Guideline 6.13 has been changed regarding stereo tag

RSG §6.13 The Stereo tag can be used for any stereo release, but is required for stereo releases that were also released in mono. Where a release contains both stereo and mono audio, both Stereo and Mono tags should be applied.

Posted because many s may not notice.

Seems strange that it now is required to know if a release also is released in mono.

I think it should be changed to "... is requred if there also is a mono version in the database"

Silvermo
I think it should be changed to "... is requred if there also is a mono version in the database"

Good call

https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/356624?page=2#7642293

I really, really don't like this. Oh well...

Sorry if I seem argumentative but I strongly disagree with this change. For me, it's an absolute nonsense.
Instead of educating new s to follow the guidelines, are we adapting the guidelines to laziness and ignorance now?
What will be the next steps?
Free track positions and the abolition of RSG §12.2 ?
Free capitalization and the abolition of RSG §1.2.1 ?
After all, the easiest way to eliminate the errors is to ensure they are not errors anymore, isn't it?

vinyljunkie66
Instead of educating new s to follow the guidelines, are we adapting the guidelines to laziness and ignorance now?

exact same way marketplace rules have been recently bended and amended to allow drop-shipping

a bit sad indeed

There is no reason to have weird rules for stereo when no other channel option has those restrictions.

It only serves as a pain point for new s. Just because we had to learn to only use it under those circumstances or face punishment, doesn't mean we need to keep practicing it. Nobody has been able to provide a valid reason why the rule should have remained beyond wanting to have something to "moderate" other people for.

Everything is going to be okay. Trust me on this one. Please.

If this does end up causing problems, let me know. I don't think it should though.

Diognes_The_Fox
Nobody has been able to provide a valid reason why the rule should have remained beyond wanting to have something to "moderate" other people for.

Post of the day.

Having a Stereo format tag on a stereo release in no way hurts anyone, trust me!

I now can *fully* sort my releases in my Collection page under Formats by Mono and Stereo, whereas before I could not.

I couldn’t see a good reason to restrict use either, so +1

Diognes_The_Fox
There is no reason to have weird rules for stereo when no other channel option has those restrictions.

Weird rules? Sorry, may I ask you why that guideline was introduced then, if you and the rest of the Staff feel it's "weird"? Through the years, many of us tried to educate new s not to use that tag if not necessary, helped them to learn and understand it was not me the one who suggested this restriction). Not sure why you changed your mind but it's not my business.

Rather, why don't we get rid of the capitalization guidelines too? How are they not "weird rules" too? As long as a title is typed correctly, it remains correct regardless of capitals or not, doesn't it? All those s with their CAPS LOCK PERENNIALLY TURNED ON will be very grateful for the abolition of RSG §1.2.1 :-)

Now, seriously: maybe 'everything is going to be okay' as you said but my disagreement is due to the fact that I believe the database is not going to gain anything from this guideline change because the redundant Stereo tag systematically heralds other, more serious errors on a submission. Very seldom, if ever, I've seen a submission that was correct except for the tag. Have you?

Finally: could you please explain what do you mean with: [the Stereo tag] "is required if there also is a mono version in the database"?
"Required" means "mandatory" so what do you mean with "mono version"? A corresponding mono version or just one mono version?
In other words: for instance, does the existence of Led Zeppelin - Houses Of The Holy album make the Stereo tag mandatory on all the other 362 releases in the master?
"Allowed" is one thing, "required" is another one, so this thing should be clarified before endless discussions arise. Thanks.

vinyljunkie66
In other words: for instance, does the existence of this lone promo-only mono issue of the 1973 Led Zeppelin - Houses Of The Holy album make the Stereo tag mandatory on all the other 362 releases in the master?

Of course!! Now that there is no weird rule this is a must!
Basically 90% of all releases, at least w vinyl, will now be swiftly edited en masse to include Stereo in format.

Diognes_The_Fox
Nobody has been able to provide a valid reason why the rule should have remained

All releases in the db can now be edited in as fast as it is possible.
So, if anyone would like to rankhunt beyond the moon, here's your chance. The sky will be no limit.

Diognes_The_Fox
Everything is going to be okay. Trust me on this one. Please.

All will remain ok, but there should be many edits, and, probably a lot of Votes, masking the edit prior to the Stereo tag edit without that info ever being checked.

Diognes_The_Fox
Everything is going to be okay. Trust me on this one. Please.

