ellington (Vinyl, LP, Album, Repress)
Various - Cairo! (The Music Of Modern Egypt) (Vinyl, LP, Album, Repress)
Pee Wee Hunt And His Orchestra - Twelfth Street Rag / The Charleston (Vinyl, 7", 45 RPM, Repress)
Nat King Cole - Unforgettable (Vinyl, LP, Repress)
Gene Norman Presents Gerry Mulligan And His Tentette*, Shorty Rogers And His Giants - Modern Sounds (Vinyl, LP, Repress) -
j_lit 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postcheebacheebakid
All Canadian plants have misinfo on that page, either incorrect date ranges or identifiers. Quality had the same deep groove ring in that era but isn't even present on the page despite being one of the largest volume pressers in the 50s through 70s. That is not a reliable source for Canadian pressings.
Noted - thanks! It's got other issues too, as do many of our usual timeline/identification sources (like label guides, bsn, etc.). All of them have to be taken with a grain of salt, IMO. -
fearious 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
feariousI thought about doing a forum for the Springboard pressing plant like I have one currently in operation for Mid-South, but it seemed like such a slam dunk.How can inventing a name not on a release and not the actual name of the company be a slam dunk?
This is the problem. How is an assumption like this even remotely factual?
I guess its similar to MGM Custom Pressing Division. I've never seen that written out anywhere. But we have used ads and other things to be land on that name. Other names may have been used (like simply MGM in publications or conversations) but this one title has been landed on.
That name is on the Billboard ad in the profile pic and people most likely referred to it by other similar names as well.
The slam dunk part was not on the exact name, but on every Springboard release having the same pressing ring, the SLT- in parentheses under the catalog # on the label and the SLT- in the runouts.
I have previously admitted on here that I should have started a forum and am happy to do so if people here think it's not too late. All of the documentation for any changes is in the release notes for starters. -
fearious 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postcheebacheebakid
j_litIt may be correct for that Canada sub, but some justification for it needs to be provided.In this case it is not. Capitol didn't open a plant in Canada until 1976 under Capitol Records-EMI Of Canada Limited. Likely an RCA Smiths Falls pressing but unconfirrmable.
Thanks! This is very good to know. -
berothbr 13 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
That was created after extensive research and discussion by multiple users. I can’t remember where, but that name does in fact appear somewhere. No one on Discogs invented that name.
I guess its similar to MGM Custom Pressing Division. I've never seen that written out anywherefearious
That name is on the Billboard ad in the profile pic
No it’s not. That is part of a slogan. The name on the Billboard ad is “Springboard Custom Service”. -
Opdiner 12 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
Whether DTF's reasoning for *not* using the reissue tag here is because RSG §6.17.1. states "can also be used" (vs. "must also be used"), or because it doesn't meet the 18-month window in that GL, that's not clear.
That pre-dates Brent being staff and is also clearly contrary to the guidelines. The 18 month thing is also, per guidelines and multiple discussions, about the international roll outs only. It was specifically written into the guidelines to cover that. God knows where that discussion and decision by Nik is (I was part of it) but likely lost in the Mods forums deletion. Either way, that was its specific intent hence why it sits in that part of the guidelines.
Regardless, any release with later artwork can't be the first issue of a record or CD logically. It's impossible, so that makes it a reissue per guidelines. -
j_lit 12 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postOpdiner
decision by Nik
Is it this one?
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/396808#3678752
Opdiner
Regardless, any release with later artwork can't be the first issue of a record or CD logically. It's impossible, so that makes it a reissue per guidelines.
Believe me, I completely understand this perspective. And I assume we all understand that DiscogsWorld™ ≠ real world definitions.
But Brent's continued edits since being "staff" in this scenario still follow the repress not reflexively always = reissue. -
Opdiner 12 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
Is it this one?
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/396808#3678752
No, it was well before that, but "In addition to this, if it follows the Reissue guidelines, it can be a reissue" is pretty definitive.
j_lit
the repress not reflexively always = reissue.
For all that, the guideline is fairly clear., as denoted by Nik above. -
j_lit 12 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postOpdiner
No, it was well before that
Well, I'm wary of hijacking this thread on this specific topic, but I'm going to put my hard hat on and see what else I can find in the forums.
