The big transition can proceed

Quote from walt

Okay, changed the name to: Columbia [EMI]

Adjusted timings, added logo and added brief description.

The big transition can proceed.

(From https://secondhandsongs.com/message/212727 )

Yesterday afternoon (2022-03-03) began the big transition alluded by walt.

This process must be research-based (zona research would have been the best place for this topic?).

The releases under investigation are now classified into: Columbia ... whereas your right place is Columbia [EMI].

The procedure used will be as follows:

1. Mechanism used: error report

2. Sequence: start with isolated releases, leaving for the end releases grouped in series

3. Type of analysis: examination of the covers (front, back) and the surface of the release

4. If necessary, adding images

5. Essential data: type of logo and country of origin

6. Important incidents will be highlighted in this topic

In advance, your collaboration is appreciated.

PS

This topic is dedicated to the memory of Thom

Last edit: 2022-03-09 19:34:12 UTC by dany

Reviewed the isolated releases (not in series) of the Columbia label.

The work continues with isolated releases (not in series) included in Columbia Australia.

Quote from dany

(From https://secondhandsongs.com/message/212728 )

(this link doesn't work because I must be clumsy)

See why? Put a space between the link and the )

As for the handling, see also https://secondhandsongs.com/message/213035 ...

Btw., I already transfered some serial releases from two local EMI pages to Columbia [EMI] and also opened two label series and corrected a wrongly attributed one.

My collaboration already started long ago...

Last edit: 2022-03-09 19:45:50 UTC by camembert electrique

Muchas gracias

I see that the number of releases increases and little else... because I'm reviewing the different regional EMI labels... I go in order. Now I'm with EMI [BR] and then EMI [DK], etc.

Very nice that you list the steps being a must for yourself. Doing pretty much the same, I don't really need that instruction. But you may want to inform editors you think should know by naming them with an @ in front of their names (resulting in dany etc.)

I started with EMI [SE] because that's the one I know best.

Generally, it seems Columbia [EMI] stopped applying ca. 1973. maybe worth to keep in mind.

At EMI [DK] you should have a look at the X 9xxx on His Master's Voice series...

Quote from camembert electrique

At EMI [DK] you should have a look at the X 9xxx on His Master's Voice series...

There are 9 releases... and all of them belong to the EMI label. That's what I can say.

The appendix that reads: on His Master's Voice .... in this context, it is incomprehensible to me.

Quote from dany

Quote from camembert electrique

At EMI [DK] you should have a look at the X 9xxx on His Master's Voice series...

There are 9 releases... and all of them belong to the EMI label. That's what I can say.

The appendix that reads: on His Master's Voice .... in this context, it is incomprehensible to me.

For the time being, until EMI [DK] will possibly be dissolved, attributed those nine to that one, so we have them in 'pre-place'.

It's not that incomprehensable if you look at His Master's Voice -> X 9xxx. All the ones now left there are Danish HMV 7"es (and the now moved ones 1973 or later)

camembert electrique,

It's not that incomprehensable if you look at His Master's Voice -> X 9xxx. All the ones now left there are Danish HMV 7"es (and the now moved ones 1973 or later)

I know that because I have eyes

... for that reason, I wrote: -- in this context, it is incomprehensible to me --

... because you and I know that this confluence of catalog numbers obeys to company decisions (which is common for several labels).

That is, the application of the series concept must be exclusively within a label (intra-label).

This subject gives to write a topic in the forum.

if you see on the page of a record label, releases that belong to another record label ... wouldn't you be surprised?

What does a multilabel series reflect? not to a specific record label, but a company.

Last edit: 2022-03-11 10:00:17 UTC by dany

Quote from dany

... for that reason, I wrote: -- in this context, it is incomprehensible to me --

... because you and I know that this confluence of catalog numbers obeys to company decisions (which is common for several labels).

What does a multilabel series reflect? not to a specific record label, but a company.

Yes, many record companies use numbering systems applying to releases by various of their labels, including the flagship ones.

That is also the comprehensable reason why there - just two examples out of many - shouldn't be RCA Victor label series like 'PL/PD 70xxx on RCA' or '08 8691 9xxxx 2 x on Sony Music'

After approximately 13 days, the Columbia [EMI] label accumulates 450 releases (the 70th place in the ranking of labels), which implies 217 new additions.

