IRC log of musicbrainz on 2006-08-27
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 00:00:29 [Shepard]
- only one :o
- 00:00:33 [Joan_W]
- and not only female moose - what is the plural of moose - is it moose or mooses
- 00:00:38 [Yllona]
- morning joan, good to hear that beth is off to the doctor
- 00:00:44 [Shepard]
- plural is moose
- 00:00:54 [HairMetalAddict]
- moosii
- 00:00:56 [HairMetalAddict]
- :-P
- 00:01:00 [Yllona]
- joan: meese?
- 00:01:06 [Joan_W]
- yes - her mum has fixed her up a couple of appointments in San Diego
- 00:01:18 [Joan_W]
- meese is surely mice according to Speedy Gonzales
- 00:01:19 [Shepard]
- moce
- 00:01:46 [Muz]
- It's "moose"
- 00:02:00 [Joan_W]
- no - not speedy gonzales, which cat "hated those meeses to pieces"
- 00:02:03 [Muz]
- 10 moose are better than 1 moose is to a homeless cat
- 00:02:22 [Joan_W]
- awww -poor homeless cat
- 00:02:23 [Yllona]
- ah, i'll be in san clemente, mon & tue. perhaps i'll try to catch beth while we're both local (as long as she's up to it)
- 00:02:42 [Knio1]
- Knio1 is now known as Knio
- 00:02:48 [Muz]
- Send her my regards! Hope she feels better soon
- 00:02:53 [Joan_W]
- I think she will be glad to see someone who isn't a doctor or a nurse - a friendly face can work worders
- 00:03:04 [Joan_W]
- "wonders"
- 00:03:07 [Yllona]
- yeah, i'll give it a whirl
- 00:03:33 [Joan_W]
- I could hear her husband in the background asking who she was talking to on the telephone for so long
- 00:03:33 [Yllona]
- san clemente is only an hour (or less) from san diego
- 00:03:56 [Yllona]
- yeah, he does that when i'm on the phone with beth too :)
- 00:04:14 [Joan_W]
- at least he is not paying for the call!
- 00:04:41 [Yllona]
- ;)
- 00:06:24 [potato]
- potato has joined #musicbrainz
- 00:06:54 [Yllona]
- okay, joan & muz, since you weren't in channel earlier, i'll ask the question again: do any of you know songs about space, space travel, outer space, etc?
- 00:07:04 [Yllona]
- if so pleasee-mail me at gmail
- 00:07:14 [Muz]
- Errrrm, I can recall some
- 00:07:22 [Joan_W]
- okay - I will put my thinking hat on
- 00:07:22 [Muz]
- But it'll be easier to do once home/in the office
- 00:07:22 [Yllona]
- *please e-mail me, sorry
- 00:07:33 [Yllona]
- muz: purr-fect
- 00:07:49 [Muz]
- (i'm travelling about a fair bit these bext few days, internetting will be far and few between)
- 00:07:54 [Joan_W]
- yllona - it should be purr-fect for me and a moose call for muz
- 00:08:01 [Muz]
- :P
- 00:08:19 [sidd]
- sidd has joined #musicbrainz
- 00:08:20 [Yllona]
- joan: hah! got me there
- 00:08:23 [Yllona]
- :)
- 00:08:47 [Muz]
- I'll be damned, this uni internet isn't filtered
- 00:09:17 [Joan_W]
- which uni are you camped out at
- 00:09:23 [Muz]
- Leicester
- 00:09:24 [Muz]
- Muz has quit
- 00:09:35 [Joan_W]
- why are you in Leicester?
- 00:10:03 [Joan_W]
- oh - he's gone
- 00:10:06 [HairMetalAddict]
- He be gone. Probably connection issue.
- 00:10:31 [Joan_W]
- Leicester is nowhere near either of his homes
- 00:10:32 [HairMetalAddict]
- We were chatting in last.fm moderators and he disappeared mid-discussion. :-P
- 00:10:36 [mustaqila_]
- mustaqila_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 00:10:41 [mustaqila_]
- Accidental Alt+f4 there
- 00:10:47 [HairMetalAddict]
- You bonehead. :-P
- 00:10:48 [Joan_W]
- Why are you in Leicester
- 00:11:07 [mustaqila_]
- Doing some audiovisual work there, first time in a long while I've done this stuff
- 00:11:20 [Joan_W]
- for yourself or Lastfm
- 00:11:40 [mustaqila_]
- Myself
- 00:12:30 [Yllona]
- mustaqila: waht sort of a/v stuff?
- 00:12:40 [Yllona]
- if you can say
- 00:12:49 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict is outta here, zzzzzzzzz
- 00:12:56 [Joan_W]
- in words of one syllable so that I can understand
- 00:13:00 [Yllona]
- g'night HairMetalAddict
- 00:13:08 [Joan_W]
- goodnight HMP
- 00:13:12 [Joan_W]
- goodnight HMA
- 00:13:19 [HairMetalAddict]
- HairMetalPony? :-P
- 00:13:27 [mustaqila_]
- Yllona, mainly a rig to record stuff on, audio and visual, and also a system to relay the image and sound to several places in various buildings across the campus
- 00:13:30 [Joan_W]
- why was I thinking of Her Majesty's Prison
- 00:13:58 [mustaqila_]
- Because it's where you think I belong? :P
- 00:14:00 [Yllona]
- joan: or at "Her Majesty's Pleasure" :P
- 00:14:01 [HairMetalAddict]
- HairMetalAddict is now known as SnoringAddict
- 00:14:30 [Joan_W]
- obviously Her Majesty's Pleasure :)
- 00:14:43 [Yllona]
- mustaqila: please keep me posted, i'm doing something similar
- 00:15:06 [Joan_W]
- how did HMA change his nickname to SnoringAddict
- 00:15:14 [mustaqila_]
- Well, heavy rain doesn't help at all
- 00:15:25 [mustaqila_]
- Especially with cables trailing across roads and what have you
- 00:15:41 [Joan_W]
- is it raining in Leicester - lovely day here
- 00:16:22 [mustaqila_]
- It was chucking it down yesterday, it's eased up today though
- 00:16:28 [Yllona]
- joan: /nick command: http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/ircprimer.html
- 00:18:15 [Joan_W]
- I will give it a try a bit later - usually when I do something new I cut myself off
- 00:19:16 [Yllona]
- joan: like this...
- 00:19:37 [Yllona]
- Yllona is now known as yllona
- 00:20:09 [Joan_W]
- Joan_W is now known as Joan_away
- 00:20:26 [Joan_away]
- it worked !!!!
- 00:20:29 [Kanmu]
- Kanmu has quit
- 00:20:37 [Joan_away]
- Joan_away is now known as Joan_W
- 00:20:55 [yllona]
- joan: for away msgs use /away
- 00:21:33 [Joan_W]
- I have just had a look at the URL you send - lots of things I didn't know - will read it carefully
- 00:21:37 [yoasif]
- yoasif has joined #musicbrainz
- 00:21:45 [Joan_W]
- "sent" - fingers not working properly tonight
- 00:21:53 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ snickers
- 00:22:11 [Joan_W]
- * Joan_W slaps muz with elk jerky
- 00:22:21 [yllona]
- joan: i use that primer all the time :)
- 00:22:25 [mustaqila_]
- I blame my young mind and the hormones
- 00:22:46 [yllona]
- * yllona is out of elk jerky, starts on the ostrich
- 00:22:53 [mustaqila_]
- Mmmm moose jerky
- 00:22:55 [Joan_W]
- I still have a young mind but the hormones are not working quite so well
- 00:23:07 [yoasif]
- yoasif has quit
- 00:23:15 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ holds his tongue at this point
- 00:23:27 [Joan_W]
- good idea
- 00:23:54 [mustaqila_]
- :P
- 00:23:56 [mustaqila_]
- It slipped out
- 00:23:58 [Shepard]
- muz tell me about the almah stuff
- 00:24:09 [mustaqila_]
- Edu Falaschi?
- 00:24:23 [Shepard]
- yep
- 00:24:33 [mustaqila_]
- What'd you want to know about it?
- 00:24:41 [Joan_W]
- yllona - added that primer to my favourites list
- 00:24:48 [Shepard]
- if you like it!
- 00:25:03 [mustaqila_]
- Ooooohhhh.... kind of... not really, need more time to judge properly
- 00:25:15 [mustaqila_]
- I only gave it one listen, and it was a rushed half arsed one on a Thursday
- 00:25:32 [Shepard]
- ah
- 00:25:45 [Shepard]
- well you well tell me when you listened more :)
- 00:25:51 [Shepard]
- or not as you will forget it :P
- 00:25:56 [mustaqila_]
- Remind me :P
- 00:26:06 [mustaqila_]
- It's one of the few albums I have on my MP3 player here with me
- 00:26:24 [Shepard]
- oh, since when do you own one?
- 00:26:41 [Rondom]
- Rondom has quit
- 00:26:42 [mustaqila_]
- Since ages ago
- 00:26:50 [mustaqila_]
- I've changed the type of MP3 player Ihave multiple times now
- 00:26:58 [Shepard]
- o_O who was it then who said they don't have one...
- 00:27:05 [mustaqila_]
- mo?
- 00:27:13 [Shepard]
- ot sure
- 00:27:15 [Shepard]
- *not
- 00:27:29 [mustaqila_]
- Fair do's
- 00:28:28 [Joan_W]
- I don't own one
- 00:28:44 [Joan_W]
- and don't want one
- 00:29:05 [Shepard]
- well I asked someone and they said no, but I don't remember who
- 00:29:29 [Joan_W]
- it was me - and muz thought I was lagging behind in the technological revolution
- 00:29:56 [mustaqila_]
- I did?
- 00:30:03 [Joan_W]
- you did
- 00:30:16 [mustaqila_]
- I apologise, it may well have been one of my more inebriated opinions
- 00:30:30 [Shepard]
- or you were drunk :P
- 00:30:31 [Joan_W]
- no apology needed - you did not mean it nastily
- 00:30:45 [mustaqila_]
- Shepard, I was implying that :P
- 00:31:04 [Joan_W]
- I think it was a Friday night - and you very probably were slightly inebriated
- 00:31:13 [mustaqila_]
- Yeah, sounds likely
- 00:31:41 [Shepard]
- gah, I shouldn't guess what words mean :)
- 00:31:43 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ hasn'tbeen drinking this weekend though, he has been holding out in hope for the end of the next weekend for when the birthday cometh
- 00:32:02 [mustaqila_]
- Shep, don't worry, we can switch to German and I'll sit here clueless
- 00:32:17 [Shepard]
- na gut :)
- 00:32:23 [mustaqila_]
- Que?
- 00:32:25 [rpedro]
- rpedro has quit
- 00:32:33 [Shepard]
- something like "fair enough"
- 00:32:44 [mustaqila_]
- I was joking :P
- 00:33:25 [Joan_W]
- where is nikki tonigt
- 00:33:47 [Shepard]
- muz when exactly will your birthday be? :o
- 00:33:54 [mustaqila_]
- 30th
- 00:34:05 [Joan_W]
- 17th or 18th
- 00:34:18 [mustaqila_]
- KDE alarms me, 11 minutes battery time left
- 00:34:25 [Shepard]
- joan: not here any more for some time already
- 00:34:32 [mustaqila_]
- I shall walk off towards my room and the moment that the internet cuts out, I'll be out of range I guess
- 00:34:41 [mustaqila_]
- IT'll be fun to se
- 00:34:45 [mustaqila_]
- e how far I can go
- 00:35:51 [Joan_W]
- she hasn't been here for a couple of days at least
- 00:35:56 [mustaqila_]
- :o
- 00:36:09 [mustaqila_]
- ahh outdoors
- 00:36:21 [Joan_W]
- is it raining
- 00:36:38 [mustaqila_]
- wow
- 00:36:40 [mustaqila_]
- nah
- 00:37:03 [mustaqila_]
- mustaqila_ has quit
- 00:37:26 [Shepard]
- that was too far
- 00:39:02 [Joan_W]
- 22nd August was last time she was on IRC - last Tuesday
- 00:40:05 [Joan_W]
- I hope she is not ill
- 00:41:29 [Joan_W]
- okay - it is time for bed - sleep well all
- 00:42:04 [Joan_W]
- Joan_W is now known as Joan_sleeping
- 00:44:25 [inhouseuk]
- * inhouseuk suspects his firewall will close joans session if it is idle for too long
- 00:45:12 [Joan_sleeping]
- Joan_sleeping has quit
- 00:48:33 [Shepard]
- no, she is not ill
- 01:26:17 [yllona]
- yllona has quit
- 01:27:06 [dj_empirical]
- dj_empirical has quit
- 01:30:51 [Knio1]
- Knio1 has joined #musicbrainz
- 01:43:06 [deadchip]
- ah
- 01:43:13 [deadchip]
- Studio K is from the Let Forever Be single
- 01:43:31 [deadchip]
- heh LOL this find-release-by-track-puid-and-then-retag-album in bmp is kinda cooll
- 01:43:35 [deadchip]
- cool even
- 01:43:52 [potato]
- hay
- 01:47:36 [potato]
- if my mp3's have puid's shouldn't the albums be found automatically?
- 01:48:07 [deadchip]
- where?
- 01:48:11 [Knio]
- Knio has quit
- 01:48:12 [deadchip]
- in Picard?
- 01:48:23 [potato]
- yea
- 01:48:40 [deadchip]
- well i don't know Picard _that_ much but i'd say off hand yes
- 01:48:47 [deadchip]
- but that depends on what you mean by "have PUIDs"
- 01:49:00 [deadchip]
- do you mean that they already contain a PUID tag inside their metadata
- 01:49:00 [potato]
- these are files that originally were tagged in picard but had to puid, then run through MMM to get a PUID
- 01:49:16 [potato]
- and now going back through picard a second time, with former tags and new PUIDs
- 01:49:18 [deadchip]
- or do you just mean that a PUID <-> track id relation exists on the mb server?
- 01:49:25 [potato]
- the latter
- 01:49:35 [deadchip]
- and it doesn't find them?
- 01:49:42 [deadchip]
- potato: can you upload one of those tracks?
- 01:50:20 [potato]
- yes one minute
- 01:52:55 [Yllona]
- Yllona has joined #musicbrainz
- 01:53:37 [Shepard`]
- Shepard` has joined #musicbrainz
- 01:56:13 [potato]
- http://send.hokuten.net/01%20-%20Beautiful%20Fighter.mp3
- 02:00:06 [deadchip]
- well
- 02:00:11 [deadchip]
- libtp finds the data allright
- 02:00:12 [deadchip]
- [mderezynski@core ~]$ ~/Desktop/libtunepimp-0.5.1/examples/puid -i a7f6063296c0f
- 02:00:12 [deadchip]
- 1c9b75c7f511861b89b 01\ -\ Beautiful\ Fighter.mp3
- 02:00:12 [deadchip]
- Artist: 'Chihiro Onitsuka'
- 02:00:12 [deadchip]
- Album: 'Beautiful Fighter'
- 02:00:12 [deadchip]
- Track: 'Beautiful Fighter'
- 02:00:14 [deadchip]
- TrackNum: '1'
- 02:00:16 [deadchip]
- Duration: '230730'
- 02:00:20 [deadchip]
- PUID: bad60d4e-b0f4-fcf4-cae4-f7b841764b1d
- 02:00:40 [deadchip]
- or it takes it from the file, i'm somehow not sure how exactly the puid example app from libtp works
- 02:00:52 [potato]
- after analyzing in picard, it just pops right back in to unclustered files
- 02:00:52 [deadchip]
- yeah it does, i guess, otherwise it wouldn't print the album i think
- 02:00:59 [deadchip]
- yeah erm
- 02:01:22 [deadchip]
- potato: there is no relation yet:
- 02:01:22 [deadchip]
- http://musicbrainz.org/ws/1/track/?puid=bad60d4e-b0f4-fcf4-cae4-f7b841764b1d&type=xml
- 02:01:39 [deadchip]
- potato: you can create one by clicking on the "lookup" button at the lower right of the box at the lower left
- 02:01:52 [deadchip]
- * deadchip hooray for picard's superusable interface (no troll intended)
- 02:01:59 [potato]
- oh so i'd have to manually look up and then move all the mp3s :<
- 02:02:00 [deadchip]
- potato: it will open a browser (or should)
- 02:02:03 [deadchip]
- well
- 02:02:09 [deadchip]
- picard works a little odd like that
- 02:02:09 [Shepard]
- Shepard has quit
- 02:02:10 [mudcrow]
- mudcrow has quit
- 02:02:10 [Shepard`]
- Shepard` is now known as Shepard
- 02:02:11 [potato]
- yep
- 02:02:12 [deadchip]
- you can do it easier with BMP
- 02:02:19 [potato]
- i'm not on linux :<
- 02:02:40 [deadchip]
- in BMP, you could just select the release, let it scan for the PUIDs of the files and submit them all at once without that browser, etc, thing
- 02:02:40 [deadchip]
- mm
- 02:02:42 [flamingcow]
- there are people left not on linux? :)
- 02:02:50 [deadchip]
- heh
- 02:03:21 [potato]
- i guess i could compile it through cygwin
- 02:03:28 [potato]
- but something tells em it'll be slow as hell then
- 02:03:36 [flamingcow]
- potato: you could dual-boot
- 02:03:49 [deadchip]
- well one of our developers is porting it to win32
- 02:04:03 [deadchip]
- including win-dbus, etc
- 02:04:04 [deadchip]
- he
- 02:04:05 [deadchip]
- heh*
- 02:04:13 [potato]
- bmp to windows?
