How to add or edit anniversary editions of albums. - Suggestions

capkronos

Gender: Male
Location: Ohio

Numerous groups reissue their earlier albums with an additional 2nd bonus disc containing previously unreleased tracks that were recorded at the same time of the original album but not included. How does one go about adding those here? Do you add them to the track list of the original album or do you create a second album entry like "Album Title: 10th Anniversary Edition" and then add the contents of both discs there even if means listing songs from the first issuing a second time?

baystateoftheart
Neil Young as a butternut squash

Age: 29
Location: Massachusetts

capkronos wrote:

Numerous groups reissue their earlier albums with an additional 2nd bonus disc containing previously unreleased tracks that were recorded at the same time of the original album but not included. How does one go about adding those here? Do you add them to the track list of the original album or do you create a second album entry like "Album Title: 10th Anniversary Edition" and then add the contents of both discs there even if means listing songs from the first issuing a second time?

Neither. Only the original issues of albums are eligible for BEA.
_________________
Add me on RYM

capkronos

Gender: Male
Location: Ohio

So if an artist issues previously unreleased tracks on a separate disc but as a standalone release they can have that on here but when an artist issues previously unreleased tracks as a second disc of a multiple-disc anniversary set, that can't be on here? I guess it doesn't really make sense to me as it's literally the exact same thing except for how it's packaged.

But since this is under suggestions, I guess I can suggest this rule be reconsidered as it excludes a lot of material for certain artists. Thanks for responding.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

capkronos wrote:

So if an artist issues previously unreleased tracks on a separate disc but as a standalone release they can have that on here but when an artist issues previously unreleased tracks as a second disc of a multiple-disc anniversary set, that can't be on here? I guess it doesn't really make sense to me as it's literally the exact same thing except for how it's packaged.

But since this is under suggestions, I guess I can suggest this rule be reconsidered as it excludes a lot of material for certain artists. Thanks for responding.

I get what you are saying and mostly agree with it. The want is to represent what you have in the site and sometimes the bonus material is what makes the record so great to you (as it has for me too). This kind of makes the limitation annoying.

I suppose one issue right now we have is at what point do you allow 14 different versions of an album on the site? A UK vs Japan vs Germany vs USA release, and then the remastered with a bonus track to get you to buy it, or a re-release with a bonus demo disc, etc. Does a remaster with no track change get allowed because the remaster job was actually amazing (rare occurrence).

My understanding is the way the ratings/rankings work, it'd get pretty messy. Easy for wikipedia to do, less easy for a site trying to list ratings and rankings. You need unique data identifiers. 14 versions of the same thing would muddy it up pretty bad.

Having said that, we kind of already have that problem with compilations and song ratings - you could have 4 versions of "a day in the life" show up in the top 100 songs. Imagine what it'd do for album rankings.

Of course you could lump all the different albums into a single entity, but that'd also be laborious as most users admin the albums themselves. It also could possibly be a really easy feature to add where you just add to the existing album additional information.

Duplicate albums is already a problem on the site - this would increase it 10 fold.

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

For all the reasons that Seth has mentioned BEA only displays one version of each release (which to make the site easy to understand and administer is always the original version excluding any 'bonus' tracks). This point has been raised quite a few times over the years, and at some point in the future things might change, but the site is not set up for this at the moment.

capkronos

Gender: Male
Location: Ohio

sethmadsen wrote:

I get what you are saying and mostly agree with it. The want is to represent what you have in the site and sometimes the bonus material is what makes the record so great to you (as it has for me too). This kind of makes the limitation annoying.

I suppose one issue right now we have is at what point do you allow 14 different versions of an album on the site? A UK vs Japan vs Germany vs USA release, and then the remastered with a bonus track to get you to buy it, or a re-release with a bonus demo disc, etc. Does a remaster with no track change get allowed because the remaster job was actually amazing (rare occurrence).

My understanding is the way the ratings/rankings work, it'd get pretty messy. Easy for wikipedia to do, less easy for a site trying to list ratings and rankings. You need unique data identifiers. 14 versions of the same thing would muddy it up pretty bad.

