Good. (disc x: name) only applies when the disc has it's own name so that's why I asked. ;-)
Cristov (wolfsong) --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: "Steve Bernard, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], "MusicBrainz style discussion" <musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org> Subject: Re: [mb-style] Disc Numbers on Multi Volume sets Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 10:43:30 -0400 Thanks for responding, Cristov. The years are given to volumes, not discs: Volume 1 is 1959-1961, Volume 2 is 1962, Volume 3 is 1963, and Volume 4 is 1964. Even in the first volume the discs aren't titled by year, but just encompass all of the content for the covered years in chronological order. So, if there's no further worries, I'll get to it! -Steve On 5/3/06, Cristov Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think you're almost right but one caveat. If each disc is a different year > it should be ""The Complete Motown Singles, Volume 4 (disc 16: 1964)". While > it's not given as an example it would fall under > http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/DiscNumberStyle. > > Cristov (wolfsong) > > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From: "Steve Bernard, Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > Subject: [mb-style] Disc Numbers on Multi Volume sets > Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 10:22:33 -0400 > > I just received the latest entry in the Complete Motown Singles > collection for my birthday (Volume 4, 1964). I'm gearing up to get > these DiscIDs and tags and such into MB, and at the same time I want > to clean up the data that's already in there. I have a question about > the DiscNumberStyle and how it relates to these sets. The record > label doesn't reset the disc numbers at the start of each volume, so > that Volume 1 was discs 1-6, Volume 2 is 7-10, etc. You can see this > listed on the label's official site at > http://www.hip-oselect.com/catalogue_motownsingles4.asp and it's also > labeled that way on all the discs and in the liner notes. > > So, my question is whether I should set the disc title for these to, > say, "The Complete Motown Singles, Volume 4: 1964 (disc 16)" etc, or > should I do "The Complete Motown Singles, Volume 4: 1964 (disc 1)"? I > would assume the former because that reflects the packaging and the > intent of the reissuers, but I guess it could also look confusing if > people aren't clued into the way the numbering works. > > So, if there's any official guidance to be given, I'm happy to hear it. > > Thanks, > > -Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > > _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