- 02:04:23 [flamingcow]
- http://www.fefe.de/nowindows/
- 02:04:29 [deadchip]
- potato: http://futurepast.free.fr/bmpx-metadata-editing-02.jpg
- 02:04:41 [deadchip]
- potato: if the checkmark is green, it has puid+metadata
- 02:04:52 [potato]
- oh wow that's pretty
- 02:04:54 [deadchip]
- if it should be a yellow checkmark, it turns out that there is a puid but no track id association
- 02:04:58 [deadchip]
- which would be the case for your all files
- 02:05:12 [deadchip]
- so you'd just let it scan them all, it'd give you a yellow checkmark, and then you could submit them all at once
- 02:05:32 [potato]
- this is BMP specific?
- 02:05:59 [deadchip]
- ah
- 02:06:02 [deadchip]
- like here:
- 02:06:02 [deadchip]
- http://futurepast.free.fr/bmpx-musicbrainz-tagging-2.jpg
- 02:06:22 [deadchip]
- well this is a dialog from BMP yeah and it's how i implemented it
- 02:06:31 [deadchip]
- the basic mechanism is of course to submit a PUID <-> track id relation
- 02:06:35 [deadchip]
- or "pair"
- 02:06:42 [deadchip]
- but how you do it is left to the app really
- 02:06:55 [deadchip]
- you could even do it manually with curl or something probably o_O
- 02:07:06 [deadchip]
- (once you know the PUID and Track Id heh)
- 02:07:49 [shane_]
- shane_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 02:07:53 [shane_]
- hello
- 02:12:05 [rpedro_]
- rpedro_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 02:15:04 [shane_]
- shane_ has left #musicbrainz
- 02:20:28 [deadchip]
- .
- 02:20:57 [deadchip]
- potato: well the procedure with picard is more tedious because it's approach is different
- 02:21:06 [deadchip]
- i figure though that it could work like this:
- 02:21:17 [deadchip]
- i'm not sure, ruaok and luks would have to comment on this
- 02:21:22 [deadchip]
- but you could identify one single track
- 02:21:45 [deadchip]
- have picard recognize the album for it (or if there is a collision, you'd have to select the right one, i don't know right now how this works)
- 02:22:10 [deadchip]
- and once it has found _one_ of those tracks and a release, and shows it under clustered or whatever this view is called
- 02:22:20 [deadchip]
- (the tree node that displays a release with the tracks)
- 02:22:33 [potato]
- yea
- 02:22:37 [deadchip]
- then, you could, drag the rest of the files in there without going trough the complete tedious procedure
- 02:22:46 [deadchip]
- it would still have to verify the PUID of the tracks
- 02:22:56 [deadchip]
- but at least it wouldn't be so complicated to use
- 02:23:12 [deadchip]
- like, scan file, find it trough the browser, let picard cluster it, blah
- 02:23:25 [potato]
- oh i've done all the puid-less clusters
- 02:23:33 [deadchip]
- instead once it has it, you could drag the files into the release directly
- 02:23:34 [potato]
- i'm down to individual songs now
- 02:23:52 [deadchip]
- potato: i'm not sure i'm using the word 'clustering' correctly as i don't know picard to the complete extent
- 02:24:07 [deadchip]
- i just know mostly the technical basics behind MB
- 02:24:12 [deadchip]
- but not so much about the official apps
- 02:24:13 [potato]
- you're correct
- 02:24:21 [deadchip]
- just that i've used picard and found it quite horrible to use
- 02:24:29 [deadchip]
- and then decided to code something easier to use into BMP
- 02:25:14 [deadchip]
- this is still not available in a release, it's in SVN HEAD atm only
- 02:25:32 [deadchip]
- i have to make sure the UI is constructed so, and gives the users enough warnings, so they don't submit wrong puid/trackid pairs
- 02:26:04 [deadchip]
- e.g. check for the number of tracks being identical, and then allow submission only, and really only of the users says "yes i am really f*cking sure that this is the right release"
- 02:26:24 [deadchip]
- (he might want to submit a few pairs from an album he doesn't have all tracks of so it might be valid in some constellations)
- 02:26:33 [deadchip]
- tracks from*
- 02:30:52 [potato]
- how does it handle collisions
- 02:33:28 [deadchip]
- you mean BMP
- 02:33:28 [deadchip]
- ?
- 02:33:32 [potato]
- yea
- 02:33:39 [deadchip]
- well you get told that there is a collision
- 02:33:54 [deadchip]
- and you have to make sure that you choose the right release
- 02:33:59 [deadchip]
- but as of right now, this is blocked
- 02:34:08 [deadchip]
- as in, if there is not a single release, you currently can not submit it at all
- 02:34:19 [deadchip]
- i have to first handle this case properly and safely
- 02:35:11 [potato]
- ohk
- 02:35:40 [deadchip]
- potato: i just want to avoid by any case wrong submissions
- 02:35:44 [deadchip]
- so i'm working on this carefully
- 02:35:58 [deadchip]
- in the end, i think it's impossible to avoid an occasional wrong submission
- 02:36:13 [deadchip]
- and the current procedure in BMP is already rather safe
- 02:36:23 [deadchip]
- but i'll rather test it a little more before releasing it to the publi
- 02:36:24 [deadchip]
- +c
- 02:36:38 [deadchip]
- the next release (0.30) is planned for mid-end september so i have a little time left
- 03:00:07 [potato]
- potato has quit
- 03:00:12 [potato]
- potato has joined #musicbrainz
- 03:00:46 [potato]
- potato is now known as iampotato
- 03:15:08 [iampotato]
- iampotato has quit
- 03:21:25 [Knio1]
- Knio1 is now known as Knio
- 03:44:54 [iampotato]
- iampotato has joined #musicbrainz
- 03:45:56 [Joan_sleeping]
- Joan_sleeping has joined #musicbrainz
- 03:46:07 [Joan_sleeping]
- Joan_sleeping is now known as Joan
- 03:46:14 [Joan]
- Joan has quit
- 03:48:10 [Aankhen``]
- Aankhen`` has joined #musicbrainz
- 03:50:08 [iampotato]
- iampotato has quit
- 04:00:17 [Amblin-]
- Amblin- has joined #musicbrainz
- 04:03:31 [Aankh|Clone]
- Aankh|Clone has joined #musicbrainz
- 04:07:59 [Aankhen``]
- Aankhen`` has quit
- 04:18:17 [Amblin]
- Amblin has quit
- 04:27:48 [rpedro_]
- rpedro_ is now known as rpedro
- 05:23:00 [sidd_]
- sidd_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 05:36:03 [sidd]
- sidd has quit
- 05:45:27 [SoothingR]
- SoothingR has joined #musicbrainz
- 06:01:59 [Yllona]
- Yllona has quit
- 06:33:06 [SnoringAddict]
- SnoringAddict is now known as HairMetalAddict
- 07:02:39 [rpedro]
- rpedro has quit
- 07:04:26 [rpedro]
- rpedro has joined #musicbrainz
- 07:29:22 [pjo]
- pjo has quit
- 07:40:06 [sidd_]
- sidd_ is now known as sidd|bus
- 08:02:31 [Kilu]
- Kilu has joined #musicbrainz
- 08:03:11 [Kilu]
- hooray for wiki edit wars
- 08:29:46 [ngw]
- ngw has joined #musicbrainz
- 08:34:43 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict slaps Kilu around a bit to: Alice Cooper ~ Hello Hooray [from "Billion Dollar Babies" (1973)]
- 08:36:45 [Kilu]
- * Kilu puts HairMetalAddict on a rocket and sends the rocket to the moon
- 08:37:14 [HairMetalAddict]
- Mmmm.... the moon really is made of cheese. Tasty cheese, too! And it's all mine!
- 08:37:29 [Kilu]
- hooray
- 08:39:16 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict eats the entire moon in one sitting, burps, looks at Pluto and thinks "If I eat Pluto, these stupid debates over whether it's a planet or not will be moot!"
- 08:39:56 [Kilu]
- everyone wins
- 08:40:25 [HairMetalAddict]
- win-win situations rule!
- 08:40:37 [Kilu]
- high five!
- 08:40:48 [Kilu]
- * Kilu high fives
- 08:40:56 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict looks at his hand.
- 08:41:01 [HairMetalAddict]
- Freak accident. High three.
- 08:41:07 [Kilu]
- haha
- 08:44:08 [juhae]
- morn'
- 08:44:52 [Kilu]
- morning
- 08:49:24 [HairMetalAddict]
- Any Spanish speakers around? Or at least, understands Spanish capping?
- 08:49:59 [HairMetalAddict]
- Need to verify if caps for this release is correct... http://musicbrainz.org/release/1855f8d1-4501-4f7b-acd1-6cf26d8ec4be.html
- 08:56:54 [deadchip]
- HairMetalAddict: i'm not but here's a page: http://spanish.about.com/od/writtenspanish/a/capitalization.htm
- 08:59:00 [HairMetalAddict]
- Mmm, title caps seem similar for the most part to Swedish, which I speak. Just wanted someone who might know better to verify my changes. :-)
- 09:00:03 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict took two years of Spanish in high school, and these days remembers nothing more than how to count and "No hablo español."
- 09:00:07 [HairMetalAddict]
- :-P
- 09:01:20 [Kilu]
- heh
- 09:01:54 [deadchip]
- haha
- 09:29:00 [sidd|bus]
- sidd|bus has quit
- 09:39:28 [slaad]
- slaad has quit
- 09:47:07 [sidd]
- sidd has joined #musicbrainz
- 10:01:00 [slaad]
- slaad has joined #musicbrainz
- 10:04:14 [Shepard]
- Kilu: hooray for elftor! he's back!
- 10:04:53 [Kilu]
- I'm not quite sure what you mean, but hooray anyway!
- 10:06:09 [Shepard]
- http://www.elftor.com/
- 10:06:18 [Shepard]
- he says hooray all the time
- 10:06:25 [Shepard]
- so you reminded me of him
- 10:07:26 [Kilu]
- oh
- 10:07:31 [Kilu]
- :D
- 10:08:44 [sidd]
- sidd has quit
- 10:18:11 [nightgroove]
- rarg
- 10:18:19 [Aankh|Clone]
- ARR!
- 10:18:25 [Aankh|Clone]
- Aankh|Clone is now known as Aankhen``
- 10:18:30 [nightgroove]
- hi Aanken!
- 10:18:34 [Aankhen``]
- Hiya.
- 10:18:36 [nightgroove]
- Aankhen
- 10:18:38 [Aankhen``]
- I'm leaving India on Wednesday night!
- 10:18:44 [nightgroove]
- :o
- 10:18:47 [nightgroove]
- omg why?
- 10:18:54 [Aankhen``]
- My family's moving.
- 10:18:58 [nightgroove]
- :O
- 10:19:03 [Aankhen``]
- I'll be going to college.
- 10:19:12 [nightgroove]
- but are you leaving indoa?
- 10:19:13 [nightgroove]
- :(
- 10:19:14 [deadchip]
- humm
- 10:19:22 [nightgroove]
- hi deadchip
- 10:19:23 [deadchip]
- where to?
- 10:19:27 [deadchip]
- hey nightgroove :)
- 10:19:36 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: I'm not saying at the moment. You'll find out soon enough, though. :-)
- 10:19:41 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: heeh ok
- 10:19:53 [nightgroove]
- aank! :O
- 10:20:00 [HairMetalAddict]
- As long as it's not Norway. There's some really weird freaks living there...
- 10:20:01 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: were you born in India?
- 10:20:02 [deadchip]
- i mean
- 10:20:04 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict grins evilly
- 10:20:06 [Aankhen``]
- Yes.
- 10:20:09 [deadchip]
- ahh
- 10:20:10 [Aankhen``]
- I was born and brought up here.
- 10:20:11 [deadchip]
- hrmmmmm
- 10:20:13 [deadchip]
- well
- 10:20:14 [nightgroove]
- rofl
- 10:20:17 [deadchip]
- i was born in Poland
- 10:20:23 [deadchip]
- and exiled from it in 1984 when i was 7
- 10:20:26 [Aankhen``]
- HairMetalAddict: Yeah, we considered Norway, but the people there are too weird. :-P
- 10:20:29 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: Why?
- 10:20:31 [deadchip]
- (of course not alone, but with my family o_O)
- 10:20:32 [nightgroove]
- oO
- 10:20:35 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: political reasons
- 10:20:42 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: That sucks. :-\
- 10:20:46 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: my parents worked for an underground organisation opposing the communists
- 10:20:48 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: Where do you live now?
- 10:20:51 [nightgroove]
- my great grand father was from india
- 10:20:56 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: ggg...ggrr..germany
- 10:20:59 [deadchip]
- o_o
- 10:21:02 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: Heh.
- 10:21:03 [deadchip]
- which totally sucks but what can i do
- 10:21:05 [deadchip]
- LOL
- 10:21:07 [deadchip]
- my parents chose it
- 10:21:20 [nightgroove]
- he was a gypsey
- 10:21:24 [deadchip]
- short story is we had to leave the eastern block and the nearest western location was western berlin
- 10:21:29 [deadchip]
- lol indeed
- 10:21:44 [deadchip]
- we didn't even have citizenship in ANY country on this planet for 10 years
- 10:21:48 [deadchip]
- only a stay-permit in germany
- 10:21:55 [nightgroove]
- ugh why do I bother
- 10:22:03 [deadchip]
- they exiled us and devprived us of citizenship
- 10:22:13 [Aankhen``]
- deadchip: Well, that really sucks.
- 10:22:15 [deadchip]
- nightgroove: wlel some stuff with me and school, etc, if i had german citizenship
- 10:22:23 [deadchip]
- otherwise i don't care
- 10:22:26 [deadchip]
- wouldn't*
- 10:22:38 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: yeah i still remember it
- 10:22:54 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: it feels like i did get over it but i'm not sure i came over it entirely deep down mentally
- 10:23:08 [deadchip]
- Aankhen``: we had to leave the country from one day to the next with just a set of bags
- 10:23:17 [deadchip]
- and had to leave all our other belongings behind
- 10:23:19 [Aankhen``]
- Aich.
- 10:23:34 [deadchip]
- we were not allowed to visit Poland until the break-up in the early 1990ies
- 10:23:36 [deadchip]
- etc..
- 10:23:46 [deadchip]
- so yeah liek nightgroove said we were gypsies LOL
- 10:24:03 [nightgroove]
- no, that's NOT what I said
- 10:24:18 [deadchip]
- hmm?
- 10:24:23 [deadchip]
- nightgroove he was a gypsey <- :|
- 10:24:29 [nightgroove]
- my great grand father was from india
- 10:24:39 [deadchip]
- aaah
- 10:24:42 [deadchip]
- i didn't see the line above
- 10:24:48 [deadchip]
- :)
- 10:24:49 [nightgroove]
- hhmph
- 10:24:52 [deadchip]
- LOOL
- 10:24:57 [deadchip]
- nono don't get upset please
- 10:25:29 [nightgroove]
- I have to go feed the cats and stuff
- 10:25:35 [deadchip]
- ok cya
- 10:38:42 [Shepard]
- :o wtf mo the indian
- 11:04:08 [FauxFaux]
- FauxFaux has quit
- 11:05:17 [FauxFaux]
- FauxFaux has joined #musicbrainz
- 11:14:33 [deadchip]
- deadchip is now known as channelassitant2
- 11:15:01 [channelassitant2]
- channelassitant2 is now known as deadchip
- 11:21:28 [mustaqila_]
- mustaqila_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 11:22:22 [mustaqila_]
- mustaqila_ is now known as Muz
- 11:29:28 [Muz]
- * Muz mooses in with sleepy eyes
- 11:39:12 [Kilu]
- Kilu has quit
- 12:00:58 [csp]
- csp has joined #musicbrainz
- 12:07:37 [csp]
- Why has luks deleted himself as an owner for all of his picard tickets?
- 12:08:02 [Muz]
- Oh god, more dev drama in #musicbrainz ?
- 12:08:26 [csp]
- Well, I'm just a curious user hoping that picard development didn't come to an end or something
- 12:17:14 [deadchip]
- lol well
- 12:17:49 [deadchip]
- i think the problem is just (seeing it as someone who has expertise and experience and theory in UI usability), that people just don't really want to use it because it's fairly unusable/totally unintuitive to use
- 12:18:02 [deadchip]
- furthermore i think a major hindrance point for most people is wxWidgets
- 12:18:19 [Muz]
- The most hindering thing is the amount of drama bullshit in here
- 12:18:52 [deadchip]
- well what did happen that made luks remove himself as picard bugs owner?
- 12:19:26 [deadchip]
- (and no in case this referred to me in some way, then "no, i'm not getting it" :P)
- 12:19:40 [Muz]
- Muz has quit
- 12:19:44 [deadchip]
- (just for the sake of avoiding even more drama)
- 12:19:48 [deadchip]
- yeah moose
- 12:20:32 [deadchip]
- csp: i don't think it has any particular reason
- 12:20:36 [deadchip]
- csp: just off my head
- 12:20:52 [deadchip]
- csp: i also filed a minor bug against libTP and he deowned himself off it and later on still fixed it
- 12:20:56 [deadchip]
- i think it went something like that
- 12:21:02 [deadchip]
- i wouldn't worry right now so much about this
- 12:21:09 [ngw]
- ngw has left #musicbrainz
- 12:21:11 [deadchip]
- but Picard -really- needs a redesign of the GUI
- 12:21:54 [csp]
- I know that the GUI is bad (although I personally can be quite productive with it, but I'm a geek so that's unfair)
- 12:22:11 [csp]
- but how is that related to luks deowning himself? Is he against updating the GUI?
