Re: [mb-users] Are different digital downloads different releases?

I fully agree with Davi's statement.

Different encodings do IMO not justify new releases. Neither do file naming
differences or different cover art resolutions.
One reason is that all of these can change over time for a given download
site as Davi said before.
Another reason is that we all probably get the same types of differences in
our CD-based music collections. Everyone rips their own CDs with different
encoder settings, gets cover art from his preferred sites and names the
files according to his own file naming scheme. And all those different local
versions are (of course) represented in MB by the same CD release. The only
difference to the digital media releases is that ripping and cover art
scaling and embedding into ID3 tags are usually done by the download service
providers and therefore some users may actually end up with identical
releases on their hard disks.
A third reason is that we would probably end up separating everything just
because we don't know if releases from two different sites are really the
same. And tons of separate releases in MB are more likely to remain
incomplete than a single "container" release.

Rather than having one release per download site I'd even prefer to have all
downloads with identical tracklists combined into one single digital media
release.
Release events as they were pre-NGS would help to track different
availability dates at the individual download services. But as long as MB
doesn't support this we could use start dates for the release-URL ARs
instead.
And I like Sebastiens idea of assigning attributes like format or bit rate
to the release-URL ARs.

Cheers,

Christian (MD)



--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Are-different-digital-downloads-different-releases-tp4646206p4646504.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.