Philips labels

[Peter Ward]

See the following web pages, in particular the note for Philips Classics:
http://rateyourmusic.com/label/philips_records/
http://rateyourmusic.com/label/philips_classics 

I have two CDs of Brandenburg concertos.  They both have the Philips logo, not the Philips Classics logo.  On the disc itself they both have "PHILIPS" left justified, and one has "Classics", the other "Digital Classics" right justified on the same line.  They have catalogue numbers 400 076-2 and 400 077-2.  They are evidently on the same label, and that would appear to be just plain PHILIPS, they both have the plain PHILIPS logo.  One of those releases was already in the database, with release event on the Philips Classics label.  I've added another event on the Philips Digital Classics label, as that label already existed and it's what it says on my disc.  Then I noticed the discrepancy between the two discs, despite the catalogue numbers, and got suspicious.

I've added annotations to the two Philips Classics labels for now pointing to the two web pages.

I conclude
- There is no "Philips Digital Classics" label, all its releases are almost certainly on Philips.
- It is probable that there are releases (well, I've already found one) assigned to the "Philips Classics" label which are really on Philips.

Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events mentioned above to Philips.

And is it possible to add graphics to the labels?

[David K. Gasaway]

Peter Ward wrote:
> Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the
> labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events
> mentioned above to Philips.

Well, well!  I coincidentally started to rip a release tonight and
spotted your annotation.  In my case, it's a Philips "Digital Classics"
with Philips on the spine and the standard logo.  But also clearly
states (P) and (C) Philips Classics Productions (see image below).  How
about yours?

http://dave.gasaway.org/mb/zauberflote.jpg


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[Brian Schweitzer]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:12 AM, David Gasaway <dave@...> wrote:

Peter Ward wrote:
> Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the
> labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events
> mentioned above to Philips.

Well, well!  I coincidentally started to rip a release tonight and
spotted your annotation.  In my case, it's a Philips "Digital Classics"
with Philips on the spine and the standard logo.  But also clearly
states (P) and (C) Philips Classics Productions (see image below).  How
about yours?

http://dave.gasaway.org/mb/zauberflote.jpg

I know I've seen "Philips", "Philips Digital Classics", and "Philips Classics".  Just digging around online, I've found some images which do seem to show that, even if the three haven't been anywhere as clearly separated as some of the other Decca/Philips series, they do seem to be three different series.

Just some front cover images I found, showing "Philips Digital Classics":
http://i18.ebayimg.com/03/i/001/07/37/0abc_1.JPG
http://site.voila.fr/miriades/4114582.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ZQKBGRo8I7Y/SOxrZk540PI/AAAAAAAAAcM/m6OrUR1K9ZI/s320/duopianoestravaganza.jpg

And some rear covers of releases with "Digital Classics" on the front (note the "Philips Classical Productions" text, with "Philips" logo):
http://i723.photobucket.com/albums/ww231/miketansg/jun09/062162.jpg
http://i723.photobucket.com/albums/ww231/miketansg/apr09/apr26932.jpg (Japanese one here)
http://media.photobucket.com/image/%252522Philips%20Digital%20Classics%252522/miketansg/jun09/062162.jpg

The most useful by far, however, is this one, where someone seems to have taken the trouble to try and document, photographically, all of the various different classical series from Philips:

http://arrauhouse.org/content/phot_17_cd_philips_series.htm

Note that that both "Classics" and "Digital Classics" have been used in that top, front, right area; it does appear that at least Philips made some distinction between the two.  Online retailers and such seem to have been pretty good about listing "Philips Digital Classics" vs "Philips Classics". 

While some releases quite likely have been dumped into "Philips", and some likely are in the wrong one of the two, I don't think that's quite the same as "There is no "Philips Digital Classics" label, all its releases are almost certainly on Philips." - yes, they're all on Philips indirectly, but the same could be said about most of the bigger labels' logos w/series releases; I don't recall having seen, for example, specialized versions of the SonyBMG logo or the Warner Brothers "WB" logo on their respective series releases either.