- 12:22:57 [Shepard]
- no
- 12:23:21 [Shepard]
- he's against the removing of keschte's developer rights or something
- 12:23:51 [Shepard]
- well at least it's more related to the community issues, nothing to do with picard
- 12:24:10 [csp]
- oh, okay.. I just found this open letter thing
- 12:24:16 [deadchip]
- hum?
- 12:24:24 [deadchip]
- by luks?
- 12:24:31 [Shepard]
- no
- 12:24:54 [Shepard]
- http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/GreatDispute :)
- 12:26:06 [Shepard]
- I like the Picard GUI and think it's quite intuitive :P
- 12:26:45 [csp]
- <whispering>As an outsider I find these disputes kind of funny</whispering>
- 12:28:05 [csp]
- I won't say that out loud anymore, because I can imagine that if you devote yourself to such a project, personal things will start to matter.
- 12:28:20 [deadchip]
- Shepard: well that's always subjective
- 12:28:56 [deadchip]
- i tend to think our GUI is intuitive and fantastic as well, but then again i've made it and used it countless times and know what happens behind the UI when i do certain things
- 12:29:18 [Shepard]
- well yeah it might look really strange from outside, but it all grew over time - and for the people involved it wasn't funny :(
- 12:30:01 [csp]
- Shepard: That last remark could be both about the GUI and the GreatDispute right? :)
- 12:31:03 [Shepard]
- deadchip: right, it's subjective. so if the majority thinks it's not intuitive, then we need to change it. for me it was just - well when I used it for the first time I found it self-explaining and didn't have to read any documentation
- 12:31:20 [Shepard]
- csp: probably ;)
- 12:32:58 [csp]
- About the GUI: I do feel the topmost mockup on http://musicbrainz.org/doc/IntuitivePicardInterface is getting it right
- 12:33:38 [csp]
- I find the mixing of both the unidentified and identified stuff in one listing quite confusing.
- 12:34:07 [deadchip]
- csp: you mean something like that: http://futurepast.free.fr/bmpx-musicbrainz-tagging-2.jpg
- 12:34:09 [csp]
- Its nice to have one list consiting of the files only, and the other of the files linked to mb-items.
- 12:34:48 [deadchip]
- red = no puid, yellow = puid/no metadata, green = puid+metadata
- 12:34:52 [csp]
- deadchip: I meant the screenshot here: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/IntuitivePicardInterface?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=PicardMockup2.jpg (never saw the bmp one)
- 12:34:57 [deadchip]
- ok we could display the rest of the info there as well
- 12:35:04 [deadchip]
- i mean, when the user selects a track
- 12:35:24 [deadchip]
- yeah i know what you mean, ok it was a lame-ish way to say that we basically already implemented a similar interface
- 12:36:22 [csp]
- Well, by just looking at the bmp-screenshot I'm a little confused.
- 12:37:03 [csp]
- I can't see why my track 1 is linked to the release track 1 and my track 5 isn't linked to the release track 5
- 12:37:27 [deadchip]
- yeah well ok then let's not get into religious fighting over what's better, i never claimed we "just have it" either
- 12:37:44 [deadchip]
- (just being precautions here; you know, to prevent t3h dr4m4)
- 12:37:49 [deadchip]
- cautious*
- 12:37:49 [csp]
- I don't want to go into any fighting at all :)
- 12:38:25 [deadchip]
- csp: the file is not linked because it did not find a PUID for it for whatever reason
- 12:39:08 [deadchip]
- the concept is different from picard anyway
- 12:39:15 [deadchip]
- it's not the-picard-gui/just-different
- 12:39:45 [deadchip]
- i don't remember why there as no puid for this track when i made this screenshot
- 12:40:06 [deadchip]
- but anyway how this works here is that you can find a matching release by using one of the tracks if there is no collision
- 12:40:11 [deadchip]
- basically how picard does it as well
- 12:40:33 [deadchip]
- just that here it omits the part where you have to use a browser and click this green tag link, etc, at all, but it does try to match it directly rather
- 12:40:53 [deadchip]
- and, well nvm i think i'm being watched too closely in my explanations ;)
- 12:41:00 [deadchip]
- (and i don't like that)
- 12:41:12 [csp]
- But how do you apply changes to the other tracks? Is that by having them all checked and pressing OK?
- 12:41:37 [csp]
- (it's not quite visible from this screenshot that you will be editing the metadata of your tracks, the only hint is the "Modify Album" title
- 12:41:41 [deadchip]
- well for one you can submit puid<->trackid pairs from this dialog as well, for all tracks that have a green checkmark
- 12:41:47 [deadchip]
- yeah you will
- 12:42:02 [deadchip]
- it's a retagging dialog
- 12:42:18 [deadchip]
- it tags the full set of MB metadata as described on wiki MusicBrainzTag
- 12:42:58 [deadchip]
- it's just that the whole info isn't show in the dialog, i don't think it's really needed, but for the people who yell for transparency of the process we will have to maybe do that somewhen
- 12:44:37 [csp]
- Well, I don't think you need to see all the detalis too. I think the only purpose of the tagger is to get the tags right and you need to see just enough to make that possible
- 12:44:59 [csp]
- (A music collection information browser would a different product)
- 12:45:30 [csp]
- I do like the bmp-screenshot because the window is just bothered with one release at a time.
- 12:46:00 [deadchip]
- you select them trough the 2 dropdowns at the upper left
- 12:46:19 [deadchip]
- after selecting an artist the album dropdown is filled with the release names that have been found for this artist
- 12:46:27 [deadchip]
- this can happen trough various ways (the finding)
- 12:46:30 [csp]
- But "your tracks" won't change right?
- 12:46:42 [deadchip]
- either you enter something in there manually, and use the search button
- 12:46:55 [deadchip]
- or you use a track to find a PUID, and from it a set of releases it's in
- 12:46:57 [deadchip]
- csp: nope
- 12:47:10 [deadchip]
- the only thing that changes is the amount of rows at the right hand side
- 12:47:33 [deadchip]
- to be at least the amount of your tracks, and at maximum the amount of tracks at the left hand side
- 12:47:42 [deadchip]
- if there are more rows left hand side then it's being padded
- 12:47:48 [deadchip]
- imaginable situations are
- 12:47:53 [deadchip]
- where you don't have the full album
- 12:48:10 [deadchip]
- or some track, let's say the last track, was tagged as track "15", but it is in fact track "99" (last hidden track)
- 12:48:14 [deadchip]
- i had 1-2 such albums
- 12:48:26 [csp]
- Yeah, I've seen those too.
- 12:48:50 [deadchip]
- you basically bring the rows into position to match each other
- 12:48:53 [csp]
- Okay, so I like the idea of "select the files that belong to one release that you want to tag", "find the matching release from MB", "match-up your files to the release info" and "write your tags"
- 12:48:59 [deadchip]
- then you can additionally perform PUID based operations to be really sure
- 12:49:26 [deadchip]
- you can also perform puid submissions from there, but i'm not sure right now this is a good place (but then again doing it otherwise would be sort of duplication of the GUI)
- 12:49:46 [deadchip]
- and once you have them layouted like you think they should be correct
- 12:50:23 [deadchip]
- (you can make this sure using puid/metadata finding for a track; if it finds a puid for the track with a track id and only 1 release it's on then it will also change the tracknumber, so you know where it belongs to)
- 12:50:23 [csp]
- Well, if your done matching up your files to the mb-tracks you believe they are correct, so submitting the PUIDs would be logical.
- 12:50:31 [deadchip]
- yeah
- 12:50:46 [deadchip]
- but.. it's sitll a little too click-click easy
- 12:50:54 [deadchip]
- it's easy and GOOD that it is if you just want to retag
- 12:50:59 [deadchip]
- you can always re-re-tag again
- 12:51:15 [deadchip]
- but for submitting puids it can be "fatal" if you submit too many wrong puid track id associations
- 12:52:17 [csp]
- I'm not familiar with the wrong vs right PUID ratio in the MB-database or something.
- 12:53:04 [csp]
- But wouldn't having much submission balance it to the right side? Or could one bad PUID-submission disturb it heavily?
- 12:54:08 [deadchip]
- csp: it's not a matter of ration
- 12:54:10 [deadchip]
- ratio*
- 12:54:22 [deadchip]
- csp: it's just that wrong associations can have a very big effect
- 12:54:31 [deadchip]
- because a puid association is always only puid to track
- 12:54:42 [deadchip]
- and then based on the track, you can get a number of releases this track is in
- 12:54:45 [deadchip]
- ideally only 1
- 12:55:01 [deadchip]
- and in this ideal case, where it is only 1, it would be actually even most fatal if the association was wrong
- 12:55:07 [csp]
- Yeah, but it should be that 1 puid always relates to exactly 1 track right?
- 12:55:27 [deadchip]
- since it's then easy to believe, or think, that it's the correct release (unless you really double check right with your eyes and see it has nothing to do with your local tracks)
- 12:55:46 [deadchip]
- csp: in theory, but if you look at the mb server you'll find a lot of tracks with multiple puids
- 12:55:53 [deadchip]
- err
- 12:55:55 [deadchip]
- that way around
- 12:55:56 [deadchip]
- yes
- 12:55:57 [csp]
- Okay, but also the other way around?
- 12:56:00 [csp]
- yeah :)
- 12:56:05 [deadchip]
- yeah
- 12:56:10 [deadchip]
- and if that association is made wrong
- 12:56:15 [deadchip]
- then you're - screwed
- 12:56:18 [deadchip]
- good example here:
- 12:56:38 [deadchip]
- it's not too far off but it's still wrong
- 12:56:42 [deadchip]
- (still scanning)
- 12:56:59 [deadchip]
- [mderezynski@core surrender]$ gst-puid 03\ out\ of\ control.mp3
- 12:57:00 [deadchip]
- Initializing GLib..
- 12:57:00 [deadchip]
- Initializing GStreamer Elements..
- 12:57:00 [deadchip]
- Setting up Pipeline..
- 12:57:00 [deadchip]
- Processing file.................
- 12:57:00 [deadchip]
- Processing done.
- 12:57:02 [deadchip]
- File: 03 out of control.mp3
- 12:57:04 [deadchip]
- Artist....: The Chemical Brothers
- 12:57:06 [deadchip]
- Title.....: Out Of Control (Sasha Remix)
- 12:57:10 [deadchip]
- PUID......: f2d9da10-22ed-4919-cf99-44c7d87c57bc
- 12:57:12 [deadchip]
- [mderezynski@core surrender]$
- 12:57:14 [deadchip]
- point is, this is the original track from the original album
- 12:57:16 [deadchip]
- and not the remix
- 12:58:03 [deadchip]
- i think libtp says the same
- 12:58:05 [deadchip]
- pretty sure
- 12:58:43 [csp]
- Well, mb should either prevent this by not allowing user submission (impossible I guess) or PUIDs shouldn't be a primary identification method.
- 12:59:11 [deadchip]
- yeah but if you have no idea what that track is
- 12:59:13 [deadchip]
- or it's mistagged
- 12:59:17 [deadchip]
- or it's _slightly_ mistagged
- 12:59:18 [csp]
- Personally I don't use them in Picard. It's only nice to have them when you find this "Track1.mp3", "Track2.mp3" stuff.
- 12:59:22 [deadchip]
- and you really want to make sure..
- 12:59:41 [csp]
- if you really want to make sure you can't rely on the user submissions.
- 12:59:56 [deadchip]
- well
- 13:00:00 [deadchip]
- libtp finds the same puid
- 13:00:04 [deadchip]
- but prints me different metadata
- 13:00:20 [deadchip]
- [mderezynski@core examples]$ ./puid -i a7f6063296c0f1c9b75c7f511861b89b /music/Music/chemical\ brothers/surrender/03\ out\ of\ control.mp3
- 13:00:20 [deadchip]
- Artist: 'The Chemical Brothers'
- 13:00:20 [deadchip]
- Album: 'Surrender'
- 13:00:20 [deadchip]
- Track: 'Out of Control (feat. Bernard Sumner & Bobby Gillespie)'
- 13:00:20 [deadchip]
- TrackNum: '3'
- 13:00:22 [deadchip]
- Duration: '439710'
- 13:00:24 [deadchip]
- PUID: f2d9da10-22ed-4919-cf99-44c7d87c57bc
- 13:00:26 [deadchip]
- [mderezynski@core examples]$
- 13:01:09 [csp]
- So that's because of multiple PUID --> track relations right?
- 13:01:27 [deadchip]
- csp: yeah well so much for 1 puid to 1 track: http://musicbrainz.org/ws/1/track/?puid=f2d9da10-22ed-4919-cf99-44c7d87c57bc&type=xml
- 13:01:28 [deadchip]
- yeah
- 13:01:34 [deadchip]
- gst-puid just prints the first one
- 13:02:10 [deadchip]
- hmm the xml parsing in gst-puid is sure wrong
- 13:02:21 [csp]
- It prints the second one
- 13:02:26 [deadchip]
- but then again the XML parsing does not really belong into the element itself
- 13:02:36 [deadchip]
- it should just provide the PUID and the XML document
- 13:02:52 [deadchip]
- csp: yeah it has a simple gmarkup parser and it doesn't see the very first <title/> element
- 13:03:05 [deadchip]
- wwonder why
- 13:03:09 [deadchip]
- * deadchip makes it print the xm
- 13:03:11 [deadchip]
- xml*
- 13:03:32 [csp]
- But even if there weren't wrong submissions it still would be impossible to get the right release, since it's both on a compilation (Singles 93-03) and on a album (Surrender)
- 13:03:33 [deadchip]
- inside bmp you'd get to choose from all the releases that belong to these tracks, though
- 13:03:40 [deadchip]
- yeah
- 13:03:51 [csp]
- So you still need additional logic or user interaction to pick the right release..
- 13:03:57 [deadchip]
- that's where you really have to know where you got it from, or where it belongs to
- 13:04:23 [csp]
- If you're tagging an entire release at once it's probably possible to find the common release in all of your tracks.
- 13:04:33 [csp]
- (at least, that's what I do manually in Picard anyway)
- 13:05:12 [deadchip]
- yeah same works in bmp basically
- 13:05:19 [deadchip]
- you can see if it's the right release
- 13:05:31 [csp]
- And I think we should more or less accept that tagging a single track using PUID only will never be correct.
- 13:05:37 [deadchip]
- ther is no _absolute_ guarantee anyway unless you really bought the record and have the CD case
- 13:05:55 [deadchip]
- and even in this case, we recently had a case where the record label mislabeled a track on the sleeve
- 13:07:34 [csp]
- But anyway, the reason I came into IRC: Is picard still actively developped now? Or was I mistakingly thinking that Luks was the main developper?
- 13:08:17 [csp]
- Or are you planning to split off the bmp-tagger as mb-tagger-ng-ng ?
- 13:08:24 [mellum]
- deadchip: is that bmpx-musicbrainz-tagging-2.jpg an actual screenshot?
- 13:08:34 [deadchip]
- mellum: yeah, it's not a mockup if you mean that
- 13:08:49 [deadchip]
- csp: BMP is nothing Musicbrainz-official
- 13:09:03 [csp]
- I know, but MB is in need of a good tagger right?
- 13:09:05 [mellum]
- deadchip: yes, that's what I meant... where can I find the corresponding program?
- 13:09:31 [deadchip]
- mellum: http://beep-media-player.org
- 13:09:46 [deadchip]
- csp: yeah but BMP is not only a tagger, it's also an audio player, cd ripper, etc
- 13:10:10 [deadchip]
- welll i could extract only the part that does the tagging or so if the guys really wanted that just theoretically
- 13:10:26 [MrQwerty]
- MrQwerty has joined #musicbrainz
- 13:10:52 [csp]
- Well, I don't think that will actually happen.. BMP is quite unix-bound right?
- 13:11:01 [deadchip]
- yeah mostyl
- 13:11:04 [deadchip]
- mostly*
- 13:11:06 [csp]
- (although GTK is cross platform)
- 13:11:11 [deadchip]
- we're working on a win32 port but it's going slow
- 13:12:17 [luks]
- luks has joined #musicbrainz
- 13:13:37 [luks]
- csp: about the picard future...
- 13:13:45 [luks]
- i'm working on a qt port/ui redesign/etc.
- 13:13:47 [luks]
- http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/LukasLalinsky/PicardQt
- 13:14:17 [luks]
- this how it will look like
- 13:14:56 [csp]
- Ah! So you will continue development of Picard even after this GreatDispute thing (which I'm not really familiar with)?
- 13:16:38 [luks]
- yeah, i was quite pissed off back then
- 13:16:41 [luks]
- so i unassigned all my tickets
- 13:16:53 [csp]
- well yeah, that happens sometimes.
- 13:17:42 [csp]
- It looks pretty clean too on the screenshots .. makes me curious to try it :)
- 13:18:07 [luks]
- it's actually already usable
- 13:18:13 [luks]
- it just can't save files yet :)
- 13:18:19 [csp]
- oh.. minor detail :P
- 13:18:43 [MrQwerty`]
- MrQwerty` has quit
- 13:18:50 [MrQwerty`]
- MrQwerty` has joined #musicbrainz
- 13:19:44 [csp]
- Not ready to open up some of the source for us (okay, actually "me") to play with?
- 13:19:59 [srotta]
- srotta has joined #musicbrainz
- 13:20:09 [luks]
- not yet
- 13:20:31 [csp]
- pity, some kind of rough ETA maybe?
