Limited vs. Regular releases

[R-T]

Technically they are not reprints, but is there really a point in having two separate entries for a release that has both a limited and a regular edition, if the music contents of both are identical (excluding extra music clips, etc., included only in the limited edition)?

e.g. the Best of tales compilation.

[LuxKiller65]

Good point here.

That makes me think of rare examples like the Japanese Castlevania: Curse of Darkness soundtrack, where the early printings got a limited edition poster in them and latter ones didn't. Everything was the same though: catalogue number, tracks, artworks and so on.

I guess that if limited editions that come along with a normal release too have a different catalogue number, than they need not be confused with their standard release.

[Akumu]

For collectors, info like that is valuable, also it is needed for fully cataloging releases of video game music, even if the difference is small, it's part of the history

atleast that's my opinion

[seanne]

In a case such as with The Best of Tales, where the catalog numbers differ, yes, there'll need to be two separate entries. And even in cases where the limited and regular releases of a certain album retain the same catalog number - as has been the case with most of the Final Fantasy soundtracks in the last decade - we've tended to keep separate entries for both limited and regular if the packaging is drastically different.

Originally Posted by LuxKiller65

That makes me think of rare examples like the Japanese Castlevania: Curse of Darkness soundtrack, where the early printings got a limited edition poster in them and latter ones didn't. Everything was the same though: catalogue number, tracks, artworks and so on.

What you're referring to, a bonus item packaged with the first-print run, is far too common a practice to warrant dual entries. Such information should rather go in the Notes field =)

[Gigablah]

As a rule of thumb, any two albums with different catalogue numbers should be separate entries regardless of content.

And as seanne mentioned, albums with the same catalogue number but drastically different packaging can be given separate entries, especially if scans are available for both. Here's an example (not a good one since they're released on different dates):

KSLA-0027: planetarian Drama CD – a snow globe
KSLA-0027: planetarian Drama CD Box 1 – a snow globe

If the disc contents are identical (would be good to verify this -- it's technically not a "reprint" if the tracks are remastered, etc) then both albums should be linked together, the second one as a reprint.


If both albums are released on the same day, the non-limited release takes precedence. As for "alternate versions", example below:

SW-006SF: eternal feather - THE MAIN THEME SONG OF "ef - a fairy tale of the two."
SW-006SM: eternal feather - THE MAIN THEME SONG OF "ef - a fairy tale of the two."

The earlier catalogue number (F < M) takes precedence.

Right now we don't actually treat discs as an entity in our database structure, otherwise we could point both albums to the same disc ID and your concern would be pretty much solved. It's definitely in our future plans though.

[R-T]

Aｌｒｉｇｈｔ.

There is also the case when a doujin CD is sold at a convention and later sold at specialized stores for a higher price and, albeit rarely, modified contents.
If only the price tag changed, I suppose it should be mentioned in the Notes field, while a contents change would require re-entering a new release?

[Gigablah]

That's right. A tracklist change will most definitely require a new entry. If it's only a price tag change associated with a different release date through another vendor or method of sale (catalogue number, packaging and so on remain the same) then it should be put down in the notes field.

[R-T]

Can you include a short notice in the submit page summarizing info from this thread? I can't seem to remember the guidelines every time ._.