That's what Nik said when he was warned that the submission form redesign with the radio buttons would lead to lots of people adding the Stereo tag.

Diognes_The_Fox
Nobody has been able to provide a valid reason why the rule should have remained beyond wanting to have something to "moderate" other people for.

At least not what you consider a valid reason.
Ah, yes, we're just wanting to moderate people. That's why the 33 RPM tag on LP guideline and lots of other guidelines should just be thrown out... there is and has never been a valid reason for them - people just want to moderate others!

I don't know why people are even bringing up "rank" when it is about making a long-term positive decision!

edit: this thread is looked now and moved to here. i just tried to help keep overview. thank you

now obsolete: Mono & Stereo Guideline Update?
discuss here:
discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254

In general, I agree about double threads being less helpful, except for the fact that, as I pointed out in that other thread, it's easy to miss since the eyes drift off after seeing the first part of that thread title which was later edited to include the "Mono & Stereo Guideline Update?" at the end of the thread title.

tricky23
in this thread:
"Contributor Improvement Program........??? /

is what people notice first so will move on, the thread should be properly name to remove the Contributor Improvement Program........??? part with something like the title of this thread Guideline 6.13 has been changed regarding stereo tag

tricky23
Mono & Stereo Guideline Update?
discuss here:
https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254
thank you for heads up but if you are really concerned about "many s may not notice" just post your opinion in this thread:
"Contributor Improvement Program........??? / Mono & Stereo Guideline Update?" https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254

I would like to know why is the guideline change basically hidden from view in that other thread? For starters it is hampered / obfuscated by a misleading title.
For better or worse the guideline has now been changed, so don't keep it under wraps.

It's interesting that this guideline change was the result of a thread with a deceptive title and where https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254?page=1#7610232
So suddenly a guideline that was about to be reinforced has become a "weird rule". Wow.

What a cool decission, now we can add everywhere it is printed mono/stereo to the format, and at least we can't distinguish mono from stereo records. Hardly ever seen such a contra-productiv rule here. Cheers

vinyljunkie66
It's interesting that this guideline change was the result of a thread with a deceptive title and where Diognes_The_Fox had a completely different view just one month ago
https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254?page=1#7610232
So suddenly a guideline that was about to be reinforced has become a "weird rule". Wow

it is trending now to do 180 degrees on decisions, one of the worlds leaders does it every day. At least they did not let us know via twitter, just some thread hidden away behind a deceptive title... wait, that is also one of his modus operandi, maybe he and his family has taken over the site to make "discogs great again"??

https://discogs.cinepelis.org//4theLuvOvMusic
You have serious issues. Discogs allows you to enter correct information to a release.
So President Trump has taken over Discogs.
I suggest you seek help For your President Trump derangement syndrome.

Gruffsvinyl
Discogs allows you to enter correct information to a release.

And? What is your point?

If dumbing down is what the site is going for, a lot of other guidelines needs to be change because it would "allows you to enter correct information to a release". As said by others, if a submitter can not be bother to learn not to add Stereo to releases after 1970, they will not bother with the rest either. Just making it easier for others not to bother learning things is not going to improve submissions quality.

4theLuvOvMusic
gruffd1Discogs allows you to enter correct information to a release. And? What is your point?

If dumbing down is what the site is going for, a lot of other guidelines needs to be change because it would "allows you to enter correct information to a release". As said by others, if a submitter can not be bother to learn not to add Stereo to releases after 1970, they will not bother with the rest either. Just making it easier for others not to bother learning things is not going to improve submissions quality.

https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/765254?page=3#7642698

Ps the problem was not that stereo wasn‘t required per guidelines for releases after 1970, as clear stated in the old guide:
For most CDs, Cassettes, and Vinyl releases since approximately 1970, it is unnecessary to state they are stereo.

The problem is, that new s didn‘t read the quidelines (some old s too)!

Please keep it civil.

manus-von-alles
What a cool decission, now we can add everywhere it is printed mono/stereo to the format, and at least we can't distinguish mono from stereo records. Hardly ever seen such a contra-productiv rule here. Cheers

Not entirely. If the release has mono and stereo content, both tags should be added. If it's a common jacket for both mono and stereo versions, tag as appropriate. I am happy to amend to make this more clear.

vinyljunkie66
Diognes_The_Fox had a completely different view just one month ago

That's true. After reviewing the situation and discussing the matter with Nik and thinking about the situation more, I no longer saw the benefit in adding additional complexity to the guidelines/subform.