Having said that, we kind of already have that problem with compilations and song ratings - you could have 4 versions of "a day in the life" show up in the top 100 songs. Imagine what it'd do for album rankings.

Of course you could lump all the different albums into a single entity, but that'd also be laborious as most users admin the albums themselves. It also could possibly be a really easy feature to add where you just add to the existing album additional information.

Duplicate albums is already a problem on the site - this would increase it 10 fold.

I see what you mean. This could conceivably be taken too far in a number of ways. Still, it would be nice for exceptions to be made for including 2nd discs from reissues IF they're comprised entirely of songs that aren't on any of their other albums, which is often the case. Or to at least be able to add to the track list of the original album but have an option to specify that the songs are only available on the anniversary edition. That way the songs are at least listed on here. The reason I brought this up is because some of my favorite songs aren't listed due to either being released only as a b side to a single, released only on an EP or released as part of an album reissue set.

I've also noticed that Radiohead has both In Rainbows and In Rainbows Disk 2 on here. Disk 2 (which runs just 25 minutes) was never a solo album release and was part of a limited edition set before being put on streaming services like Spotify. So that doesn't seem any different than including 2nd discs from other artist's albums. I suppose I'm just confused here.

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

capkronos wrote:

I've also noticed that Radiohead has both In Rainbows and In Rainbows Disk 2 on here. Disk 2 (which runs just 25 minutes) was never a solo album release and was part of a limited edition set before being put on streaming services like Spotify. So that doesn't seem any different than including 2nd discs from other artist's albums. I suppose I'm just confused here.

Digital releases are definitely making the lines more blurry (& more complicated), but there is a grey line which albums need to be the right side of to avoid flooding the site (alluded to earlier in the thread).

In Rainbows Disk 2 was initially released alongside certain editions of In Rainbows (and wasn't allowed to be listed on BEA as they were bonus tracks within another release), but then it got released on Amazon, Apple Music, Spotify etc as a distinct release in its own right. The packaging into its own release *without* the original material were probably the main determinants looking back on this (you can't really call it a re-issue of In Rainbows if none of the original material is present on the new album).

capkronos

Gender: Male
Location: Ohio

albummaster wrote:

Digital releases are definitely making the lines more blurry (& more complicated), but there is a grey line which albums need to be the right side of to avoid flooding the site (alluded to earlier in the thread).

In Rainbows Disk 2 was initially released alongside certain editions of In Rainbows (and wasn't allowed to be listed on BEA as they were bonus tracks within another release), but then it got released on Amazon, Apple Music, Spotify etc as a distinct release in its own right. The packaging into its own release *without* the original material were probably the main determinants looking back on this (you can't really call it a re-issue of In Rainbows if none of the original material is present on the new album).

OK I think I understand. Radiohead's Disk 2 was first contained on a set, then it was streamed separately as its own thing. I think I have an even better example of what I'm talking about here.

Gorillaz and Garbage have both released an album called "G Sides." In both cases, the album contains tracks recorded during the making of their self-titled debut that didn't make the final cut. In both cases, the "G Sides" album contains songs that were previously not on their other albums. It both cases, the "G Sides" album is on a different disc with a different title (not just added on at the end of the original CD) and in a different case with different artwork.

The difference?

Gorillaz's "G Sides" album was released apart from their self-titled debut:
https://www.discogs.com/Gorillaz-G-Sides/release/116459

Garbage's "G Sides" album was bundled with the original album as part of a reissue set:
http://www.garbagediscobox.com/2015/09/...y-in-full/

So all this really boils down to is how a distributor has chosen to release / package the material.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

It's true - half the battle is dealing with the marketing strategies of record companies or artists themselves.

It's a battle of data validation vs what's in the wild, and if this site just listed releases, then that'd be simple. This site is unique in that it aggregates ratings and rankings to accomplish a bigger goal than simply listing all forms of releases. Therein lies the conundrum.