- 13:21:00 [deadchip]
- looks really much better o_O
- 13:21:01 [luks]
- dunno how much time will i have
- 13:21:08 [luks]
- but i want to make it public as soon as possible
- 13:21:21 [deadchip]
- i didn't really expect it to be that much better (take that as a compliment, not an underestimation of skills please :)
- 13:22:31 [csp]
- Yeah, it sure is an improvement, I can't wait to drag&drop horizontally anyway :D
- 13:23:00 [deadchip]
- heeh
- 13:23:11 [HairMetalAddict]
- QT is so much tastier with ketchup than wxWidgets
- 13:23:14 [deadchip]
- yeah that sort of actually makes the whole difference in a way
- 13:23:27 [deadchip]
- i meant the horizontal drag not the ketchup :P LOL
- 13:23:32 [luks]
- yep, i didn't like it on the mockups
- 13:23:37 [luks]
- but i'm too used to it
- 13:23:40 [luks]
- *but now
- 13:24:44 [csp]
- The only thing I don't really like is the side by side metadata representation in the main window
- 13:25:16 [csp]
- I'm always having trouble finding the differences when Picard gives a match a very low rating
- 13:25:47 [csp]
- Focussing on one line and switching tabs is okay, I think that comparing to lines right below eachother would be even better.
- 13:26:18 [csp]
- So vertically stacked: "Local title", "Server Title", Local Artist", "Server Artist"
- 13:26:35 [csp]
- But that would be something I would like to experiment with myself in the source sometime in the future
- 13:26:45 [csp]
- (I have no clue how hard QT is anyway).
- 13:27:21 [csp]
- But for a starter this would be pretty usable anyway .. can't wait :)
- 13:27:57 [luks]
- the only thing i hate about Qt is that is always crashes instead of giving you some error code/message :)
- 13:28:14 [deadchip]
- heh
- 13:28:21 [luks]
- about the side by side metadata, i changed it only because a lot of complained about the tabs
- 13:28:34 [csp]
- yeah, the tabs weren't perfect either.
- 13:28:42 [deadchip]
- well it's one thing less to keep in mind
- 13:28:58 [deadchip]
- and in some very own way confusing aside of the issue that you need to remember each values
- 13:29:01 [csp]
- Seeing them both at the same time is part one of the improvement
- 13:29:13 [slaad]
- The problem with a line-under-line representation is you cannot give visual queues to the user that the blocks of meta data belong together.
- 13:29:42 [csp]
- Hmm, might be true indeed. It depends on what you use the metadata for
- 13:29:54 [csp]
- I mostly ignore it, unless I need to compare both.
- 13:30:01 [slaad]
- And it also increases the amount of text on the screen (As each label has to hint at the location of the meta data).
- 13:30:48 [csp]
- Well, you could try to fit "Album | Artist | Track | Title" on one line.. so you only need two lines.
- 13:31:33 [csp]
- (but that might be little bit messy too.. GUI designing is hard)
- 13:32:02 [MrQwerty]
- MrQwerty has quit
- 13:32:14 [slaad]
- I think the current method is as good as you're going to get.
- 13:32:48 [csp]
- The beauty of open-source is that you can't imaging how good I'm going to get it :P
- 13:32:49 [slaad]
- An idea might be to only show the local metadata. And highlight fields that differ from the server... then show the server metadata on mouseover (or some such)
- 13:33:37 [csp]
- Possibly yeah.. even just giving the changed fields a different background color would help.
- 13:34:00 [slaad]
- Or that.
- 13:35:20 [csp]
- It's hard to pick what I'm interested in most. The local metadata helps me figure out which release I should be looking up, The server metadata shows me what the tagging operation will result in.
- 13:35:35 [csp]
- So I can't just really pick one and think showing both is quite okay.
- 13:36:40 [csp]
- So with this thinking out loud I guess I would be happy with the "this server field differs from you local data"-background color.. but that would be probably be a later enhanchement
- 13:39:06 [deadchip]
- not a bad idea but i think this would be only good if it'd work only 1-sided
- 13:39:22 [deadchip]
- as in, it would mark up fields in the local metadata that differ from the server (makes most sense probably)
- 13:39:31 [deadchip]
- but not on both sides at the same time
- 13:39:43 [csp]
- not on both sides, I agree
- 13:40:19 [csp]
- It depends what meaning you assign to the background color: Is it marking the stuff that wrong locally or is it marking what is corrected by the server?
- 13:41:10 [csp]
- In the first case you would mark the local metadata, in the second I would like some friendly coloring in the server metadata.. it doesn't actually matter that much.
- 13:53:20 [slaad]
- slaad has quit
- 14:03:40 [Rondom]
- Rondom has joined #musicbrainz
- 14:04:49 [Rondom]
- hello
- 14:05:58 [Rondom]
- a really stupid quiestion today: I have a track with single quotes (‚…‘), do you think I shall enter it this way?
- 14:11:04 [praest76]
- What's the track?
- 14:12:26 [Rondom]
- http://musicbrainz.org/track/f0af6de4-5eb8-4c03-bc39-036a9578152b.html
- 14:12:40 [Rondom]
- is there any guideline on quotes? can't find one
- 14:13:23 [Rondom]
- oh, and an (instrumental) in brackets is supposed to begin with a small i, isn't it?
- 14:14:39 [luks]
- yes
- 14:14:50 [luks]
- same for remix, mix, edit, ...
- 14:15:00 [Rondom]
- http://musicbrainz.org/doc/ExtraTitleInformationStyle
- 14:15:50 [Rondom]
- luks: I've made amd64-debs
- 14:15:53 [Rondom]
- btw
- 14:16:01 [luks]
- for picard?
- 14:16:04 [Rondom]
- yep
- 14:16:20 [luks]
- debian or ubuntu?
- 14:16:25 [Rondom]
- dapper
- 14:16:40 [luks]
- i could probably put them to the repository...
- 14:16:54 [Rondom]
- luks: they're not signed
- 14:17:10 [luks]
- you can't sign binary packages
- 14:17:12 [Rondom]
- and don't you think a different pgp-key would confuse users
- 14:17:17 [luks]
- only source packages, or the repository
- 14:17:34 [Rondom]
- ok
- 14:17:39 [luks]
- so it i add them to the repository, and sign it all with my key it would be ok
- 14:17:42 [luks]
- *if
- 14:18:06 [Rondom]
- luks: well, you have to trust me that i haven't inserted malicious code
- 14:18:10 [Rondom]
- but I didn't
- 14:18:54 [Rondom]
- luks: I have to compile them again (compiled them in /tmp/ last time)
- 14:20:50 [Rondom]
- luks: well, I don't really understand http://musicbrainz.org/doc/ExtraTitleInformationStyle
- 14:21:11 [luks]
- hm?
- 14:21:33 [luks]
- practically every extra title information should be in lower case
- 14:21:38 [luks]
- except names
- 14:21:42 [Rondom]
- ok
- 14:21:46 [Rondom]
- except names
- 14:21:57 [Rondom]
- that was what I wanted to ask
- 14:22:32 [Rondom]
- but isn't "F.A.F's "Heap Bigg" Remix" as a whole a name?
- 14:22:59 [luks]
- i'd says it should be "F.A.F's "Heap Bigg" remix"
- 14:23:17 [Rondom]
- ok, it#s interpretation anyway
- 14:25:33 [Shepard]
- and except german extra title information :)
- 14:26:20 [Rondom]
- luks: I'm German, so this is not a problem :-P
- 14:26:41 [Rondom]
- * Rondom really needs quad-opteron machine for compiling
- 14:26:48 [Shepard]
- luks: it's good to see you are working on Picard again :) *thumbs up*
- 14:26:53 [luks]
- :)
- 14:27:14 [Shepard]
- Rondom: well, but german extra title information itself *is* a problem :)
- 14:27:27 [Rondom]
- Shepard: why?
- 14:27:48 [Shepard]
- Radio-Version <- german or english? :)
- 14:28:51 [Rondom]
- Shepard: hmmm... you have a point
- 14:28:55 [Shepard]
- sometimes you can't see what the artist wants it to be and often they just mix obviously german mix names and obviously english mix names on singles so you end up with mixed capitalisation for the different tracks which looks ugly
- 14:29:21 [Rondom]
- Shepard: this example is an example of the so called "Deppenbindestrich" anyway
- 14:29:46 [Rondom]
- luks: dcc?
- 14:30:06 [Shepard]
- yeah often they don't even use a dash but write them apart :)
- 14:30:53 [luks]
- Rondom: ehm, no
- 14:30:57 [sidd]
- sidd has joined #musicbrainz
- 14:30:59 [luks]
- it won't work for me :)
- 14:32:02 [Shepard]
- good example: http://www.cover-paradies.to/?Module=ViewElement&ID=196372
- 14:35:29 [Rondom]
- Shepard: never heard her name, btw
- 14:36:20 [Shepard]
- she became popular through some austrian casting show
- 14:42:57 [Shepard`]
- Shepard` has joined #musicbrainz
- 14:43:05 [Shepard]
- Shepard has quit
- 14:43:07 [Shepard`]
- Shepard` is now known as Shepard
- 14:46:00 [Rondom]
- * Rondom read "autralian" first
- 14:49:47 [Rondom]
- Rondom has quit
- 14:49:55 [Rondom]
- Rondom has joined #musicbrainz
- 15:36:58 [nightgroove]
- luks back on picard: yay!
- 15:37:07 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove breathes a sigh of relife
- 15:37:21 [nightgroove]
- its nice to have luks on board again :D
- 15:37:43 [nightgroove]
- oohh tag editor :D
- 15:38:18 [nightgroove]
- hey luks: I like the way it looks
- 15:38:28 [MrQwerty`]
- MrQwerty` is now known as MrQwerty
- 15:38:29 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove will lnow go to take a mini-shower
- 15:46:04 [luks]
- luks has left #musicbrainz
- 16:14:28 [CarlFK]
- CarlFK has joined #musicbrainz
- 16:30:47 [pankkake]
- pankkake has joined #MusicBrainz
- 16:59:22 [Rondom]
- Rondom has quit
- 17:02:52 [Rondom]
- Rondom has joined #musicbrainz
- 17:37:16 [Yllona]
- Yllona has joined #musicbrainz
- 17:50:56 [srotta]
- Arh. Anyone else having problems with Foobar2000 and tags?
- 17:51:53 [srotta]
- Or Picard, ID3v2.4 and Foobar2000. Or something like that :P
- 17:52:44 [srotta]
- I changed Picard's setting so that it wouldn't write ID3v1 tags. Now I noticed that Foobar says many of the tracks I've tagged today are by "Unknown Artist".
- 17:55:41 [juhae]
- I've encountered something like that
- 17:56:08 [juhae]
- If a file has id3v1 and id3v2 tags, Picard seems to write new id3v2 tags but leaves the v1 tags intact
- 17:56:16 [juhae]
- So I have to remove them in Foobar later
- 17:57:49 [srotta]
- Aaaaahhh, right.
- 17:59:28 [srotta]
- For some reason EAC crashes every time I try to get something out of FreeDB, so I just rip and encode with it and my tracks are all by Unknown Artist and named like "Track 1".
- 17:59:49 [srotta]
- Except that some of the tracks do have the proper names, and they're tagged the same way in Picard. Hmm.
- 17:59:52 [srotta]
- 8)
- 18:01:14 [srotta]
- Yeah. Apparently I also have "Unknown Title" in the album title. \o/
- 18:06:49 [Freso]
- Freso has joined #musicbrainz
- 18:07:04 [juhae]
- Hmm, after they changed some things in foobar, I don't know how to remove v1 tags anymore :p
- 18:10:21 [srotta]
- Yeah, I tried (Tagging => MP3 Types or something similar) and apparently it copied the "Unknown Artist" into ID3v2
- 18:11:08 [srotta]
- For some reason id3v2, the command line tool, shows whatever it wills, but the file had proper frames for artist in ID3v2.
- 18:12:20 [juhae]
- If you uncheck the boxes at mp3 types, it just removes those tags in my experience
- 18:12:44 [juhae]
- (My previous problem was actually my own retardness... the files were flac, not mp3 :p)
- 18:13:52 [srotta]
- Hmmmmmmmmmm
- 18:15:13 [srotta]
- Ok, I think you're right. Picard doesn't overwrite existing tags, except when it does. Or something to that effect.
- 18:15:54 [srotta]
- If I interpret this correctly, right now the primary artist is "Unknown Artist", performer sort order tag says "Olavi Virta".
- 18:18:39 [iampotato]
- iampotato has joined #musicbrainz
- 18:19:54 [srotta]
- And it seems to be pretty random. Most of the files I've tagged today are OK, but some are missing track title, some artist, some album... And of course, some all of them.
- 18:25:58 [juhae]
- how useful :)
- 18:26:48 [srotta]
- Easy to debug.
- 18:26:48 [srotta]
- 8)
- 18:28:45 [Aankhen``]
- Aankhen`` has quit
- 18:32:46 [CarlFK]
- think this is really 'her' or a fan or a promoter: http://www.myspace.com/rihanna
- 18:38:45 [BrianG]
- it's probably "official"
- 18:38:54 [BrianG]
- not many fans bother with tour dates or mailing lists
- 18:39:05 [csp]
- I found some kind of duplicate release (Red Snapper - Redone): http://musicbrainz.org/album/f96ae24a-657b-440c-9e52-6bf9228a6c3b.html and http://musicbrainz.org/album/ae899f78-ece0-4878-b026-e2053a3f5161.html
- 18:39:20 [csp]
- I think the latter is the best release, should I just remove the first one?
- 18:39:26 [Yllona]
- CarlFK: that's a page maintained by her management team
- 18:39:31 [csp]
- (best release = best edited release)
- 18:39:42 [Yllona]
- and/or record label
- 18:40:47 [Yllona]
- CarlFK: she's on Jay-Z's label, and is considered his latest protege, so prob'ly same management also
- 18:46:47 [demonhunter]
- demonhunter has joined #musicbrainz
- 18:48:13 [csp]
- Hmm, I guess I should merge instead
- 18:48:59 [HairMetalAddict]
- Merge is preferred. Don't think I've merged a VA into a non-VA before though, so dunno if it works the same.
- 18:50:34 [csp]
- Yeah, It's pretty tricky.. don't want to mess things up, but it feels stupid to "just leave" things
- 18:51:28 [jave]
- are there any fc5 rpm:s of picard?
- 18:53:01 [csp]
- Well, now I'm confused.. there seems to be a merge edit already :)
- 18:59:13 [demonhunter]
- demonhunter has quit
- 19:03:44 [Shepard]
- this edit is going out of control for no reason...
- 19:08:42 [nightgroove]
- it is
- 19:08:55 [nightgroove]
- it's like 'talk talk talk OMGSTFUBITCH' wtf?
- 19:09:21 [BrianG]
- it looks in control to me.. 14 yes vs 3 no..
- 19:09:33 [BrianG]
- :)
- 19:10:20 [nightgroove]
- to be honest I think its.. unusual that so many newbies and non-regulars come i and vote yes on a mod and leave no notes of their own
- 19:10:31 [nightgroove]
- come in and*
- 19:10:42 [BrianG]
- nightgroove: thats probably because they read the link on the blog
- 19:10:49 [BrianG]
- or on mb-users
- 19:10:57 [nightgroove]
- to be honest. I think hma would know this, seeing as he's a big fan of all
- 19:11:03 [BrianG]
- and know how to follow the guideline
- 19:11:28 [nightgroove]
- AL even
- 19:11:31 [nightgroove]
- lol
- 19:11:53 [nightgroove]
- autocorrect is backfiring :P
- 19:12:45 [BrianG]
- that's not all
- 19:13:30 [HairMetalAddict]
- (1) Last.fm sends every braindead MySpacer here to submit ASINs so album covers will show at last.fm, (2) Those newbie nobodies don't comprehend "quality data > tagging" as has been said for years, (3) Free song relevant to their Kazaa-lovin' asses appears, (4) There's most of the yes-voters.
- 19:13:53 [nightgroove]
- hmmhhh
- 19:13:59 [nightgroove]
- I hate to say it, but that makes sense
- 19:14:10 [nightgroove]
- wtf where are all the quality data voters? :p
- 19:14:30 [HairMetalAddict]
- Busy listening to their Radiohead?
- 19:14:32 [HairMetalAddict]
- :-P
- 19:14:34 [nightgroove]
- rofl
- 19:14:44 [nightgroove]
- radiohead lol
- 19:15:00 [BrianG]
- so are you saying certain users votes should weigh more than other users?
- 19:15:15 [HairMetalAddict]
- Being a last.fm mod, I hate to say that too. Love that last.fm is working on MB data implementation, hate that it's causing MySpacers to notice MB.
- 19:15:18 [BrianG]
- just get over the fact that you aren't correct :)
- 19:15:26 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove never saw the aperla of radiohead, I mean, ok maybe like one or 3 songs, but wtf its on the top of *gud og hvermanns* higlisst
- 19:16:01 [HairMetalAddict]
- Radiohead don't have enough hair for my tastes. ;-)
- 19:16:02 [csp]
- Well, just tag those users on registration if they have "myspace" as a referrer and simply ignore their votes :+
- 19:16:03 [BrianG]
- how do you keep throwing myspace into everything?
- 19:16:07 [BrianG]
- or why rather
- 19:16:11 [nightgroove]
- LOL
- 19:16:38 [HairMetalAddict]
- Al's got that killer poodle hair thing going, so... well, that and I got my first Al album back in '83. :-P
- 19:16:47 [nightgroove]
- :D
- 19:16:51 [BrianG]
- to me the people most vocal about hating myspace are the ones that have no real friends
- 19:17:08 [csp]
- OR they just hate myspace
- 19:17:17 [Rondom]
- csp: ack!
- 19:17:37 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove never understood the thing with myspace either
- 19:17:48 [nightgroove]
- I hadn't heard of it before it was mentioned here
- 19:17:53 [BrianG]
- csp: or they hate mysapce because they have no friends
- 19:18:31 [HairMetalAddict]
- I've had to deal with far too many MySpacers at last.fm moderating the wiki there. I don't think any of them passed remedial English.
- 19:18:50 [nightgroove]
- well they *are* mostly 12-13 year olds
- 19:18:57 [nightgroove]
- i know I was pretty retarded at that age
- 19:19:33 [BrianG]
- is it? i think you have to be 16 to join.. and then even so.. if you're over 18 you can't see anyone under 18
- 19:19:51 [HairMetalAddict]
- I wrote better at age 5. Seriously, I see a lot of potential in these people... as the ones who'll be handing me fries at McD's some day.
- 19:20:32 [nightgroove]
- ew McD
- 19:20:51 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove would rather make burgers from scratch at home
- 19:20:52 [Rondom]
- ^ hehe, I don't even want them to hand my fries
- 19:20:57 [csp]
- Well, you can pick a Date Of Birth (why the caps?) of 2006 at the MySpace sign-up.
- 19:21:05 [HairMetalAddict]
- Should say fries at BK, since I prefer their veggie burger.
- 19:21:18 [nightgroove]
- BK > McD
- 19:22:56 [BrianG]
- csp: if anyone enters a year that makes them under 15 or 16 it tells them they can not register
- 19:22:58 [nightgroove]
- re: writing better at age 5, you know 12-13 is that magical age.. when the hormones flow . and make the brain mush, you regresss som uch.. damn its bad
- 19:23:08 [nightgroove]
- ok I'm just talking aout a my ass :)
- 19:23:28 [BrianG]
- like always
- 19:23:48 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict laughs his booty off to: "Weird Al" Yankovic ~ Avril Lavigne Interview [from "2004-07-21: Pacific Amphitheatre, Costa Mesa, CA, USA (disc 1)" (2004)]
- 19:23:57 [nightgroove]
- heh
- 19:24:41 [Freso]
- Anyone disagreeing with my note on this http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=5475593 ?
- 19:25:32 [nightgroove]
- naw, makes sense
- 19:25:38 [nightgroove]
- either all or none
- 19:25:39 [nightgroove]
- not mixing
- 19:25:44 [nightgroove]
- it makes it messy
- 19:29:15 [Freso]
- Good, good.
- 19:29:27 [Freso]
- * Freso doesn't like non-explained no votes.
- 19:29:29 [Freso]
- Oh well.
- 19:29:51 [nightgroove]
- probably a newbie that didn't understand
- 19:29:52 [Freso]
- What's the guide explaining the "artist 1 & artist 2" style thingy?
- 19:29:56 [Freso]
- It is a newbie. :)
- 19:30:05 [HairMetalAddict]
- Signed up 5 days ago
- 19:30:14 [Freso]
- (As opposed to "artist 1 and artist 2".)
- 19:30:15 [nightgroove]
- newbies are a necesarry evil :)
- 19:31:30 [csp]
- Regarding the Weird Al To NAT or not to NAT. What if it was uncertain if it ever became an album track? Would it be a NAT or would we wait until it suddenly is certain (which might never happen)?
- 19:31:43 [nightgroove]
- then I'd agree with it
- 19:31:49 [nightgroove]
- if it was at all uncertant
- 19:32:04 [HairMetalAddict]
- Uncertain is fine. Certain is not.
- 19:32:11 [nightgroove]
- yepp
- 19:32:25 [csp]
- But couldn't we just say that we can't trust this information about possible future releases then and just consider it uncertain?
- 19:32:52 [nightgroove]
- its so silly that we arehavign this dispute, I mean, by the time it goes trought, it may very well be released o nthealbum and be removedanyway .>
- 19:33:24 [csp]
- For this case that might be true.. but I think one of the comments said it right, this will happen more often.
- 19:33:26 [nightgroove]
- afaik Weird Al is trusthworthy? or somesuch
- 19:34:18 [csp]
- Well, Weird Al might be, but it could as well change due to some unforseen circumstances.. I don't get it why we want to consider the information about the possible future release.
- 19:34:37 [HairMetalAddict]
- Al is very meticulous about his songs. Nothing gets put out until he's satisfied with it. Thus his loathing of "single versions" and such as well.
- 19:34:54 [nightgroove]
- if it was any other artist....
- 19:35:04 [nightgroove]
- but Al is as HMA said
- 19:35:12 [nightgroove]
- and he'd know, he's Teh Fan :)
- 19:35:14 [HairMetalAddict]
- The discs are being pressed, there's no changing now.
- 19:35:22 [BrianG]
- o rly?
- 19:35:29 [nightgroove]
- no chance of getting a promo at all? :(
- 19:35:35 [BrianG]
- i've seen discs get recalled.
- 19:36:12 [nightgroove]
- yes brian, the discs will lget recalled, because *you*say so ë_ë
- 19:36:23 [HairMetalAddict]
- Al's not known for promo albums. Not saying it couldn't happen, but chances are slim.
- 19:36:23 [BrianG]
- thats a moot point anyway.. the track is out.. so it's a NAT until the album it's on is out. it's simple. you just don't want to follow what everyone else follow. you some how think you're above everyone.
- 19:36:33 [nightgroove]
- aahh, bummer :)
- 19:36:34 [Freso]
- * Freso has fetched the Danish Folk Council's promo album for Danish folk music anno 2005 at the Tønder festival and will be adding it one of these days... =)
- 19:36:36 [BrianG]
- well.. the track is out.. says Al.
- 19:36:40 [nightgroove]
- oohh
- 19:36:42 [nightgroove]
- neat!
- 19:37:08 [BrianG]
- like you said.. the votes speak for themselves :)
- 19:38:10 [csp]
- And if nobody convinces me really quick, I'm going to add another yes >:)
- 19:38:21 [nightgroove]
- well its your call
- 19:38:53 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove doesn't see the point in adding stuff that will lbe removed in just a little while or so anyway
- 19:38:54 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict slaps nightgroove around a bit to: "Weird Al" Yankovic ~ You're Pitiful [from "[non-album tracks]" (2006)]
- 19:38:57 [lauri]
- lauri has joined #musicbrainz
- 19:39:03 [HairMetalAddict]
- :-P
- 19:39:08 [nightgroove]
- hi lauri !
- 19:39:14 [lauri]
- hi :)
- 19:39:18 [nightgroove]
- what are you slappin' me for?! I voted no!
- 19:39:20 [nightgroove]
- :p
- 19:39:24 [lauri]
- you guys still arguing?
- 19:39:30 [nightgroove]
- no, just talkin'
- 19:39:41 [lauri]
- not what it looks like in the chat logs :)
- 19:39:43 [BrianG]
- yes, some people are.
- 19:39:46 [HairMetalAddict]
- Oh, is there a yes-voter around?
- 19:39:50 [nightgroove]
- briansa' gurtling wer'a moosing along
- 19:39:51 [HairMetalAddict]
- hehehe
- 19:40:14 [nightgroove]
- that being said, where is muz?
- 19:40:33 [BrianG]
- whatever that means
- 19:40:36 [nightgroove]
- I have to give him this moose back
- 19:40:45 [HairMetalAddict]
- Muz is "on the road" so he's not able to come on regularly.
- 19:40:50 [nightgroove]
- aaaah
- 19:41:49 [nightgroove]
- and nikki is missing too :/
- 19:42:01 [nightgroove]
- and ru is at bm
- 19:42:33 [BrianG]
- ./whois nikki_
- 19:45:34 [lauri]
- I think focussing on wierd al is not really the problem here, I think it's dangerous to change guidelines that affect an argument while the argument is still going on, no matter which direction you change them
- 19:46:48 [nightgroove]
- damn the post officefor not sending the stuff ru sent ages agoo, I could really fancy some right about now :/
- 19:47:14 [csp]
- lauri, it's pretty hard to justify guideline changes without concrete cases.
- 19:47:34 [BrianG]
- csp: do you know the changes that she is speaking of?
- 19:47:49 [nightgroove]
- actually as far as I knew, before this started, i thghout the guidelines *was* that one should addsyuf that was known to be released later
- 19:48:05 [nightgroove]
- shouldn't add stuff*
- 19:48:15 [lauri]
- csp: this is a concrete case that complied with the guidelines as stated on the wiki
- 19:48:19 [BrianG]
- i agree.. the reason given was "concensus" but.. where is that concensus? the three no voters that are being opposed by the 15 yes voters?
- 19:48:32 [lauri]
- and then the wiki was changed, while the edit was open, changing said guideline so it didn't
- 19:48:38 [csp]
- BrianG: If you ask me I probably don't, but I guessed it was about the Weird Al vs NAT-Guidelines.
- 19:48:51 [BrianG]
- there isn'ta Weird Al anything guideline
- 19:48:52 [BrianG]
- hehe
- 19:49:17 [nightgroove]
- I thghout it was set before, and that the change i n the wiki was forrgotten as an oversight
- 19:49:31 [lauri]
- nightgroove: we have a mechanism to make changes on the guidelines, and letting one track through (which a dozen people could easily remove, if the guideline did change) while you raised the issue on mb-style would have totally avoided this whole argument
- 19:49:32 [nightgroove]
- which is whyI changed it
- 19:49:45 [lauri]
- nightgroove: and now you know it wasn't
- 19:49:46 [csp]
- BrianG: Well, it would be kind of freaky if Weird Al had his own guidelines indeed :P
- 19:50:08 [HairMetalAddict]
- It was an oversight. It's been stated *dozens* of times over the years not to put non-NAT tracks in as a NAT, defeats the point of a NAT.
- 19:50:23 [nightgroove]
- twhat hma said is what I thghought
- 19:50:33 [BrianG]
- if you looked at the history before making changes with a make-beleive concensus than you could see that the guideline was been in place for a very long time
- 19:50:33 [nightgroove]
- I didn'tthink this neededa post in the ml
- 19:50:39 [lauri]
- but the definition of a NAT has never been stated to include "things that may be on a future album"
- 19:50:52 [nightgroove]
- I was going to do it actually, but shepard beat me to it in the blog
- 19:51:16 [BrianG]
- why did you feel that it should be in the blog but not the ml-users list?
- 19:51:21 [lauri]
- you're not listening nightgroove, I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing, I'm saying, changing it while the edit was open, was confrontational
- 19:51:26 [nightgroove]
- lauri: i'd think that would go without saying..
- 19:51:29 [nightgroove]
- obviously not :)
- 19:51:58 [lauri]
- and a post to the mailing list would have taken you 30 seconds to write, asking if there were any objections to such a change, and then it could have been talked out without a big fight
- 19:52:24 [nightgroove]
- I don't understand, i explained why I did it, I never meant to be 'confrontational' I understand, oif course in retrospect that it would be seen as that, but the intent was not this
- 19:52:29 [HairMetalAddict]
- Should've been changed a long time ago. I challenge anyone to find the consensus that got it in there in the first place. It doesn't exist.
- 19:52:30 [lauri]
- obviously not (because, while this particular case is very clear that it's maybe going to be on the album, I can find you tons that are very unclear)
- 19:52:38 [BrianG]
- i'm still curious what the concensus is
- 19:52:43 [lauri]
- so, we know this one's going tobe on an album
- 19:53:10 [lauri]
- what about "we'rean unsigned band, here's all our music, thisis the ten tracks we'd like to put on album if we got signed and actually made an album"
- 19:53:12 [BrianG]
- lauri: but the album track list hasn't been released yet
- 19:53:17 [HairMetalAddict]
- This particular case is very clear that it definitely will be on the album. There's no "maybe" in this case.
- 19:53:45 [BrianG]
- so why don't you want to compromise by adding it now and removing it once the album is released
- 19:54:17 [nightgroove]
- actually it would take me 30 minutes miss know it all, it would take me the going to the mailig nlist to subscribe (as i unsubscribed) then making n a post, which his hard for me to do, because I type so badly, and then press send, then it would takem me 30 minutes to wait and try to make people stay on targed, or even interested because whn I make a post o n the ml, it is *always* without fail, igonred in a few replies or so
- 19:54:43 [BrianG]
- miss know it all? don't have to get person now
- 19:54:52 [HairMetalAddict]
- Whoa... lots of words... brain go boom... plays Bon Jovi...
- 19:54:57 [nightgroove]
- yea
- 19:55:01 [nightgroove]
- that was overdone
- 19:55:06 [lauri]
- if you won't take the time to go through the procedures that are in place, why are you making changes to guidelines?
- 19:55:15 [BrianG]
- i think it comes down to 3 peole not willing to compromise
- 19:55:16 [nightgroove]
- why aeyo uso mad at me?
- 19:55:20 [lauri]
- I'm not
- 19:55:24 [nightgroove]
- I already explaiend why I did as I did
- 19:55:35 [lauri]
- I don't want an explanation, I completely understand your explanation
- 19:55:43 [nightgroove]
- I haven't gone back and continued to do so as I saw that it was not right in this time
- 19:55:45 [lauri]
- I want you to understand why it made a bad situation really hinky
- 19:55:52 [lauri]
- and how you could avoid that in future
- 19:55:54 [nightgroove]
- you think i don't know that?
- 19:56:09 [nightgroove]
- and that OI wouldn't learn for mmy mistakes?
- 19:56:18 [nightgroove]
- why would you uthin k that?
- 19:56:30 [lauri]
- I just read the entire chat log,and didn't see anything but defense of your position, and no admission that you maybe made a mistake, so yes, I do think you don't know that, until you tell me different
- 19:56:34 [lauri]
- that doesn't mean I'm mad at you
- 19:56:39 [nightgroove]
- did I ever argue that I was *right* in doing so?
- 19:56:44 [nightgroove]
- of course I bloody wasn't
- 19:56:44 [HairMetalAddict]
- Because the "guideline" got in there without a consensus in the first place. It should never have been there to begin with. There's long been a tone of not adding album tracks as NATs (by definition), so a consensus to have gotten that in the wiki in the first place couldn't possibly have happened.
- 19:56:45 [lauri]
- ask gurt, he can tell when I'm mad at him :)
- 19:56:55 [BrianG]
- it's true
- 19:57:13 [nightgroove]
- I'd rather avoid 'talking' to gurt
- 19:57:34 [BrianG]
- you ahd no problem sending me private messages the apst two days
- 19:57:36 [nightgroove]
- ok lauri
- 19:57:44 [lauri]
- then talk to me, instead of at me
- 19:57:46 [nightgroove]
- sorry, I am a bit tired and winded up a little :)
- 19:57:48 [HairMetalAddict]
- --> /ignore is your friend. It's certainly mine. I guess by his mention that he's at it again.
- 19:57:59 [BrianG]
- but /ignore solves nothing
- 19:58:04 [BrianG]
- it just proves you're thick headed
- 19:58:07 [lauri]
- I can see that, but honestly, I'm not mad, and if/when I get mad, I will pretty clearly tell you so
- 19:58:09 [BrianG]
- and refusing to reason
- 19:58:13 [lauri]
- brianG, that's not really helping either
- 19:58:17 [nightgroove]
- hma: I already have him there, its ye reaso nwe're having a nomral conversatino and not a screaming match
- 19:58:17 [BrianG]
- refusing to compromise
- 19:58:40 [BrianG]
- lauri: ok. but it's true.
- 19:58:46 [nightgroove]
- I'm sorry that you thoughtthat i was talking nat you and not with you lauri
- 19:58:56 [BrianG]
- who is screaming?
- 19:58:59 [nightgroove]
- I've been having some RealLife stresses lately
- 19:59:05 [nightgroove]
- so I'm always a bit edgy
- 19:59:47 [BrianG]
- it's always something..
- 20:00:04 [lauri]
- heh, unfortunately,the exampleI wanted to show is not available
- 20:00:36 [HairMetalAddict]
- I'm "no" until someone shows me the discussion that led to a consensus to get that "add album tracks as NATs" in the wiki in the first place. I don't believe it happened. I do believe a long time ago someone overstepped their bounds by putting that in there, and noone's noticed it until now.
- 20:01:12 [BrianG]
- the onus is on you
- 20:01:19 [csp]
- hma, but does "no" also imply it shouldn't be in the database at all (until it is an AlbumTrack) ?
- 20:01:21 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: that's fine, too, I've thrown my votes away on edits that I know will go through or fail, because I'm wildly outvoted, as a stand
- 20:01:43 [lauri]
- but the votes will decide
- 20:01:55 [HairMetalAddict]
- Yup. It may be in vain, but it's my stand. That shouldn't have made it into the wiki in the first place.
- 20:02:11 [lauri]
- meanwhile, what harm does it do to add a track that is currently without a doubt a NAT (if you define 'album' as 'something that has actually been released')
- 20:02:14 [nightgroove]
- I have to say I agree with thqat, and definitely the 'broadcast' bit too
- 20:02:37 [lauri]
- (I am not taking sides here, and I didn't vote on the mod, I'm just trying to you know, be a mediator, or a moose, or whatever)
- 20:02:41 [nightgroove]
- it has never been accepted that 'broadcasted' bits should be added
- 20:02:52 [nightgroove]
- aah I see lauri
- 20:03:24 [HairMetalAddict]
- And by the time the week wait goes by, it'll probably be a moot edit anyway as a track listing appears for the album.
- 20:03:27 [lauri]
- I think everyone is pretty clear on brian's point of view: It is not on a currently released album, but it is available legitimately from the artist, so it qualifies as a NAT
- 20:03:35 [lauri]
- and when the album is released, it can be removed
- 20:03:45 [lauri]
- (did I state that ok brian?)
- 20:03:46 [nightgroove]
- but why can't we wait?
- 20:03:52 [nightgroove]
- whats the rush for?
- 20:03:54 [lauri]
- what I'm not clear on, are the arguments
- 20:04:11 [HairMetalAddict]
- I don't want to see it there because it's not correct data to call an album track a NAT.
- 20:04:15 [BrianG]
- lauri: yes.
- 20:04:18 [lauri]
- nightgroove: it's available now, people may want to tag it, get it a puid
- 20:04:29 [csp]
- waiting makes no sense to me as in the general case we would leave known information (a track that does exists somehow) outside the database
- 20:04:33 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: so you define album differently than "something that has actually been released"?
- 20:04:36 [nightgroove]
- and.. so? that puid will be deleted with the track when it gets removed?
- 20:04:47 [BrianG]
- nightgroove: and then re-added
- 20:04:52 [BrianG]
- when the album is released
- 20:04:59 [lauri]
- nightgroove: if the track is on the album, it'll match anyway, that's no big problem
- 20:05:20 [BrianG]
- so it's a hang up on MB that NATs can't be placed in a future album.. thats no reason to deny the database valid data
- 20:05:23 [HairMetalAddict]
- We know there's an album. We know it's being pressed. We know this track is from that album. We know the album will be out very shortly. It's an album, whether we're able to get it *at this particular moment* or not.
- 20:05:32 [nightgroove]
- yea. so why must the taggers demand it to be a nat and tag it like so?. they will only have to update their tags anyway, later
- 20:05:36 [HairMetalAddict]
- "Time" doesn't change the fact that it's a track from an album.
- 20:05:45 [lauri]
- how do we know the track is from the album=?
- 20:05:46 [nightgroove]
- exactly
- 20:05:54 [lauri]
- nobody has told me how they know that yet
- 20:06:11 [lauri]
- as for "we know becauseit's on a track list", did anyone not see the mess that was the idlewild album last week?
- 20:06:14 [lauri]
- or tool's last album
- 20:06:33 [lauri]
- or any of the others entered daily from rock solid "we have a tracklist, it's on the bands news page" information
- 20:06:48 [HairMetalAddict]
- In this case, we know because Al has stated this. He is also vehemently against "single versions" and remixes or other defacing of his music, so it's the exact track that will be on the album.
- 20:06:52 [nightgroove]
- you need to talk to hma there, as I only take his word for it, but I've been proven right/wrong by him before, so I trust his judgement
- 20:06:54 [nightgroove]
- actually
- 20:07:14 [BrianG]
- weird al also says the track is out now.
- 20:07:27 [lauri]
- ok, so this particular case is one thing, 100% sure it will be on an album that is going to be released fairly soon
- 20:07:35 [lauri]
- now step back: what if he hadn't said that
- 20:07:36 [HairMetalAddict]
- Correct
- 20:07:37 [nightgroove]
- that's the thing
- 20:07:42 [BrianG]
- lauri: do you see the unwillingness to compromise?
- 20:07:44 [nightgroove]
- if it wasn't sure I'd not vote no
- 20:07:49 [lauri]
- brianG: give me time :)
- 20:07:55 [BrianG]
- ok
- 20:07:58 [lauri]
- if we're going to have a guideline, it has to make sense
- 20:07:59 [HairMetalAddict]
- If he hadn't, that's an "unsure". Unsure = okay for NAT
- 20:08:06 [nightgroove]
- exactly
- 20:08:32 [HairMetalAddict]
- This particular case has been dragged out because it's a known quanitity. Unknowns are fine for NATs.
- 20:08:38 [lauri]
- ok, so which url in the edit mod has al saying explicitly "This track will be on my album, unadulterated"?
- 20:09:56 [lauri]
- (there isn't one)
- 20:10:05 [keschte]
- keschte has joined #musicbrainz
- 20:10:07 [nightgroove]
- there isn't?
- 20:10:08 [nightgroove]
- :(
- 20:10:10 [BrianG]
- the track has over 50,0000 listens on last.fm -- you don't think people should PUID the track at all untill September 26 2006?
- 20:10:11 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: if you have such evidence, why didn't you post it?
- 20:10:12 [nightgroove]
- hi keschte
- 20:10:16 [keschte]
- * keschte waves
- 20:10:24 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: that would have probably shortcut the argument somewhat too
- 20:10:50 [csp]
- I think it would be a strange thing for MB to vote depending on the trustworthiness of URLs saying something about possible future release status
- 20:11:07 [lauri]
- then you must be new to MB csp
- 20:11:10 [nightgroove]
- uhm, we use urls to back up information all the time
- 20:11:15 [csp]
- I am
- 20:11:44 [lauri]
- brianG: from another point of view, can you understand that people fear adding data to the database that we know for certain is going to be incorrect in the future (even if it's arguably correct now)
- 20:11:47 [csp]
- The stress in that remark was on "future" anyway.. I don't see why that matters at all, but continue your arguments lauri
- 20:12:03 [HairMetalAddict]
- * HairMetalAddict is busy at the moment playing mod at last.fm dealing with someone sending porn PMs to underagers...
- 20:12:05 [lauri]
- because it's too often forgotten, and lays around gathering dust
- 20:12:23 [nightgroove]
- :(
- 20:12:28 [nightgroove]
- dig up the url now then
- 20:12:28 [HairMetalAddict]
- Back shortly...
- 20:12:30 [BrianG]
- lauri: yes, but i stated in my edit that it should be removed when the album is released.. it's not likely to be over looked
- 20:12:32 [nightgroove]
- ya ok
- 20:12:43 [lauri]
- ok, but there can be a slippery slope feel to things
- 20:12:48 [BrianG]
- i'm sure that if it was, than the latest it would be noticed is if someone runs the analization in picard
- 20:13:04 [lauri]
- "if we let this one in, even though we know Brian will fix it in time, we'll have to let them all in, and there'll be all this bogus stuff nobody ever fixes"
- 20:13:17 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove nods
- 20:13:27 [lauri]
- I suspect that's the root of the problem in fact
- 20:13:41 [nightgroove]
- I think you'reright
- 20:13:49 [nightgroove]
- you're a good mediater/moose!
- 20:14:02 [lauri]
- not that they don't trust you (brian) to fix it, but that it creates precedent for something we don't in general want to allow (adding data that we know will need to be removed)
- 20:14:13 [lauri]
- it's all in the antlers darling
- 20:14:14 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove nods again
- 20:14:18 [nightgroove]
- :D
- 20:14:23 [keschte]
- well does it?
- 20:14:27 [BrianG]
- but where it "all this bogus stuff"?
- 20:14:30 [keschte]
- i know it is a bit offtopic
- 20:14:34 [BrianG]
- s/it/is
- 20:14:36 [nightgroove]
- sorry, what?
- 20:14:41 [keschte]
- but this qualifies as a internet release, imho.
- 20:15:06 [lauri]
- yes, but we're not arguing this particular edit so much, as why there is an argument over it
- 20:15:18 [BrianG]
- if i create music and post it on myspace, it's a NAT
- 20:15:21 [BrianG]
- too bad
- 20:15:23 [lauri]
- the argument boils down to: we don't want bogus stuff in the database
- 20:15:25 [BrianG]
- heh
- 20:15:33 [BrianG]
- lauri: but what is the bogus stuff?
- 20:15:36 [BrianG]
- the track exists
- 20:15:44 [lauri]
- brianG: I never said it didn't
- 20:15:50 [BrianG]
- i know
- 20:16:01 [lauri]
- can you understand why it makes people nervous though?
- 20:16:10 [BrianG]
- no, because it's not bogus :)
- 20:16:22 [lauri]
- it is "something we know will need to be removed"
- 20:16:35 [BrianG]
- theres enough subscribers to the artist
- 20:16:44 [lauri]
- I agree it's not bogus, but, there is also a lot of crossover in the two categories
- 20:17:06 [lauri]
- like: entering future album tracklists... I _know_ they are nearly always wrong, no matter how reliable the site you got them from
- 20:17:21 [lauri]
- but they're not always
- 20:17:27 [nightgroove]
- that was my point aboutthesame ness of that
- 20:17:57 [keschte]
- lauri: yes, but its likely the data gets revisited when more details get into the open.
- 20:17:59 [lauri]
- I no vote them a lot (especailly when the editor says "I got this pre-release off kazaa")
- 20:18:01 [csp]
- the difference is that these tacklists are information that might be wrong, the track however exists and will exist forever (however maybe not forever as a NAT)
- 20:18:11 [keschte]
- its not a case of data gathering dust, at all.
- 20:18:15 [BrianG]
- my point is.. it's a NAT now, when it's on an album it can be removed. if you see that it's a NAT, remove it. why does suddenly all data on MB have to be up to the second correct. if it were we'd not be voting on any edits
- 20:18:17 [lauri]
- but when they are from the artist website, complete, and the artist has a screenshot of the cover, it's a different story
- 20:18:21 [keschte]
- neither would this be, if it was added as a single.
- 20:18:41 [lauri]
- BrianG: there's a compromise, add it as a net only released single
- 20:18:42 [Brandon_72]
- Brandon_72 has joined #musicbrainz
- 20:18:51 [lauri]
- it certainly fulfills that (by MB's definition)
- 20:18:54 [BrianG]
- same peokle voted taht idea down as well
- 20:18:59 [BrianG]
- thats why i added the NAT
- 20:19:00 [keschte]
- problem is, this was voted down by HairMetalAddicttoo
- 20:19:00 [nightgroove]
- yes ok, that is truw
- 20:19:02 [keschte]
- :)
- 20:19:03 [BrianG]
- people*
- 20:19:17 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: ok, but MB's definition of single does not match billboard's definition of single
- 20:19:24 [lauri]
- hairMetalAddict: can you allow that much?
- 20:19:29 [Freso]
- lauri: Well, single != album, so it would still be a NAT...
- 20:19:33 [nightgroove]
- lets wait until he comes back with the url also
- 20:19:41 [nightgroove]
- Freso: .p
- 20:19:46 [lauri]
- we don't use compilation strictly the way record labels do always
- 20:20:02 [keschte]
- good moment to dash off :P
- 20:20:04 [lauri]
- we don't necessarily use promo the same way either, and I've had my own arguments about what a demo is
- 20:20:13 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove has been wondering about calling nats 'non attached tracks'
- 20:20:18 [lauri]
- so _by MB's definition of a single_ this ought to qualify
- 20:20:30 [nightgroove]
- I can agree with that
- 20:20:52 [lauri]
- I think there is precedent for that too (net only releases entered as singles)
- 20:21:02 [lauri]
- I can't think of one offhand, but I am pretty sure I have seen some
- 20:21:06 [nightgroove]
- ohoh!
- 20:21:08 [nightgroove]
- I know
- 20:21:23 [nightgroove]
- go home productions has tonns
- 20:21:41 [lauri]
- ok, so that's something that would sidestep the "has to be removed" issue entirely
- 20:22:03 [lauri]
- would allow the 50k listens on last.fm to be nicely tagged and puid'ed etc
- 20:22:04 [BrianG]
- well i'd like to see HMAs proof that the part of the wiki that mo tried to remove has actually been just thrown into the wiki before i agree to adding the track as a single
- 20:22:09 [Freso]
- nightgroove: Or just non-release tracks...
- 20:22:24 [BrianG]
- because right now the track and my edit follows the style guidleine for NAT
- 20:22:25 [nightgroove]
- but that shortens to nrt which is unpronouncable
- 20:22:29 [lauri]
- * lauri going to let the dog out to pee
- 20:22:34 [nightgroove]
- :)
- 20:22:36 [lauri]
- try not to explode before I get back
- 20:22:39 [csp]
- Would be quite okay, since we probably don't know if the album will contain the exact same track or an extended or slightly edited version.
- 20:22:59 [csp]
- (in which case a NAT wouldn't have to be removed either)
- 20:23:05 [nightgroove]
- csp: we do, since weird al does *not* do alt versions at all
- 20:23:23 [BrianG]
- csp: i've also mentioned th at in a basic way in my mod note that i added when i created the edit
- 20:24:05 [csp]
- Hmm, why don't we just let lauri decide! She is good at making arguments :)
- 20:24:16 [nightgroove]
- I agree
- 20:24:18 [csp]
- (and I hate this democracy model anyway)
- 20:24:18 [nightgroove]
- she's good
- 20:25:02 [BrianG]
- lauri: i think it's actually 50k listenERs now that i look at it
- 20:25:29 [BrianG]
- 58,508 listeners on Last.fm
- 20:26:01 [BrianG]
- or is that weird al in general?
- 20:26:51 [lauri]
- probably
- 20:26:56 [nightgroove]
- hi l
- 20:27:38 [lauri]
- seems to be the same on all the pages
- 20:28:09 [BrianG]
- 58,508 potential listeners/taggers :P
- 20:28:18 [nightgroove]
- whatdoes how many that listened to it haveto do with mb adding it anyway?
- 20:28:21 [lauri]
- before anyone brings it up, I think this can be easily differentiated as "single like" from the average "I dumped this song on myspace" entry which should be an NAT
- 20:28:23 [nightgroove]
- if you don't mind me asking
- 20:28:42 [nightgroove]
- yes
- 20:28:49 [lauri]
- nightgroove: we would like them to tag it properly (you should see how many variants of weird al yankovic's name there are, for a start)
- 20:29:04 [keschte]
- and that its more than a month before the album comes out
- 20:29:16 [BrianG]
- it's not only avalible on myspace
- 20:29:20 [lauri]
- anyway, to finish that thought: he's taken the trouble to give it art, a site of it's own, it's been treated very differently by the artist than the usual "here's some demos" or "here's my myspace"
- 20:29:20 [nightgroove]
- yea but last.fm needs to upadte their date on mb before its pointiful too :(
- 20:29:29 [keschte]
- if there are so many people listening to it, there's a grand chance they like to tag it.
- 20:29:45 [nightgroove]
- lauri: i'd agree with a single
- 20:30:05 [csp]
- But that would make the difference between a Single and a NAT .. not the difference between "to add" or "not to add" right?
- 20:30:22 [BrianG]
- i'd like to see HMAs proof that the part of the wiki that mo tried to remove has actually been just thrown into the wiki before i agree to adding the track as a single because right now the track and my edit follows the style guidleine for NAT
- 20:30:25 [nightgroove]
- its on an album, it would be added, eventually
- 20:30:47 [BrianG]
- all NATs could end up on an album, eventually
- 20:30:48 [lauri]
- csp: yes, but the argument is not so much "this shouldn't be added because it's bogus" but "this shouldn't be added _as an NAT_ because it will have to be removed"
- 20:31:00 [keschte]
- look mo, that we have to argue about that is not a sign of us being hard-headed and stupid.
- 20:31:19 [nightgroove]
- ?
- 20:31:24 [BrianG]
- all NATs from any artist could end up on an album, eventually
- 20:31:32 [lauri]
- can anyone reach www.stum.net?
- 20:31:43 [nightgroove]
- oh
- 20:31:45 [BrianG]
- and it's been agreed taht we don't remove them until the album is in MB
- 20:31:50 [nightgroove]
- erh, keschte did I say that?
- 20:31:56 [keschte]
- lauri: no, times out
- 20:32:19 [nightgroove]
- what is it?
- 20:32:24 [lauri]
- heh, ok, they were my example of a band who have taken a great deal of trouble publishing their album on the net, except, they aren't signed and it's not really an album
- 20:32:35 [nightgroove]
- aha ok
- 20:32:48 [nightgroove]
- typical that their site is down :p
- 20:32:53 [Brandon_72]
- Brandon_72 has left #musicbrainz
- 20:33:30 [csp]
- nightgroove: that's because of their popularity and thus proving their relevance :P
- 20:34:08 [lauri]
- they're an unsigned swedish alternative band, they're not very popular (They are pretty good, if you're into that kind of thing, which I'm not so much, but they aren't bad)
- 20:34:19 [nightgroove]
- neat
- 20:34:23 [lauri]
- but they're a good example of when an album isn't really an album
- 20:34:34 [nightgroove]
- a net release album?
- 20:34:35 [csp]
- not even an "unofficial album"?
- 20:34:38 [lauri]
- and how we probably need to clarify this guideline anyway, since it's clearly confusing people
- 20:34:46 [lauri]
- indeed, it could be both
- 20:35:03 [keschte]
- even more, the current set of attributes is just way to narrow
- 20:35:06 [nightgroove]
- but in the sense of unofficial != bootleg
- 20:35:15 [lauri]
- but the point was, they put up new tracks all the time, and some of them were up for like, 2 years, before they posted in their own forums which ones they'd put on an album
- 20:35:33 [nightgroove]
- ook oh
- 20:35:36 [lauri]
- and even then, the only way to know which ones that was, is to have read the forum post
- 20:35:46 [BrianG]
- i think the guideline is pretty clear.. add the NAT.. when there is an album that the NAT appears on remove the NAT
- 20:35:48 [lauri]
- which I can't, because their site is broken, you'll just have to trust me on that one :)
- 20:35:51 [nightgroove]
- (or gotten the album) ?
- 20:35:52 [nightgroove]
- :)
- 20:37:20 [lauri]
- I think the guideline is pretty clear as it is written currently too
- 20:37:31 [lauri]
- and I think the votes are also pretty clear on this specific case
- 20:37:39 [nightgroove]
- but I honnestly can't' remember this being agreed upon
- 20:37:54 [csp]
- Yeah, although you just made us doubt if it should be a NAT or a Single.
