I noticed that jaikoz doesn’t fill-in the fields related to the “work” if on musicbrainz the work has an attribute (like “cover” or “instrumental” or “live” …)
Is it a bug?
Works attributes
Jaikoz uses MusicBrainz data but does not seek to totally replicate MusicBrainz structure within your audio metadata. If there is a link from song to a MusicBrainz work then Jaikoz will store the MusicBrainz Work Id, but it will only add Work name, work type ectera for classical works in the context of movement and works because this is what most users understand as the usage of works.
This SongKong article should apply to Jaikoz as well - How do Works work?
Ok … I read your answer and the article but, if i understand correctly, here we are talking about works, movements, parts, top level, etc …
For example, in this release (not classic): https://musicbrainz.org/release/d92c9f3b-d091-46b2-ac34-3c2980b96706
we have a medium with the normal album and all the recordings are directly linked to the related work (and Jaikoz works well).
The second medium contains all the tracks of the first in instrumental format, so the tracks are always directly connected to the work (as previously) but with the specification of the “instrumental” attribute. So, in this case jaikoz / songkong cannot manage it because of the “instrumental” attribute even if it is directly connected to the work and it is the only main work (no movements or parts).
Quite right?
Hi @Dani82
Okay I have looked at it again and maybe there is a bug
We build a database (albunack) from MusicBrainz (and Discogs) that we use for tagging. In the context of tagging we dont want more than one work directly linked to a recording, so if there is more than one we prioritise them. So what we do is first build up a SQL table based on work linked to a recording with no attribute selected since this if exists this is likely to be the main one. Then we try again and look for works linked to recordings with the live attribute set, if we don’t already have a work for the recording, then we repeat in same way for partial recording.
But we don’t check for cover, instrumental or medley, since we don’t check for instrumental you are receiving no links for your second disc.
I don’t know why we don’t check for these to start with, I dont think we should check for medley since help says
This indicates that the recording is of a medley, of which the work is one part.
so there is not a one-one correspondance between recording and work and we can only store one work per recording.
But it seems we should support instrumental, not sure about cover
What do you think?
I think “cover” should also be supported.
Even if it is not “directly” related to the recording, i believe it’s still correct to insert the “original work” to which it refers
Okay i will add as an issue to include cover and instrumental works.
1 Like
@Dani82 - this should now be fixed these works are now included in the rebuild of albunack database, but you will need to run Advanced:Empty Cache within Jaikoz so that its gets the new versions of these releases from albunack.
1 Like