Opdiner
the repress not reflexively always = reissue.
For all that, the guideline is fairly clear., as denoted by Nik above.
As it seems the suggestion here is that a repress cannot be correctly tagged in format without reissue also being tagged (i.e., not mutually exclusive). Yet every example I can find with either DTF's discussion (e.g., https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/746812 > Ashford & Simpson - Is It Still Good To Ya; https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/807041 > Jefferson Airplane - Jefferson Airplane Takes Off ) or DTF's sub edits (linked earlier) show that repress can exist in format without reissue being tagged. -
rdvriese 11 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postfearious
I have previously admitted on here that I should have started a forum and am happy to do so if people here think it's not too late. All of the documentation for any changes is in the release notes for starters.
I think this would indeed be for the best, perhaps ping some users familiar with US plants to get a consensus on the IDs and what name to use.
fearious
I was under the assumption that Capitol used their own pressing plants, so it seemed safe since that's what actually happened there.
Even the majors didn't have their own pressing plants in all territories and even if they did, sometimes also outsourced work. Sometimes the pressing plants also had a different name from the parent company. So it's never a good idea to assume pressing credits from a manufacturing credit. -
Opdiner 11 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
Yet every example I can find with either DTF's discussion (e.g., https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/746812 > Ashford & Simpson - Is It Still Good To Ya; https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/807041 > Jefferson Airplane - Jefferson Airplane Takes Off ) or DTF's sub edits (linked earlier) show that repress can exist in format without reissue being tagged.
DTF does a few things contrary to guidelines, not least his caps in BAOI descriptions. I think we've long just smiled and carried on within the rules. That said, neither reissue nor repress are compulsory tags but it's EI to remove them when they are correct. In the case of the releases listed above reissue is correct however no earlier versions using the same masters were offered as evidence to support repress (as required) so repress was not. -
j_lit 11 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postOpdiner
In the case of the releases listed above reissue is correct
Re the ones that had a barcode added or a price code increased, or a new catalog number prefix, indeed, and hopefully it was clear I wasn't disputing that in the least. KC ##### > PC ##### should be entirely uncontroversial to be considered a reissue (both in the real world and DiscogsWorld).
Opdiner
DTF does a few things contrary to guidelines, not least his caps in BAOI descriptions. I think we've long just smiled and carried on within the rules.
Had always thought of that as the so-called Discogs third rail!
Anyway, probably best to take the rest of the point about the label stock change only offline or to another thread the rest, vs. continue here. Thanks as always though. -
berothbr 11 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Mass changing as on release London Records to not on release London Records, Inc. (the also seem to have swapped pressing plants on a bunch of these):
Do people have an opinion on these? (See the examples above). This looks quite wrong to me. -
j_lit 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Patent# as Plant ID:
Dick Stabile - Dick Stabile Plays For You
Mel Tormé - Gene Norman Presents Mel Torme At The Crescendo (this also has other issues)
Audrey Morris - The Voice Of Audrey Morris
The Australian Jazz Quintet + Osie Johnson - Australian Jazz Quintet +1
berothbr
Other invented Plant IDs:
Diana Krall Featuring The Clayton-Hamilton Jazz Orchestra - Christmas Songs
Roberta Martin Singers - He Has Done Great Things For Me
Nat Adderley Quartets* - Naturally!
George Cables - Cables' Vision
Chris Connor - Chris In Person
Bill Evans (3) - Living In The Crest Of A Wave
If I were waving the Discogs magic wand, PPID field would return to its core purpose for which it was created: documenting ONLY the printed plant codes at List of codes/ symbols/ numbers on centre labels (which is discussed in the former undocumented guidelines wiki: printed matter).
That it is used for all manner of data that potentially relates to pressing lineage, some of which are seen in the OP examples -- client IDs, patent numbers, job numbers, pressing ring diameters -- is to my understanding, not the purpose of the field. Even if the field is now widely used to accommodate runout-derived identifiers (despite the original purpose for printed plant codes), RSG §5.2.e. clearly instructs that it must be a "code" associated with the plant, not just an identifying characteristic.
Which suggests to me that any of the example edits in the OP with PPID uses at odds with RSG §5.2.e. should be reverted, IMO. -
j_lit 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
berothbrMass changing as on release London Records to not on release London Records, Inc. (the also seem to have swapped pressing plants on a bunch of these):
Do people have an opinion on these? (See the examples above). This looks quite wrong to me.
I checked a few of the examples. It seems the releases state "Marketed by London Records, a division of PolyGram Classics, Inc.," but LCCN was edited from London Records > London Records, Inc.
Gerry Mulligan - Night Lights has fearious' sub note explanation:
Edited London Records to London Records Inc which is the company that was a division of Polygram Classics, Inc.
I'm not sure I'm following that logic? If the profile previously assigned was the *wrong* London Records (which doesn't seem to be the case), then we re-assign to London Records (#). Not an entirely different entity that's not credited on the release.
Ideally fearious can shed some light here. Otherwise, these should all be reverted to the entity that's given on the release ("London Records"). -
j_lit 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Incorrect crediting:
Martin Denny - Exotica Volume II
berothbr's comment there is correct. The rules for "Model" credit specifically prohibit the use of Uncredited per the forum discussions surrounding the role's introduction:
https://www.discogs.com/forum/search?query=model+uncredited
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/935000
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/833718
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/1024377
https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/944747 -
j_lit 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postberothbr
Dinah Washington - Unforgettable
(they seem to have added Pressed By - National Record Pressings, Inc. to numerous Mercury releases without any evidence)
Fearious' statement in sub history is:
Added pressing plant - National didn't really use an ID (which is why there appears to be so little in the DB), but they were the main in house pressing plant for Mercury. DG pressing ring matches and when Mercury went outside, the other pressing plants usually added their ID - RCA Indy, Columbia Terre Haute & Hollywood (even for this release). So, it's pretty obvious they would use National for most of their pressings.
I see this as similar to this recent thread:
Deriving pressing plant from test pressing in MR
The credit *may be* correct, but a process of elimination not based on facts should not be the basis for crediting a pressing plant, IMO (apologies for the double negative). Some actual objective identifiable aspect must be cited before applying an LCCN credit.
Outside of reverting, if an existing discussion on how to identify National pressings doesn't exist, or hasn't been part of the master runout index discussion forum, I think a thread should be started to gather the facts, update the profile, and then releases that match the criteria can be credited with the pressing. -
berothbr 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postj_lit
As far as I can tell, that’s just one of many bad decisions that needs to be reverted as per RSG §4.2.1 This involves a lot of releases.
I'm not sure I'm following that logic?j_lit
Exactly. I’m seeing similar flawed logic time and time again. I’m not saying these are all wrong, I just think they need to be reviewed because this was all guesswork.
The credit *may be* correct, but a -
berothbr 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postOpdiner do you still feel the same about the comment you posted to Ella Fitzgerald & Louis Armstrong - Porgy & Bess? (there are a lot more of these) -
Opdiner 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this post Opdiner edited 9 days agoPretty much. There seems to be no solid evidence that this was 1984 in Europe. To claim that is a date for this European copy in Billboard is just incorrect. Billboard was and is a US domestic industry mag. 100x is correct here and has some expert knowledge of CD timelines. 810 049 is also an early CD cat #. That entry just means that EU stock was used for an initial US later domestic release at the time. Common. The UPC dates claimed as evidence are also notoriously patchy/unreliable and are often latter-day entries. Schwann (also claimed as a source) was a US catalogue.
Edit: the previous cat # https://www.discogs.com/release/7281725-Stan-Getz-Jo%C3%A3o-Gilberto-Featuring-Antonio-Carlos-Jobim-Getz-Gilberto 1983.
The next cat # https://www.discogs.com/release/5475918-ABBA-The-Singles-The-First-Ten-Years 1983 -
berothbr 10 days ago
This post is hidden because you reported it for abuse. Show this postOpdiner
To claim that is a date for this European copy in Billboard is just incorrect.
That’s not good. I only started tracking these on page 10 of their edits. There are a lot of these for France, Greece, Japan, Australia, Canada, etc. After your comment, they started adding a submission note that said something along the lines of ‘Billboard announced release dates for foreign editions’ (or something like that).
Log In You must be logged in to post.