- 20:37:55 [BrianG]
- ok great.
- 20:37:59 [BrianG]
- i'm off for a smoke.
- 20:38:04 [lauri]
- but it's _also_ clear, that we as a group should probably revisit the guideline formally, even if that means changing it (or just confirming that it shouldn't be changed)
- 20:38:05 [keschte]
- hehe, that helps ;)
- 20:38:27 [nightgroove]
- ding
- 20:38:34 [BrianG]
- i can't remember where i was when JFK was shot, but taht dosen't mean it didn't happen
- 20:38:48 [keschte]
- http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/NonAlbumTrack?action=recall&rev=1
- 20:38:50 [lauri]
- csp: I was just suggesting it as a compromise that might satisfy everyone (compromises sometimes mean everyone gives a bit)
- 20:38:58 [keschte]
- it was before the wiki was migrated to moinmoin
- 20:39:05 [nightgroove]
- yes
- 20:39:10 [keschte]
- which is ridiculously long ago.
- 20:39:16 [BrianG]
- over a year
- 20:39:17 [nightgroove]
- I tried looking for it on usemod oldwiki butthats been deleted
- 20:39:25 [BrianG]
- and look at all those that h ave changed this page since
- 20:39:42 [BrianG]
- if they're correcting typos they are obviously reading what is written
- 20:39:44 [keschte]
- yup. JohnCarter might find that out, he surely has an old wiki lying around
- 20:39:48 [lauri]
- nightgroove: for what it's worth, I've always understood the guideline exactly as written
- 20:39:50 [keschte]
- should we ask him? *wink*
- 20:39:55 [nightgroove]
- yes I think soo
- 20:40:18 [nightgroove]
- hmm I've always though that the guideline was the opposite
- 20:40:52 [lauri]
- after having made a doofus of myself in a mod note once, I've taken to checking the guidelines pretty often, since even a moose can't remember them all verbatim
- 20:40:54 [nightgroove]
- and the broadcast thing
- 20:41:03 [nightgroove]
- hehe true
- 20:41:22 [nightgroove]
- I'm *sure* that broadcasted sniplets do *not* qualify as nts
- 20:41:29 [lauri]
- the broadcast thing comes up less often, simply because they are usually not one-at-a-time, and go in as bootleg compilations, or bootleg live
- 20:41:36 [nightgroove]
- yes
- 20:41:37 [csp]
- that's why we are called "editors" and not "bots" I guess.
- 20:41:50 [keschte]
- are you really serious with that moose thingie?
- 20:41:51 [nightgroove]
- I belivethat needs revising too
- 20:41:52 [csp]
- (I'm using "we" a lot for a newbie.. sorry for that)
- 20:41:52 [lauri]
- but I've seen also KEXP live performances go in as NAT
- 20:41:55 [keschte]
- doh! :(
- 20:42:06 [lauri]
- and nobody no voting them
- 20:42:19 [nightgroove]
- that's shouldn't happen imho lauri
- 20:42:48 [lauri]
- and didn't think twice about it (because i know what KEXP is, and that they get bands in to do live performances and then send them out as podcasts, so they are easy to come by legitimately)
- 20:43:06 [nightgroove]
- because rips from broadcasts can be different for mperson to person
- 20:43:14 [lauri]
- they are not bootlegs, they are live, they are legit, some of them are very popular and what else could they be than NAT's?
- 20:43:21 [lauri]
- not if you got them straight from the radio station
- 20:43:22 [nightgroove]
- singles
- 20:43:26 [nightgroove]
- oh yea
- 20:43:39 [lauri]
- which is what they are
- 20:44:03 [lauri]
- they do (on cd) compilations of them sometimes too
- 20:44:04 [nightgroove]
- that reminds me of http://musicbrainz.org/album/a56a001a-2580-4d3d-827d-f785bd315d22.html
- 20:44:18 [lauri]
- then they could come off NAT's :)
- 20:44:28 [nightgroove]
- it was radio released half an hour long tracks on Live 105
- 20:44:46 [nightgroove]
- this guy that was the dj, released them as 30 min long tracks
- 20:44:50 [nightgroove]
- mp3 files
- 20:44:51 [lauri]
- but in the meantime, I don't see why those particular ones are a problem ,as opposed to the average radio rip, ripped by someone with a tuner card, and nobody else has a copy (that makes no sense)
- 20:45:02 [nightgroove]
- yepp
- 20:45:10 [nightgroove]
- there needsto be defintion there
- 20:45:15 [lauri]
- if he released them himself, they are real releases, and have to be in there somewhere
- 20:45:45 [lauri]
- I'd have put those as NAT's too
- 20:46:31 [nightgroove]
- I added it has a 111 track album, since nats are cumbersome, since some where guest mixed, and then those tracks (as nats) would be on some other artist, and it would be messy
- 20:46:34 [lauri]
- on the other hand, maybe it's better to have them gathered up
- 20:46:46 [lauri]
- what matters, in the end, is simple
- 20:46:49 [nightgroove]
- and also mewss up the other nats which where non album tracks he released on his site
- 20:47:03 [lauri]
- "Is it more useful, overall, to have this data available and accurate"
- 20:47:16 [lauri]
- the problem with radio rips, is we have no way to get the second of those
- 20:47:21 [lauri]
- or even the first
- 20:47:24 [nightgroove]
- yes
- 20:47:32 [lauri]
- this argument,the kexp podcasts, the six mixxes, we can
- 20:47:39 [lauri]
- and it is (more useful)
- 20:47:40 [nightgroove]
- yep
- 20:47:44 [nightgroove]
- I agree totally
- 20:48:17 [nightgroove]
- I'm not so good with words, it would be nice if someone who can write better could summarise somewhere
- 20:48:31 [nightgroove]
- inm a 'dsicussion' part of nat wikipage maybe?
- 20:48:53 [lauri]
- I am completely wiki challenged
- 20:48:57 [lauri]
- I'll try though
- 20:49:00 [nightgroove]
- sweet
- 20:49:04 [nightgroove]
- thanks a lot
- 20:49:22 [csp]
- good stuff.. it would be a waste to not let all this discussion lead to something constructive
- 20:49:37 [nightgroove]
- I agree
- 20:50:56 [dholmes]
- Is it over? Can I ask a question about something else now? =D
- 20:51:02 [nightgroove]
- lol
- 20:51:04 [nightgroove]
- of course!
- 20:51:13 [dholmes]
- http://musicbrainz.org/release/1c25bb30-dc9f-4c98-8d7a-dea3730b20f7.html
- 20:51:17 [dholmes]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ll_Sleep_When_I%27m_Dead_%28An_Anthology%29
- 20:51:36 [dholmes]
- So this is a two-disc set
- 20:51:57 [dholmes]
- The current title in MB is wrong, the question is, should it be:
- 20:51:59 [dholmes]
- I'll Sleep When I'm Dead: An Anthology (disc 1: The Asylum Era)
- 20:52:01 [dholmes]
- OR
- 20:52:07 [dholmes]
- I'll Sleep When I'm Dead (An Anthology) (disc 1: The Asylum Era)
- 20:52:25 [dholmes]
- I guess the question is, is "An Anthology" a subtitle or just part of the title?
- 20:52:52 [dholmes]
- It appears in smaller text, in parentheses, after "I'll Sleep When I'm Dead"
- 20:53:37 [BrianG]
- I'll Sleep When I'm Dead: An Anthology (disc 1: The Asylum Era)
- 20:54:06 [lauri]
- what brian said
- 20:54:13 [dholmes]
- Okay
- 20:54:19 [lauri]
- I am also fairly sure if you look in the history,this album's done the rounds already
- 20:54:25 [lauri]
- (and it's other half)
- 20:55:05 [dholmes]
- Indeed
- 20:55:07 [nightgroove]
- I'd say with the :
- 20:55:07 [lauri]
- heh, and I was the one put it the way it is now :)
- 20:55:09 [lauri]
- my bad
- 20:55:18 [lauri]
- i missed out the anthology bit
- 20:55:51 [lauri]
- oops, no, I just added the date
- 20:55:54 [lauri]
- not my bad
- 20:56:11 [dholmes]
- I think the anthology bit is less important than the individual disc titles being in the (disc 1: ...), not the album title
- 20:56:31 [lauri]
- yes, it makes much more sense
- 20:56:53 [dholmes]
- Anyways, thanks for the votes
- 20:58:09 [lauri]
- and where the heck did that extra copy of transverse city come from
- 20:58:51 [keschte]
- keschte has quit
- 21:00:01 [csp]
- bye everyone!
- 21:00:49 [csp]
- csp has quit
- 21:05:08 [lauri]
- heh, so I found it (remaster with a bonus track, it is) and it's one of those ones that won't show the damn cover art anyway)
- 21:15:26 [Rondom]
- Rondom has quit
- 21:23:05 [dholmes]
- Okay, another question
- 21:23:20 [dholmes]
- http://www.archive.org/details/wz2000-05-25.sbeok.flac16
- 21:23:23 [dholmes]
- What is the legality of that?
- 21:23:50 [BrianG]
- if it's on archive.org it's legal.
- 21:23:59 [BrianG]
- they will not allow anything that is illegal
- 21:24:13 [dholmes]
- Okay
- 21:24:31 [dholmes]
- Is it still a bootleg as far as MB's concerned, because it apparently was recorded off of FM radio?
- 21:24:51 [dholmes]
- And is it okay to create a "Can be downloaded from ..." AR?
- 21:25:05 [BrianG]
- Is it still a bootleg? IMO yes
- 21:25:18 [BrianG]
- can be downloaded AR? yes
- 21:25:21 [lauri]
- ok, how's the wiki page look now
- 21:25:27 [nightgroove]
- let me see
- 21:25:42 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove had a phone from his mom
- 21:25:54 [lauri]
- and it only took me an hour to make the wiki do my bidding
- 21:26:00 [nightgroove]
- :o
- 21:26:05 [nightgroove]
- * nightgroove cracks whip
- 21:26:07 [lauri]
- wiki's hateme
- 21:26:09 [nightgroove]
- do it wiki!
- 21:26:13 [nightgroove]
- :(
- 21:26:17 [nightgroove]
- dakar lauri
- 21:26:29 [dholmes]
- Hm
- 21:26:39 [lauri]
- I need more weaselwords on point 1
- 21:26:46 [BrianG]
- d"oes not sit well with many people"
- 21:26:50 [nightgroove]
- what words?
- 21:26:50 [BrianG]
- not many..
- 21:26:56 [BrianG]
- some
- 21:26:59 [BrianG]
- three
- 21:27:19 [dholmes]
- It would be nice if MB had import album scripts for sources other than FreeDB, so we could just point to a URL like that one and have MB parse it
- 21:27:35 [nightgroove]
- we do, its called the trackparser :)
- 21:27:40 [dholmes]
- Hm?
- 21:27:44 [Shepard]
- bah beat me to it
- 21:27:51 [nightgroove]
- :D
- 21:27:53 [Freso]
- Freso has quit
- 21:27:59 [dholmes]
- Is this something new? I haven't been around much in the past year
- 21:28:08 [Shepard]
- http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/HowToParseTrackListings
- 21:28:20 [Shepard]
- it's there for quite some time already
- 21:28:31 [dholmes]
- That's pretty cool
- 21:28:42 [Shepard]
- the picture's not up to date
- 21:28:45 [nightgroove]
- few people know of it, which is unhappy, as its a great feature
- 21:28:49 [Shepard]
- but I think you can figure it out :)
- 21:29:19 [lauri]
- brian: heh, well, I in general don't like pre-adding albums that are unreleased, so I was projecting
- 21:30:05 [lauri]
- changed
- 21:30:30 [BrianG]
- thanks
- 21:30:42 [nightgroove]
- I like it lauri
- 21:30:51 [FauxFaux]
- Loli?
- 21:33:34 [dholmes]
- Hm
- 21:33:49 [dholmes]
- It's nice, but you still have to do a little work to copy stuff out of the table
- 21:33:57 [dholmes]
- It would be nice if there were something I could just pass a URL to
- 21:35:36 [lauri]
- would be wouldn't it
- 21:35:40 [lauri]
- how's your javascript?
- 21:36:19 [dholmes]
- I did some Javascript for an internet programming class last spring, but I'm not an expert
- 21:36:26 [dholmes]
- I could probably figure it out though
- 21:36:39 [dholmes]
- It would kinda have to be specific to each different site that it imports from though
- 21:36:43 [lauri]
- probably wouldn't be too hard to rig up screen scraping for the most common webshops (say, amazon, cdnow, cduniverse, maybe like, ginza or something to help us up north out)
- 21:37:21 [nightgroove]
- trackparser!
- 21:37:42 [nightgroove]
- its the only use we can use, and screen scraping may or may not be apreciated by those sites
- 21:38:10 [dholmes]
- I'm not really sure about the legal aspects
- 21:38:20 [lauri]
- automated screenscraping (ie, spidering the website and grabbing all the data) is one thing
- 21:38:30 [lauri]
- if you ask, most of the time they're ok with single, user-initiated requests
- 21:38:46 [nightgroove]
- its better with trackparser
- 21:38:48 [lauri]
- (I got permission from yahoo to screen scrape their stock data on that basis, back in the days before rss was big :)
- 21:38:58 [nightgroove]
- then trhere doesn't nee to be a dozen and one different scripts
- 21:39:03 [dholmes]
- It's more work though
- 21:39:06 [lauri]
- nightgroove: I am saying, scrape the tracklisting _into_ the track parser, not replace it
- 21:39:09 [nightgroove]
- hmph
- 21:39:15 [nightgroove]
- people are afraid of work it seems
- 21:39:17 [dholmes]
- For some sites it could eliminate a ton of work, including track times, titles, everything
- 21:39:31 [lauri]
- wouldn't hurt to ask
- 21:39:36 [dholmes]
- I'm not afraid of work, but I'm a computer scientist; making computers do work for me is what I do =D
- 21:39:44 [nightgroove]
- ooh, but thatswhat copy + paste *does* is it not?
- 21:39:51 [lauri]
- nightgroove: exactly
- 21:39:59 [dholmes]
- It requires some manual editing to copy + paste though
- 21:40:05 [dholmes]
- Like that site, I had to edit every line
- 21:40:12 [lauri]
- except something like ginza, with their nested tables, it gets all wonky
- 21:40:18 [nightgroove]
- then you're not doing it right :p
- 21:40:26 [nightgroove]
- oh yes
- 21:40:27 [lauri]
- heh, trust me, I'm doing it right :)
- 21:40:36 [nightgroove]
- but then you can make scripts at home that does it for you
- 21:40:42 [nightgroove]
- if you use this site often
- 21:40:55 [lauri]
- and that's the point of open source, write what you need, share what you write
- 21:40:59 [nightgroove]
- I measnt dholmes
- 21:41:09 [dholmes]
- I agree with lauri though
- 21:41:18 [dholmes]
- Why shouldn't it be shared with the MB community?
- 21:41:26 [nightgroove]
- I didn't say that :)
- 21:41:36 [dholmes]
- And why not integrate it into MB? =D
- 21:41:49 [nightgroove]
- ug. more. javascript.
- 21:41:53 [BrianG]
- did hma ever come back with his url?
- 21:42:11 [lauri]
- you'd still have to find the release and give the url to the track parser, but instead of me (and everyone else in sweden) unwonkifying every ginza paste in I do, I could push a button and have it fill in the track parser for me
- 21:42:11 [dholmes]
- It wouldn't have to be that bad
- 21:42:22 [lauri]
- and you, nightgroove, wouldn't have to push the button ever, and therefore it wouldn't bother you
- 21:42:33 [dholmes]
- The Javascript wouldn't even have to be in the page MB sends by default
- 21:42:43 [lauri]
- you could just hide that bit of the editors toolbox, and pretend it wasn't even there
- 21:42:44 [dholmes]
- You could just enter the URL and it would fetch the Javascript it needs
- 21:42:52 [lauri]
- that too
- 21:43:02 [nightgroove]
- no but I'd have to wait for the already taking a ng *huge* jpage to load with its javascript that I wouldn't press the buton of ;)
- 21:43:15 [dholmes]
- But you wouldn't
- 21:43:17 [dholmes]
- That's the point
- 21:43:18 [lauri]
- what dholmes just said
- 21:43:20 [lauri]
- it wouldn't have to
- 21:43:26 [dholmes]
- It would just be a couple lines of Javascript unless you press the button
- 21:43:31 [dholmes]
- Then it would fetch what it needs
- 21:43:37 [lauri]
- half the stuff on the page now could be loaded dynamically if one of us would just put the time in to make it so
- 21:43:42 [nightgroove]
- it loads slow enough as it is, thanks :)
- 21:43:53 [dholmes]
- Indeed, we could make it a lot faster that way
- 21:43:55 [nightgroove]
- what is loaded dynamically?