How is adding correct information Dumbing down the site.

I also do not agree with this change of rule and the way it has been done, as I didn' t notice the thread where it has been discussed once more. I don't think that changing the rules is a good thing, it brings more confusion and I have the feeling that our efforts are useless.

Diognes_The_Fox I asked in the other thread, but will ask here again: what to do if stereo was previously removed from a submission, should it be add back in following edit? I did edits to remove stereo before the guidelines change, do I need to revert those now? And also asked by others in that thread: should people be doing edits just to add stereo to releases without another other (often needed) changes now like has already start happen?

Diognes_The_Fox
Not entirely

My experience is, just the mono tag appears at the listings in the format. So it looks like there would be a mono release, while it has this useless mono/stereo tagging. This was common in the old days, cause there was some trouble to produce records you can play with mono and stereo equipment. So every company that solved the problem, approximately middle of the 1960s, proudly printed that mono/stereo tagging.

To be true, the mono - stereo discussion was over in 1970. It makes no sense to tag post 1970 releases stereo at all. The Format should be for distinguish releases on a first view. The rest should go the release notes. Or do we now start to add every gatefold to the FTF, too. To add this stereo / mono everywhere just opens the pandoras box.

manus-von-alles
Or do we now start to add every gatefold to the FTF, too

Hopefully, yes.

strummin
Hopefully, yes.

Okay, the Format becomes the new trash can.

"To add this stereo / mono everywhere just opens the pandoras box. "
Do you really believe this .
To me , Going after someone and voting incorrect for adding correct information . Because the rules say you should not is dumbing down the site.
New . But it is a stereo release.
Voter / . But the rules say that you should not add this correct information .
. To CIP you go
P.S . You can blame President Trump

Gruffsvinyl
To CIP you go

people do not end up on CIP just because of Stereo tag, there are always more issues with submissions than just the Stereo being add. I have not seen any votes given just for incorrect use of stereo, can you point out any people now on CIP or before that are/were there for this?

Still waiting for a Staff reply to my previous question.
Does the existence of a mono release in the master make mandatory the use of the Stereo tag on all the other ones? The new wording of RSG §6.13 suggests this.

4theLuvOvMusic
As said by others, if a submitter can not be bother to learn not to add Stereo to releases after 1970, they will not bother with the rest either.

Exactly. The redundant 'stereo' tag has always been a clear indicator that other, more serious errors were present on a submission.

Gruffsvinyl
New . But it is a stereo release.
Voter / . But the rules say that you should not add this correct information .
To CIP you go

Do you really know anyone who has ever been sent to CIP only for this?
Under the same reasoning, 33⅓ RPM should be allowed along with LP. Isn't it correct information too?

So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

4theLuvOvMusic


people do not end up on CIP just because of Stereo tag, there are always more issues with submissions than just the Stereo being add

absolutely agree

Look at it this way - if you don't have to coach new s on why a Stereo tag shouldn't be used on a stereo release you've got more time to be a dick over other trifling submission issues ;-)

manus-von-alles
the Format becomes the new trash can.

It does if you consider legitimate format descriptions trash. I would rather consider RSG §6.1.6 to fall into this category. There should be tick boxes for the more common packaging options, instead of having to enter this in the free text field. It is unintuitive the way it is handled and it is small wonder that

vinyljunkie66
The redundant 'stereo' tag has always been a clear indicator that other, more serious errors were present on a submission.

because most of these "serious" errors will be in the same category, impossible to know and impossible to control by anyone not making a full time job out of it.

I can currently pick any random release page, chances are that I'll find errors. But most of them will be of the do-not-add-stereo variety. Unnecessary complexity caused by unnecessarily complex guidelines and incomplete submission options.

4theLuvOvMusic
people do not end up on CIP just because of Stereo tag, there are always more issues with submissions than just the Stereo being add. I have not seen any votes given just for incorrect use of stereo, can you point out any people now on CIP or before that are/were there for this?

vinyljunkie66
Exactly. The redundant 'stereo' tag has always been a clear indicator that other, more serious errors were present on a submission.

Vier
absolutely agree

+1

It seems the past few years the rules have been changing to accommodate s that do not intend to read the guidelines, or are arrogant in acting in defiance. That's where this whole stereo issue was birthed again. A got put on CIP because the last straw edit was adding stereo where it was indicated not to in the guidelines. An I agree with above...there were many more issues with that than 'stereo tagging'.

If you say there are other issues that accompany a lax approach to the "Stereo" rules (as were,) then you don't need that specific tag as a measure of submission standard or as a stick with which to beat those s into CIP, do you?

punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

That's pertinent, as I have MANY releases don't bother with stereo printed on the labels or cover. The RARITY is mono. That would be the unusual after 1970. It should definitely be defined in the guidelines to not use the stereo tag when it isn't printed on the release. I guarantee there will be those of whom will argue what else could it be.

mossinterest
That's pertinent, as I have MANY releases don't bother with stereo printed on the labels or cover. The RARITY is mono. That would be the unusual after 1970. It should definitely be defined in the guidelines to not use the stereo tag when it isn't printed on the release. I guarantee there will be those of whom will argue what else could it be.

+1
Second question:
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition, Stereo
at Vibravoid - A Night At The Museum

Or
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition

4theLuvOvMusic
do not end up on CIP just because of Stereo tag

+ 1 is true, sorry, but i don't undestand this guidelines update, tomorrow we add 33RPM, Single Etc....so much now on Discogs is only interested in making money, lately it's anarchy, everyone, especially new s do as they please, voters no longer vote, it's no use at all, sample just see the merge pending, before 600-700, see now today over 1.400
https://discogs.cinepelis.org/submissions?mode=merges
just waste time, people, especially older s, are tired of meaningless changes and carry nothing, my opinion as against changed the guidelines

punkergott
Second question:

Yes, I'd like to know that as well

punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

I'd think so.

vinyljunkie66
Sorry, may I ask you why that guideline was introduced then, if you and the rest of the Staff feel it's "weird"?

I'd imagine it dates back to this site's origin as a database of electronic/dance music releases, all of which would have been stereo. I'd imagine that the Mono tag was added later when other, older genres of music were included. The question then would have been 'Do we go ask people to go back and tag all existing subs as Stereo or make an exception for stereo releases where there is no mono version?' – and the resulting guideline was probably the most sensible option at the time.

 punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?
6.13. The Stereo tag may be used for any stereo release

andygrayrecords
I'd think so.

if that is so, it should really also be mentioned in the guideline because now as the guideline reads it is carte blanche to add to any stereo release.

The question was how to use tag in multi formats
https://discogs.cinepelis.org/forum/thread/770731?page=1#7642992

punkergott
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition

In my opinion, this layout is correct, as Stereo doesn't apply to the release as a whole but to the format of each disc (in the way Vinyl and LP do).

Edit: I messed up my reply and seemed to be recommending the incorrect version! I've corrected it now so it's clear what I meant to say!

andrenafulva
In my opinion, the former is correct, as Stereo doesn't apply to the release as a whole but to the format of each disc (in the way Vinyl and LP do).

Ok
But not for box sets?
Here I prefer:
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP,Stereo, Red Clear
Box Set, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition,

and not
Format:
Vinyl, LP, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition, Stereo
Regards

Stereo is the new Black.

In one month Black, 33.3recurring rpm Gold Stamp promo in format. What are the odds?

hafler3o
Stereo is the new Black.

In one month Black, 33.3recurring rpm Gold Stamp promo in format. What are the odds?

Not as unlikely as I would have thought a few years ago. Good point

vinyljunkie66
Exactly. The redundant 'stereo' tag has always been a clear indicator that other, more serious errors were present on a submission.

Not in favor of this lazy change. I'd rather see the stereo tag gone altogether making every release stereo by default unless tagged otherwise.
Although it's no longer against the guideline to use the tag, it's still going to bother me every time I see it on a post 1970 release.

rikroc
it's still going to bother me every time I see it on a post 1970 release.

Right? It's like allowing 'Round' to format. There are some square plastic discs out there. Why wouldn't we add round to format?

Anarchy, Chaos . Round records, 33 1/3, The new black. President Trump and his family attacking Discogs. Making people put stereo on stereo releases.
We think you are incorrectly adding correct information on releases and you should not be allowed.

hafler3o
Gold Stamp promo in format. What are the odds?