I must also say that not all error reports have been processed. This does not surprise me. Many of them were sent to editors who are not active.

In addition to reviewing the Columbia and Columbia Australian labels, I have been checking many labels with the word EMI, looking for Columbia records.

I think that, while the remaining error reports are resolved, we should proceed to the transfer of complete series.

Transfer of EPs series

The smallest work corresponds to the EPs: 483 releases, including 16 series.

Of the 16 EP series now in Columbia label, 10 EP series are transferable to Columbia [EMI] label.

The EP series transferable are listed below, indicating their country of origin:

01 C 4xxxx (only 1 release) Germany ----> already transferred

02 ESDF xxxx France ----> already transferred

03 ESG 7xxx UK

04 ESRF 1xxx France

05 ESVF xxxx France

06 MY EP xxx Finland

07 SEGH xx Holland

08 SEGS (x)xx Sweden ----> already transferred

09 SEG xxxx UK

10 SEMQ (x)xx Italy

Last edit: 2022-03-28 11:28:04 UTC by dany

I tried to mass attribute the label for all releases on SEGS (x)xx [[Sweden]] to Columbia [EMI].

Now there is an according label series over there listing them, but, as the label was not changed for the releases themselves, it also remains at Columbia called 'SEGS (x)xx [Sweden] on Columbia [EMI]'...

walt can you tell me what I did wrong and/or how I can mass edit the releasing label of all releases of a label series?

camembert electrique, actually, the label was not changed.

It must be another procedure by which the label is changed en masse and the releases disappear from their old affiliation.

Quote from dany

camembert electrique, actually, the label was not changed.

That's what I'm saying...

Quote from dany

It must be another procedure by which the label is changed en masse and the releases disappear from their old affiliation.

...and that's what I am asking walt's help for

I am sorry !!

The truth is that I am a little nervous and I thank the gods who allow me to contemplate this incredible phenomenon

Quote from dany

camembert electrique, actually, the label was not changed.

It must be another procedure by which the label is changed en masse and the releases disappear from their old affiliation.

Yes and I haven't got that power, it's for managing editors only.

It was announced late August 2021 here: https://secondhandsongs.com/topic/76815?offset=0#m209479

I managed the Odeon label by merging, than the label obviously changes.

Quote from walt

Quote from dany

It must be another procedure by which the label is changed en masse and the releases disappear from their old affiliation.

Yes and I haven't got that power, it's for managing editors only. It was announced late August 2021 here: https://secondhandsongs.com/topic/76815?offset=0#m209479

I managed the Odeon label by merging, than the label obviously changes.

Thanks a lot, walt. I had more or less blended that announcement. As for this according message by Bastien:

Managing Editors never involve themselves in matters like this. Only one of them actively delegates sorting out everything to editors he at least agnizes to be better knowing. Even Basten himself occasionally, though mainly indirectly, admits not to be familiar with cases in question, either.

No wonder proceding is as inert and frustrating as it is. But: what to do about it? Allowing selected and knowledgable editors without 'Managing' status to do according changes?

Quote from camembert electrique

As for this according message by Bastien:

Managing Editors never involve themselves in matters like this. Only one of them actively delegates sorting out everything to editors he at least agnizes to be better knowing. Even Basten himself occasionally, though mainly indirectly, admits not to be familiar with cases in question, either.

No wonder proceding is as inert and frustrating as it is. But: what to do about it? Allowing selected and knowledgable editors without 'Managing' status to do according changes?

I’ve never tried a label mass-merge before but could give it a go at the weekend when I have more time. Maybe safest to do it just with a handful of releases so everyone can check it is correct.

Quote from sebcat

Quote from camembert electrique

As for this according message by Bastien:

Managing Editors never involve themselves in matters like this. Only one of them actively delegates sorting out everything to editors he at least agnizes to be better knowing. Even Basten himself occasionally, though mainly indirectly, admits not to be familiar with cases in question, either.

No wonder proceding is as inert and frustrating as it is. But: what to do about it? Allowing selected and knowledgable editors without 'Managing' status to do according changes?

I’ve never tried a label mass-merge before but could give it a go at the weekend when I have more time. Maybe safest to do it just with a handful of releases so everyone can check it is correct.

Sounds like a good idea for a start. Looking forward to hear how that went