- 21:44:13 [lauri]
- only load the track parser javascript if you have that bit open and displayed
- 21:44:18 [nightgroove]
- oohh
- 21:44:21 [lauri]
- only load the guess case scripts for the language you choose
- 21:44:23 [nightgroove]
- that would be a good idea
- 21:44:33 [lauri]
- only load anything if you are actively using it
- 21:44:42 [nightgroove]
- I agree with that fully
- 21:44:42 [lauri]
- quite doable
- 21:45:03 [lauri]
- not high priority for Stefan, given the amount of workload he's already had (and uhh,the GreatDispute)
- 21:45:07 [nightgroove]
- thanks for explaining to this complete non-coder what it meant :D
- 21:45:21 [dholmes]
- Well, maybe if I ever have a free weekend I'll look into it
- 21:45:26 [nightgroove]
- neat
- 21:45:35 [lauri]
- but entirely doable, and possibly a nice little project for someone to get their feet wet into MB development
- 21:45:52 [dholmes]
- I've never contributed any code to MB though so I'd have to ponder it a bit
- 21:46:08 [lauri]
- we need more developers :)
- 21:46:13 [nightgroove]
- ja
- 21:46:36 [dholmes]
- And like I said, I'm no JS expert
- 21:47:03 [lauri]
- I have fits and starts, keschte's javascript is pretty intricate though
- 21:47:06 [nightgroove]
- ok, food and bed
- 21:47:26 [nightgroove]
- good night all, was pleasentto debate with you lauri
- 21:47:27 [lauri]
- but wrapping it all in "don't load until I ask you to" doesn't sound like too huge a task
- 21:47:32 [lauri]
- I say without daring to go look :)
- 21:47:35 [nightgroove]
- lol
- 21:47:38 [Shepard]
- natta mo!
- 21:47:41 [nightgroove]
- natta!
- 21:47:47 [lauri]
- natti natti
- 21:47:54 [Shepard]
- aww natti
- 21:48:05 [nightgroove]
- that's swedish afaik
- 21:48:10 [lauri]
- (swedish for "nitey nite", like you say to little kids)
- 21:48:19 [Shepard]
- nachti :)
- 21:48:20 [nightgroove]
- :)
- 21:48:38 [nightgroove]
- that's natta too
- 21:48:45 [nightgroove]
- the 'proper' is 'god natt'
- 21:49:20 [nightgroove]
- if muz comes online while I'm away7sleeping, say my mooses and regards to him
- 21:49:25 [lauri]
- heh
- 21:49:31 [Shepard]
- will do
- 21:49:42 [lauri]
- * lauri idly wonders why itunes random shuffle has fallen in love with rosenstolz
- 21:50:16 [Shepard]
- ugh rosenstolz :)
- 21:51:22 [lauri]
- liebe ist alles! (at one point tonight, it played me sternraketen three times in an hour
- 21:51:26 [lauri]
- )
- 21:51:51 [lauri]
- however you spell that, since I half spelled it in swedish there, but anyway
- 21:52:54 [Shepard]
- looks correct
- 21:57:13 [dseomn]
- is anybody here familiar with "Warning" by Green Day?
- 21:57:34 [lauri]
- define "familiar"
- 21:57:47 [dseomn]
- remotely familiar
- 21:57:49 [lauri]
- I have a copy. Somewhere.
- 21:57:57 [lauri]
- I think I listened to it once too.
- 21:58:17 [dseomn]
- it's called "Warning" in the db, but it looks like the title should be "Warning:"
- 21:59:09 [dseomn]
- if it weren't a really popular artist I would just change it, but I thought there might be a reason why it hasn't been changed before
- 21:59:11 [lauri]
- I've never seen it called that, anywhere
- 21:59:27 [dseomn]
- on the cd cover I have it was a colon
- 21:59:28 [lauri]
- (nimrod, on the other hand, often has a . after it's name, so that one could go either way)
- 21:59:46 [dholmes]
- The official website clearly spells it "Warning" in spite of the text on the cover image
- 21:59:59 [dholmes]
- I would say leave it "Warning"
- 22:00:22 [dseomn]
- ok, thanks
- 22:00:28 [dseomn]
- I'll add an annotation
- 22:00:29 [dholmes]
- The track is also definately "Warning" without the :
- 22:00:36 [lauri]
- that too
- 22:00:40 [lauri]
- I'd leave it Warning also
- 22:01:05 [lauri]
- I notice they also have nimrod without the . to :)
- 22:01:39 [lauri]
- in general you can assume if it mattered to them, they would use the punctuation, always
- 22:01:55 [lauri]
- and if they don't, then they don't care, and it's just pretty graphic design on the cover art
- 22:02:08 [dholmes]
- Well, assuming the web site isn't some junky thing that the artist had nothing to do with
- 22:02:42 [dholmes]
- Official websites are usually pretty accurate, but I was just looking at one where the webmaster asked fans to contribute information about the band's albums
- 22:05:23 [dholmes]
- As for http://www.archive.org/details/wz2000-05-25.sbeok.flac16, does the title on that page constitute an official title, or should I use the style guideline?
- 22:05:57 [dholmes]
- The style guideline doesn't really apply well, since it's not exactly a live performance at a venue with an audience
- 22:06:01 [dseomn]
- * dseomn didn't know there were any other editors who added stuff from IA
- 22:06:18 [dholmes]
- I didn't even know it existed
- 22:06:37 [dholmes]
- I was looking for info on his 1987 BBC recording and found that one instead
- 22:07:00 [dholmes]
- Maybe just "Warren Zevon Live at BBC Studio" with the date in the release info?
- 22:07:38 [dseomn]
- I added something like that once
- 22:07:40 [dseomn]
- * dseomn looks for it
- 22:07:57 [dseomn]
- the artist is Amir Golshani
- 22:08:38 [dseomn]
- http://musicbrainz.org/release/e154b808-e6cf-447d-b1e4-0149c789688d.html / http://www.archive.org/details/amir2003-04-30.shnf
- 22:09:28 [dholmes]
- There doesn't seem to be a CD case in this case
- 22:09:40 [dseomn]
- yeah, I just realized that
- 22:10:00 [dseomn]
- but the format on IA is the exact same for both
- 22:10:18 [dseomn]
- I think the IA title is just generated by info from a form
- 22:10:33 [dholmes]
- Perhaps
- 22:10:37 [dholmes]
- I don't have any better title though
- 22:11:20 [dholmes]
- Think "[introduction]" and "[interview]" are alright for track titles?
- 22:11:45 [dseomn]
- there isn't much else to use
- 22:11:56 [Shepard]
- your two nicknames are sure confusing :)
- 22:12:06 [dseomn]
- and [uknown] or [untitled] wouldn't be completely accurate
- 22:12:06 [mustaqila_]
- mustaqila_ has joined #musicbrainz
- 22:12:12 [Shepard]
- hi muz!
- 22:12:17 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ mooses in nonchalantly
- 22:12:20 [mustaqila_]
- Hey Shep!
- 22:12:41 [Shepard]
- <nightgroove> if muz comes online while I'm away7sleeping, say my mooses and regards to him
- 22:12:42 [dholmes]
- Whose two nicknames? Mine?
- 22:12:51 [Shepard]
- yours and dseomn
- 22:12:55 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ sends mo mange elger
- 22:13:08 [dseomn]
- dseomn is now known as dschocolate
- 22:13:11 [dschocolate]
- Shepard: happy?
- 22:13:25 [dschocolate]
- dschocolate is now known as dseomn
- 22:15:55 [dholmes]
- http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=5477167
- 22:16:05 [dholmes]
- If anybody else thinks it should be done differently, I'll leave it to them =D
- 22:17:06 [dholmes]
- Interesting that the track listing in IA's "Description" is missing two tracks
- 22:20:10 [dholmes]
- Come to think of it, is it okay to have Warren Zevon as the artist of all tracks, including the interviews which are by an interviewer who is presumably not Warren Zevon?
- 22:22:28 [dseomn]
- * dseomn thinks it's ok
- 22:22:54 [dseomn]
- some bands with a primary member use that person's name for all releases
- 22:24:08 [dseomn]
- like עפרה חזה, she does lead vocals on her releases, and has other people playing background music, but the albums are credited to here
- 22:24:10 [dseomn]
- *her
- 22:24:54 [dseomn]
- I think this is sorta the same thing because the interviewer is really just there to help convey stuff from the artist to the listener
- 22:25:16 [dseomn]
- there might be an appropriate AR though
- 22:25:50 [ngw]
- ngw has joined #musicbrainz
- 22:28:13 [SoothingR]
- SoothingR has quit
- 22:36:37 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ mooses about IN CAPS LOCK
- 22:37:07 [Shepard]
- MOOSE
- 22:37:54 [mustaqila_]
- ELCH
- 22:44:17 [lauri]
- some bootlegs use [unknown] for voiceovers and things like that
- 22:44:36 [lauri]
- but interviews, it's him talking too, I can't see how else you'd do it, other than create some bogus collaboration with the interviewer
- 22:45:17 [deadchip]
- heh
- 22:45:22 [deadchip]
- collab with the interviewer
- 22:45:24 [deadchip]
- that's some
- 22:51:16 [lauri]
- goodnight folks
- 22:51:19 [lauri]
- lauri has left #musicbrainz
- 22:51:35 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ sneaks in and steals lauri's puppy
- 22:58:50 [mustaqila_]
- Shep shep shep
- 22:58:52 [mustaqila_]
- ping ping ping
- 22:58:59 [Shepard]
- hm?
- 22:59:05 [mustaqila_]
- BLIND GUARDIAN. LIVE. IN LONDON :D
- 22:59:09 [Shepard]
- :o
- 22:59:12 [mustaqila_]
- Fucking hell,t he timing is so perfect and its right near work too
- 22:59:15 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ gets wet
- 22:59:24 [Shepard]
- ja jøss!
- 23:00:06 [mustaqila_]
- I'm excited now
- 23:20:44 [catgruff]
- catgruff has joined #musicbrainz
- 23:21:26 [dholmes]
- Could I get one last vote on http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=5476524 ?
- 23:22:51 [Shepard]
- slightly confused diff script
- 23:24:11 [dholmes]
- ?
- 23:24:12 [dholmes]
- Thanks
- 23:27:01 [mustaqila_]
- * mustaqila_ tickles catgruff
- 23:35:12 [dholmes]
- Hm
- 23:35:28 [dholmes]
- Picard is showing my "Local Metadata" track time as something incorrect
- 23:35:36 [dholmes]
- for a FLAC file
- 23:35:48 [dholmes]
- Does it get that from a tag, or does it try to compute it itself?
- 23:36:27 [dholmes]
- Oh, nm
- 23:36:32 [dholmes]
- It just matched the wrong track
- 23:36:58 [deadchip]
- i'm still wondering how to attribute an interviewer in an interview
- 23:37:15 [deadchip]
- in a rather weird way, you could treat it like with book authors
- 23:37:27 [nightgroove]
- nightgroove has quit
- 23:37:29 [deadchip]
- and the author ("release artist") of the interview would be the interviewer actually
- 23:37:51 [deadchip]
- but he's less relevant than the interviewed
- 23:38:10 [dholmes]
- Wow
- 23:38:12 [ngw]
- ngw has left #musicbrainz
- 23:38:21 [Shepard]
- I would attribute it to the interviewed artist
- 23:38:24 [dholmes]
- Picard reads/write FLAC tags much faster than ID3 tags for some reason
- 23:38:36 [deadchip]
- there's no "FLAC tags"
- 23:38:36 [deadchip]
- :P
- 23:38:38 [dholmes]
- Oh, wait
- 23:38:42 [dholmes]
- That explains it =D
- 23:38:45 [deadchip]
- FLAC can have various kinds of other metadata formats
- 23:38:58 [dholmes]
- Well, it looks like Picard didn't read or write any of them =D
- 23:39:04 [deadchip]
- IMPE reading xiphcomments is generally faster
- 23:39:10 [deadchip]
- heh
- 23:39:21 [dholmes]
- Oh, wait
- 23:39:22 [dholmes]
- It did
- 23:39:26 [deadchip]
- lol dholmes
- 23:39:30 [dholmes]
- MPC didn't show them but Winamp does
- 23:39:33 [deadchip]
- * deadchip counts the times dholmes says "Oh, wait"
- 23:39:46 [deadchip]
- yeah well if you write tags to FLAC files
- 23:40:01 [deadchip]
- or ok let's don't say this in an universal-truth fashion
- 23:40:01 [deadchip]
- :P
- 23:40:15 [deadchip]
- when BMP writes FLAC metadata, it makes sure only 1 tag remains
- 23:40:23 [deadchip]
- all data from the previous tag, if existent, gets carried over
- 23:40:38 [deadchip]
- since a FLAC file can in theory have both a xiphcomment, an id3v2 tag and (i think) an APE tag
- 23:40:55 [deadchip]
- having several at once is surely borked and a possible reason for problems with apps
- 23:41:03 [dholmes]
- Too bad iTunes doesn't support FLAC files :(
- 23:41:18 [deadchip]
- so when we rewrite a FLAC file we strip all metadata from it, carry what was in them over to a xiphcomment and rewrite it
- 23:41:25 [deadchip]
- dholmes: i had a Rio Karma once
- 23:41:27 [deadchip]
- in fact i had 3
- 23:41:29 [deadchip]
- each of them died
- 23:41:42 [deadchip]
- harddisk failure, i think 40% of all rio karmas died of that cause
- 23:41:49 [deadchip]
- it supported vorbis and flac playback
- 23:41:54 [deadchip]
- best-mp3-harddisk-portable-player-ever
- 23:42:00 [deadchip]
- (except for the harddisks)
- 23:42:14 [dholmes]
- Bummer
- 23:42:28 [deadchip]
- yeah i had one and the harddisk died, i had it replaced, it died again, i had it replaced again
- 23:43:00 [deadchip]
- and the harddisk died.. and after that i only said i want my money back
- 23:43:13 [deadchip]
- sadly enough because it has a freaking awesome audio engine (instant seek)
- 23:43:22 [deadchip]
- good interface, and plays voribs and flac
- 23:43:38 [deadchip]
- the iRiver ones play vorbis too but their interface and audio engine sucks totally compared to it
- 23:43:52 [dholmes]
- Would it be conceivable to replace the HD yourself?
- 23:44:01 [dholmes]
- My friend has a Karma and I think he was talking about something like that
- 23:44:14 [deadchip]
- yeah well
- 23:44:15 [deadchip]
- hmm
- 23:44:18 [deadchip]
- i was actually thinking about it
- 23:44:28 [deadchip]
- then i taked about some stuff on the forums
- 23:44:35 [deadchip]
- the usual semi-official forums
- 23:44:36 [deadchip]
- you know
- 23:44:44 [deadchip]
- where some developers of the hard+software hang around
- 23:44:52 [deadchip]
- but it's still not official as in company-offical
- 23:44:52 [deadchip]
- heh
- 23:45:06 [deadchip]
- and there were some issues with just putting in a new hard drive
- 23:45:14 [deadchip]
- i think it ran down to that it must be also a model by Hitachi or something
- 23:45:32 [dholmes]
- Huh
- 23:45:33 [deadchip]
- and since obviously these Hitachi drives didn't do well in all the Karmas i had before, i didn't want to attempt that
- 23:45:51 [dholmes]
- Yeah, my friend apparently replaced it with a 60GB, which worked but didn't fit correctly
- 23:45:59 [deadchip]
- yeah it could be modded
- 23:46:05 [deadchip]
- i read about some guy who put in a 40GB one
- 23:46:12 [deadchip]
- but then the casing will not fit anymore yes
- 23:46:24 [deadchip]
- but i'm pretty sure you can not use another model
- 23:46:28 [deadchip]
- dholmes: i think it was something really stupid
- 23:46:36 [deadchip]
- like that the connector of Hitachi drives is on one side
- 23:46:43 [dholmes]
- Ah
- 23:46:47 [deadchip]
- and for all other drive manufactures like Toshiba, etc, on the other
- 23:47:09 [deadchip]
- and that, together with some other stuff, made it impossible or at least extremely difficult to sanely fit in another drive type
- 23:47:13 [deadchip]
- by some other manufacturer
- 23:47:22 [dholmes]
- I'm waiting for a music player that stores 500 GB before I get one myself =D
- 23:47:35 [deadchip]
- * deadchip waits for one that stores 500GB without moving parts
- 23:47:51 [deadchip]
- i bought a cheap ass Thomson player
- 23:47:57 [deadchip]
- yeah t3h evil with the mp3 patents
- 23:47:58 [deadchip]
- lol
- 23:48:06 [deadchip]
- it was a sell out, an older model
- 23:48:13 [deadchip]
- so they reduced it from 300 to 80 EUR or so
- 23:48:15 [deadchip]
- but still seemed nice
- 23:48:25 [deadchip]
- so, it had 1.5GB of storage, and i thought it's flash
- 23:48:37 [deadchip]
- then after some while, i found out there is actually a microdrive in it
- 23:48:38 [deadchip]
- LOL
- 23:48:50 [deadchip]
- and who wonders, after a few more weeks/months it showed signs of failure
- 23:49:08 [deadchip]
- i haven't found a way yet to check the drive with _some_ OS or app that would make the drive ignore the back sectors
- 23:49:20 [deadchip]
- the player still works but is unreliable
- 23:49:40 [dholmes]
- Yeah, I'd want to wait for flash too
- 23:50:04 [MBChatLogger]
- Down with DRM!
- 23:50:04 [dholmes]
- My ideal music player would be an iPod Nano that wasn't made by Apple, doesn't have any DRM and supports FLAC and Vorbis =D
- 23:50:09 [dholmes]
- ... :P
- 23:50:18 [dholmes]
- I can dream, can't I? =D
- 23:50:22 [MBChatLogger]
- Down with DRM!
- 23:50:22 [deadchip]
- DRM is data corruption by design
- 23:53:00 [iampotato]
- musicbrainz keeps taking me back to freedb import when i click change encoding
- 23:53:22 [iampotato]
- er "change character set"
- 23:53:57 [Shepard]
- hmm please enter a bug report for that
- 23:57:25 [iampotato]
- okie.