Followed by the "Copyrighted" and "double sided" tags for Vinyl

punkergott
In my opinion, the former is correct, as Stereo doesn't apply to the release as a whole but to the format of each disc (in the way Vinyl and LP do).

Apologies! I put in my eyes upside down. I should have said 'the latter is correct'. In other words:

Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition

I'll go back and correct my reply now.

andrenafulva
punkergottIn my opinion, the former is correct, as Stereo doesn't apply to the release as a whole but to the format of each disc (in the way Vinyl and LP do).
Apologies! I put in my eyes upside down. I should have said 'the latter is correct'. In other words:

Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Yellow Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Blue Clear
Vinyl, LP, Stereo, Red Clear
All Media, Album, Deluxe Edition, Limited Edition
I'll go back and correct my reply now.

Thx, so Stereo always to the media
and not to the box set or all media.

Diognes_The_Fox
That's true. After reviewing the situation and discussing the matter with Nik and thinking about the situation more, I no longer saw the benefit in adding additional complexity to the guidelines/subform.

This is something good for Discogs, that we have staff that can change their mind after reviewing the case at hand.

---

I dont see how it can be bad that more (correct) information is added to a release, I dont really see anything wrong with allowing blck to be added to vinyl releases that are black either. As the then cant be mistaken for being a unfinished submission of a collored vinyl. But that is another discussion.

Please, make "adding images" mandatory, more useful than adding "round, black, 33rpm, single-laminated-squared sleeve, promo stamp"

punkergott
Thx, so Stereo always to the media
and not to the box set or all media.

In my opinion, yes.

AmazingDiscoveries
Look at it this way - if you don't have to coach new s on why a Stereo tag shouldn't be used on a stereo release you've got more time to be a dick over other trifling submission issues ;-)

I think you hit the nail on the head above!

mossinterest
It's like allowing 'Round' to format. There are some square plastic discs out there. Why wouldn't we add round to format?

Stereo is the new Round.

punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

It looks like you are trying to generate a loophole. It is pretty clear:

Stereo

6.13. The Stereo tag may be used for any stereo release, but is required if there also is a mono version in the database. Where a release contains both stereo and mono audio, both Stereo and Mono tags should be applied.

mossinterest
punkergottSo one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

That's pertinent, as I have MANY releases don't bother with stereo printed on the labels or cover. The RARITY is mono. That would be the unusual after 1970. It should definitely be defined in the guidelines to not use the stereo tag when it isn't printed on the release. I guarantee there will be those of whom will argue what else could it be.

This.
Needs to be mentioned, not assumed or personal verification.

Vier
" images mandatory, more useful than adding "round, black, 33rpm, single-laminated-squared sleeve, promo stamp"

Agree100%, this is really improvements, no without sense Stereo tag...

ladrodipolli
Vier
" images mandatory, more useful than adding "round, black, 33rpm, single-laminated-squared sleeve, promo stamp"

Agree100%, this is really improvements, no without sense Stereo tag...

Count me in on THAT!!!!!

Diognes_The_Fox
There is no reason to have weird rules for stereo when no other channel option has those restrictions.

Thanks a lot.

I learned to live with the old rule, but to me it never made sense. It feels like a relieve, or a window that has opened to let in some fresh air.

punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

I'd think so.

punkergott
Thx, so Stereo always to the media
and not to the box set or all media.

+1
It's the media that is in stereo, not the box.

andygrayrecords
+1
It's the media that is in stereo, not the box.

+1

punkergott
So one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

andygrayrecords
I'd think so.

+0,75
the other quarter: anytime it is 100% sure. (= not only by assumption or because the recording is recent, but really sure by reliable source or a decent sound analysis. And: if it is not mentioned somewhere on a release, but tagged as stereo, some declaration should be included how it was determined in the release notes)
=> So in general: I'd think so too

meltdwn
It looks like you are trying to generate a loophole. It is pretty clear:

Stereo

6.13. The Stereo tag may be used for any stereo release, but is required if there also is a mono version in the database. Where a release contains both stereo and mono audio, both Stereo and Mono tags should be applied.

No, all other tags must be clear indentfied, on the release, webpage, sticker and so on.
So 100% for that,

avalon67
This.
Needs to be mentioned, not assumed or personal verification.

regards

mossinterest
Count me in on THAT!!!!!

