Skip to main content

Adding missing distribution companies to releases

One thing that I have hardly looked into is the section "Label, Company, Catalog Number, Etc." or "LCCN" in Discogs lingo (although it is only called that in the data entry form, on regular pages it says "Companies, etc.").

In this section information such as the label, record company, distributor and much more should be entered. But of course, this often doesn't happen, partially also because people don't know what to enter.

I believe that with a little bit of data mining it should be possible to find at least some of the data. I already showed that it works for depósito legal values so why shouldn't it for others?

Let's look at an example from, again, Spain, namely this release on the Pye label. On the rear sleeve the following can be seen:


Looking at the label page for Discos Belter:

"Discos Belter, S.A. also offered distribution services and was a licensee for Motown, Pye Records, Salsoul Records, Prelude Records, etc."

As the data was not initially on the release page I thought this might be a pattern, where the distribution company is missing for certain labels that didn't do their own distribution, like Pye.

So what I did is to look at all of the Spanish the releases on the Pye label, see how many of these don't have a distribution company declared and that also have images so the data can be verified to see if there actually is one on the image.

I found 160 releases for which there was no distribution company defined. Of these 8 had references to Discos Belter. Of these 5 had it listed as "record company" (not sure if this is correct, as it is only listed as the distributor), and 3 had a reference to it in the "Notes" section.

Of the 152 releases there was just a single image for 54 of them, so I ignored those. Quite a few were not distributed by Discos Belter, but Hispavox, RCA and others so it is clear Pye must have switched distributors a few times.

The resulting releases are a bit of a mixed bag, but for most of them I could change or improve something. Each time Pye changed distributors or manufacturers the label changed (wordings, information). For example what I could add or correct:
  • add the "licensed from" field for releases made by Ariola Eurodisc or releases distributed by Discos Belter
  • add "distributed by" for the releases distributed by Discos Belter
About 1/3 of the releases I found could be fixed, so that is not a bad score. But: it is difficult! This is why I think it is so important to guide people to add correct data.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SID codes (part 1)

One thing that I only learned about after using Discogs is the so called Source Identification Code, or SID. These codes were introduced in 1994 to combat piracy and to find out on which machines a CD was made. It was introduced by Philips and adopted by IFPI, and specifications are publicly available which clearly describe the two available SID codes (mastering SID code and mould SID code). Since quite a few months Discogs has two fields available in the " Barcode and Other Identifiers " (BaOI) section: Mould SID code Mastering SID code A few questions immediately popped up in my mind: how many releases don't have a SID field defined when there should be (for example, the free text field indicates it is a SID field)? how many releases have a SID field with values that should not be in the SID field? how many release have a SID field, but a wrong year (as SID codes were only introduced in 1994) how many vinyl releases have a SID code defined (which is impossi

SPARS codes (part 1)

Let's talk about SPARS codes used on CDs (or CD-like formats). You have most likely seen it used, but maybe don't know its name. The SPARS code is a three letter code indicating if recording, mixing and mastering were analogue or digital. For example they could look like the ones below. There is not a fixed format, so there are other variants as well. Personally I am not paying too much attention to these codes (I simply do not care), but in the classical music world if something was labeled as DDD (so everything digital) companies could ask premium prices. That makes it interesting information to mine and unlock, which is something that Discogs does not allow people to do when searching (yet!) even though it could be a helpful filter. I wanted to see if it can be used as an identifier to tell releases apart (are there similar releases where the only difference is the SPARS code?). SPARS code in Discogs Since a few months SPARS is a separate field in the Discogs

Country statistics (part 2)

One thing I wondered about: for how many releases is the country field changed? I looked at the two most recent data dumps (covering February and March 2019) and see where they differed. In total 5274 releases "moved". The top 20 moves are: unknown -> US: 454 Germany -> Europe: 319 UK & Europe -> Europe: 217 unknown -> UK: 178 UK -> Europe: 149 Netherlands -> Europe: 147 unknown -> Europe: 139 unknown -> Germany: 120 UK -> US: 118 Europe -> Germany: 84 US -> UK: 79 USA & Canada -> US: 76 US -> Canada: 65 unknown -> France: 64 UK -> UK & Europe: 62 UK & Europe -> UK: 51 France -> Europe: 51 Saudi Arabia -> United Arab Emirates: 49 US -> Europe: 46 unknown -> Japan: 45 When you think about it these all make sense (there was a big consolidation in Europe in the 1980s and releases for multiple countries were made in a single pressing plant) but there are also a few weird changes: