2013/4/19 LordSputnik <ben.s...@gmail.com> > symphonick wrote > > If it only adds confusion it's better to leave it out. But if the current > > recording definition implies that a recording/track are mastered > > individually, I must take back my support. :-( I didn't read it that way, > > can you explain how? > > Well, it says that mastering is a process that happens to a recording, it > doesn't say whether it's by itself or with other recordings. > > "a recording is a set of one or more audio tracks, which ... have not been > mastered." > > Then in the mastering section: > > "Mastering is a process that is applied to recordings" > > So in neither place does it say whether mastering is done to an individual > recording or a group of recordings, which is probably the best way to leave > it. > > Agreed.
> > symphonick wrote > > No, you cannot make that assumption. Common examples would include > > re-issues, but I suppose any time you can get away with it. > > Ok then, I'll remove "particular format". > > With that, I can officially +1 this proposal :-) /symphonick
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