Also, in many italian release is written Stereo - Suonabile anche in Mono, which means that the disc is stereo, but also playable on mono, this creates a big mess, because the sound is actually stereo, possible that there are no more important things to improve rather than the stereo tag, which seemed perfect to me before?

Diognes_The_Fox
Just because we had to learn to only use it under those circumstances or face punishment, doesn't mean we need to keep practicing it.

+1 for breaking the sunk cost fallacy!

Diognes_The_Fox
Nobody has been able to provide a valid reason why the rule should have remained beyond wanting to have something to "moderate" other people for.

+1

scenescof
I couldn’t see a good reason to restrict use either, so +1

+1

meltdwn
Having a Stereo format tag on a stereo release in no way hurts anyone

+1

Silvermo
I dont see how it can be bad that more (correct) information is added to a release,

+1

Dr.SultanAszazin
I learned to live with the old rule, but to me it never made sense. It feels like a relieve, or a window that has opened to let in some fresh air.

+1

Before: Assume all post-1970 releases are stereo and don't add tag even if printed on release
After: Don't assume all post-1970 releases are stereo, don't add the tag unless printed on release

LOL, screw that, new guideline is fine.

Channel field should've been made mandatory, a null field that could indicate either stereo or no data entered is shit DB design.

avalon67 about 3 hours ago


 mossinterest
punkergottSo one question,
stereo should only be added when it‘s clear mentioned on the release?

That's pertinent, as I have MANY releases don't bother with stereo printed on the labels or cover. The RARITY is mono. That would be the unusual after 1970. It should definitely be defined in the guidelines to not use the stereo tag when it isn't printed on the release. I guarantee there will be those of whom will argue what else could it be.

This.
Needs to be mentioned, not assumed or personal verification.

Before change . You can not tag stereo because everything after 1970 is stereo
After change . Needs to be mentioned, not assumed or personal verification. You can not assume everything is stereo

a) i smell NMiC votes if the stereo tag is not yet entered - or if it's recently removed based on a comment (before this RSG change) some will vote EI...

b) what about releases when "all tracks are stereo exept * mono"?
(recently discussed IIRC on James Brown releases)

cheebacheebakid


LOL, screw that, new guideline is fine.

If you're happy with mono releases being tagged stereo, yea!

mossinterest
It should definitely be defined in the guidelines to not use the stereo tag when it isn't printed on the release.

I agree with this 100%. I don't think adding stereo is a big deal, as long as it's factual and on release.
I will also not live in fear of receiving EI or NMC votes to subs I haven't added stereo to, just like I haven't lived in fear over any of the other guideline changes. Same way I do not live in fear of making a mistake or not adding other non mandatory credits on release.
Should you receive an abusive vote for not having added something that isn't mandatory or removing something that was valid to remove at the time of the edit, then report it.

discosanddragons
Should you receive an abusive vote for not having added something that isn't mandatory or removing something that was valid to remove at the time of the edit, then report i

+ 1

OLDFRIENDSFORSALE
b) what about releases when "all tracks are stereo exept * mono"?
(recently discussed IIRC on James Brown releases)

Both Stereo and Mono tags should be added. That was the case before this guideline update, and hasn't changed.

It is, of course, useful to note in the release notes which tracks on the release are mono.

avalon67
If you're happy with mono releases being tagged stereo, yea!

Before this change, did we ask submitters to prove their non-tagged post-1970 release was truly stereo? No. Why would we need to now ask submitters to prove their tagged post-1970 release is truly stereo?

Whether the mono release was incorrectly tagged as "no tag" or as "stereo" the guideline in either iteration won't change or fix that. Neither will adding a requirement for the word "stereo" to be on the release.

cheebacheebakid
Why would we need to now ask submitters to prove their tagged post-1970 release is truly stereo?

because not every single post 1970 release is stereo?

cheebacheebakid
Whether the mono release was incorrectly tagged as "no tag" or as "stereo" the guideline in either iteration won't change or fix that. Neither will adding a requirement for the word "stereo" to be on the release.

why? Because they won't read the guideline in the first place? Which brings it back to the original essence, people just do not bother to read guidelines, already accomodating this lazy people doing this, the least that can be asked is they check if is actually stereo if they add this tag.

4theLuvOvMusic
because not every single post 1970 release is stereo?

Same as before the guideline change. No difference.

4theLuvOvMusic
least that can be asked is they check if is actually stereo if they add this tag.

Why? We didn't ask when they left it untagged before. No difference.

4theLuvOvMusic
the least that can be asked is they check if is actually stereo if they add this tag.

Adding no 'channels' tag to the format has previously implied that the release is stereo, not that the submitter doesn't know what channels the release has. Just as cheebacheebakid says, there is no change here.

OLDFRIENDSFORSALE
a) i smell NMiC votes if the stereo tag is not yet entered

That will seldom happen. There are always wrong votes, but those who do this too much risk losing their voting possibility

OLDFRIENDSFORSALE
what about releases when "all tracks are stereo exept * mono"?

Stereo is a format. all "stereo except mono"-releases usually mean a stereo-format is used, with the probable exception of file-releases (and maybe audio DVD-releases, these can contain mono-formats & stereo-formats on one disc, I believe)

-A vinyl pressing is either stereo or mono, never mixed. -> technically they should be tagged stereo, the use of mono source material can go to the notes
-A CD is always stereo, but may release mono material. For a CD the stereo/mono tag can only refer to the source material -> stereo, mono source material to the notes
-Cassettes & tapes are normally recorded from start to end with the same amount of channels -> stereo, any mono source material in the notes
-A file release might mix stereo formats with mono formats (this is easy to on a computer) -> tag as the files are formatted

An exception is when the release shows a general stereo/mono tag, I believe -> stereo/mono (If I'm right this was agreed on in a precious discussion)

avalon67
If you're happy with mono releases being tagged stereo, yea!

Why would mono release be tagged as stereo all of a sudden?

cheebacheebakid
Why would we need to now ask submitters to prove their tagged post-1970 release is truly stereo?

I don't think a post 1970-release should be tagged stereo, just because it is a post-1970 release.
Either the release mentions it is stereo, or either you determine 100% sure (by verification or by a source) that it is actually stereo and it should be added to the release notes how it was verified.
It was always assumed on discogs a post 1970 release was stereo, but in fact 'almost' all post 1970 releases are stereo, but not all.
It is a fact that in the world of vinyl, after 1970 very little pressings were mono-pressings for a 1.0 mil stylus. Even post 1970-releases in mono usually are actually cutted on stereo equipment and intended to be played with a 0.7 mil stylus. But that doesn't mean one should add assumed information to the sub.
Assumption should stay assumptions and never be added as information to a sub.

cheebacheebakid
We didn't ask when they left it untagged before.

That's one of the reasons it is a very good case we can now add stereo, also if it is a post 1970-release. Now starting to add stereo to any post-1970 release would make this improvement partially obsolete.

Dr.SultanAszazin
Stereo is a format. all "stereo except mono"-releases usually mean a stereo-format is used, with the probable exception of file-releases (and maybe audio DVD-releases, these can contain mono-formats & stereo-formats on one disc, I believe)

-A vinyl pressing is either stereo or mono, never mixed. -> technically they should be tagged stereo, the use of mono source material can go to the notes
-A CD is always stereo, but may release mono material. For a CD the stereo/mono tag can only refer to the source material -> stereo, mono source material to the notes
-Cassettes & tapes are normally recorded from start to end with the same amount of channels -> stereo, any mono source material in the notes
-A file release might mix stereo formats with mono formats (this is easy to on a computer) -> tag as the files are formatted

An exception is when the release shows a general stereo/mono tag, I believe -> stereo/mono (If I'm right this was agreed on in a precious discussion)

Sorry, but the information that matters in the documentation of a release, is the source material. The way is CD or a vinyl is technically made is general knowledge/information, not release specific.

In other words, the tag(s) to apply in the format description are meant to refer to the source material.

For instance, some CDs contain Mono tracks. Who cares if these mono tracks are technically pressed onto two channels; what count is the audio outcome, the experience. Similarly, some vinyls records contain both Stereo and Mono tracks; again who cares if the mono tracks on these vinyl records are technically stereo pressings, what counts here too is the experience.

There are plenty of such releases in the database, and I am glad the format is already tagged Mono where appropriate. E.g.:
The Who - My Generation Box
etc.

bertielego
The way is CD or a vinyl is technically made is general knowledge/information, not release specific.

That's correct for a CD, but not for vinyl.
Vinyl is either a mono cut or a stereo cut.

But I agree for the CD format, a CD is always stereo, so it can as well refer to the source material.

bertielego
again who cares if the mono tracks on these vinyl records are technically stereo pressings, what counts here too is the experience.

Stereo & mono vinyl might be compatible, but for accurate playback a different stylus is needed.
The experience is different, a stereo stylus (0.7 mil) doesn't track as well on mono records which are cut at 1.0 mil.

So: for vinyl it is important to note whether it is a stereo or mono cut, regardless of the source material.
BUt: of course a vinyl tagged stereo/mono is a stereo cut. So that does not pose any problem in practice.
(the only difficulty is on mono reissues which are cut for a modern stereo stylus, but you are right, this isn't discogs' problem, but that of the manufacturer of the vinyl)

so:
I adjust & agree to: stereo/mono
for releases with mixed material

The problem I described is no problem in practice, as we automatically know for CD & vinyl that a stereo/mono record is actually a stereo format.

Dr.SultanAszazin
The problem I described is no problem in practice, as we automatically know for CD & vinyl that a stereo/mono record is actually a stereo format.

Indeed :-)

Dr.SultanAszazin
Stereo & mono vinyl might be compatible, but for accurate playback a different stylus is needed.
The experience is different, a stereo stylus (0.7 mil) doesn't track as well on mono records which are cut at 1.0 mil.

So: for vinyl it is important to note whether it is a stereo or mono cut, regardless of the source material.
BUt: of course a vinyl tagged stereo/mono is a stereo cut. So that does not pose any problem in practice.
(the only difficulty is on mono reissues which are cut for a modern stereo stylus, but you are right, this isn't discogs' problem, but that of the manufacturer of the vinyl)

I understand the channel tags as they are used in Discogs to represent how the music sounds. If, for example, a 'mono' record has been cut using a stereo lathe, it would still be correct to add the Mono tag if the two audio channels were identical, in other words if the audio sounds monaural to the human ear. It's a description of the audio effect, not a technical description of the equipment or process involved in production.

andrenafulva
If, for example, a 'mono' record has been cut using a stereo lathe, it would still be correct to add the Mono tag if the two audio channels were identical, in other words if the audio sounds monaural to the human ear. It's a description of the audio effect, not a technical description of the equipment or process involved in production.

Exactly. The way that it's cut might be irrelevant. Mono is mono, on vinyl as well as on CD.

I bet that some s will get confused if they find something else than just "Stereo" on a release, e.g. "Stereo but Mono Playable" or "Mono/Stereo Compatible".

Dr.SultanAszazin
Stereo & mono vinyl might be compatible, but for accurate playback a different stylus is needed. The experience is different, a stereo stylus (0.7 mil) doesn't track as well on mono records which are cut at 1.0 mil.

Nice explanation but likely lost on 90% of the marketplace participants and 75% of the other participants that do believe that a © 1972 date on a CD is the release date or that EMI Records Ltd. is a label.

Diognes_The_Fox
There is no reason to have weird rules for stereo when no other channel option has those restrictions.

OK, so while making the Discogs submission process more simple, please also get rid of the following weird guidelines:
RSG §1.1.1 to RSG §21.4. They are useless - nobody really reads, let alone understands them anyway.

Gatefold anyone?

sebfact
Gatefold anyone?

One thing for sure: RSG §6.1.6 is much more of a complication than the previous version of RSG §6.13 was.

sebfact
Gatefold anyone?

'Only add the gatefold tag, if a red translucent mono version exists.'

vinyljunkie66
sebfactGatefold anyone?
One thing for sure: RSG §6.1.6 is much more of a complication than the previous version of RSG §6.13 was.

In the short term, RSG §6.1.6 should be changed exactly the same way RSG §6.13 has been changed. Something along the line of (English is not my mother tongue):

"Packaging description may be entered in the Free Text Field for any physical release, but is required if in the database there are multiple versions of similar releases with the same release title and the same format description."

...and ultimately, in the longer term, we should at last see in the submission template a proper, dedicated, packaging field, with preset options in some drop down menu...

zevulon
So, if anyone would like to rankhunt beyond the moon, here's your chance. The sky will be no limit.

Have asked it before: what do rankhunters gain from rankhunting? It is not that you get some golden hip card with exclusive access.

bertielego
in the longer term, we should at last see in the submission template a proper, dedicated, packaging field, with preset options in some drop down menu...

This would be the perfect solution IMO, I have lost track of how many times it has already been suggested in the forum but it looks like Staff is not interested, at least for the time being. :-(