Brian

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[leivhe]

Peter Ward wrote:
> I conclude
> - There is no "Philips Digital Classics" label, all its releases are almost
> certainly on Philips.

How is PDC not an imprint? Because a comment on
http://rateyourmusic.com/label/philips_classics says so?

I added PDC as label (or rather imprint), because

- Philips used PDC for at least about a decade to give their newly
recorded full-price classical music a stylish profile. AFAIK these
releases was marketed as PDC releases
- Many vendors used PDC in the label field, see e.g. amazon:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22philips+digital+classics%22+site%3Aamazon.com
- From what I know of "series", this is not one: Series tend to be
focused on one type of releases (Romantic Piano Concertos from Hyperion,
20/21 from Deutsche Grammophon).

I am as uncertain as the next guy when it comes to this difficult label
stuff. So, if you are so sure, what makes the claim from that
rateyourmusic comment correct?

> - It is probable that there are releases (well, I've already found one)
> assigned to the "Philips Classics" label which are really on Philips.

certainly, errors abound in this area :)

>
> Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the
> labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events
> mentioned above to Philips.
>
> And is it possible to add graphics to the labels?

there's an ar for "has a graphic image at" or something.



Leiv / leivhe

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[leivhe]

David Gasaway wrote:

> Peter Ward wrote:
>> Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the
>> labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events
>> mentioned above to Philips.
>
> Well, well!  I coincidentally started to rip a release tonight and
> spotted your annotation.  In my case, it's a Philips "Digital Classics"
> with Philips on the spine and the standard logo.  But also clearly
> states (P) and (C) Philips Classics Productions (see image below).  How
> about yours?
>
> http://dave.gasaway.org/mb/zauberflote.jpg

Philips Digital Classics recordings have been rereleased as budget
philips duo and solo releases.

(And of course "Digital" is not as fashionable now as it was in the late
eighties, so PDC releases also get rereleased as PC releases.)

Philips DUO has to my knowledge only cheap twofers, Philips Solo only
cheap single CDs.

I guess that these (PD, PS) are both imprints, but then I find this
label stuff so tricky, so I haven't added them yet!

Leiv / leivhe

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[Peter Ward]

David K. Gasaway wrote:

Peter Ward wrote:
> Does anyone disagree with my conclusions?  I intend to add comments to the
> labels to warn of these points, and change the labels on the release events
> mentioned above to Philips.

Well, well!  I coincidentally started to rip a release tonight and
spotted your annotation.  In my case, it's a Philips "Digital Classics"
with Philips on the spine and the standard logo.  But also clearly
states (P) and (C) Philips Classics Productions (see image below).  How
about yours?

http://dave.gasaway.org/mb/zauberflote.jpg

Mine have much the same layout as your picture, but no mention of Philips Classics Productions.  The production company probably isn't necessarily the same as the label, I suppose.

Like others have mentioned, this business of labels is a bit of a minefield, that's why I waited after posting to see if anyone had objections before adding my comments.  All the evidence I have here, and have seen from these messages, suggests to my mind that the comments on rateyourmusic are correct.

[David K. Gasaway]

Peter Ward wrote:

> All the evidence I have here, and have seen from these
> messages, suggests to my mind that the comments on rateyourmusic are
> correct.

I'd say I agree with rateyourmusic that the Philips Classics label
should only have releases from the specific imprint/logo.  However,
leivhe has convinced me that Philips Digital Classics is more than a
"series" in the MusicBrainz sense of the word.

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[papayaone]

What are you talking about?
cellphones wholesale

[Peter Ward]

I'd managed to miss this response somehow.

leivhe wrote:

Peter Ward wrote:
> I conclude
> - There is no "Philips Digital Classics" label, all its releases are almost
> certainly on Philips.

How is PDC not an imprint? Because a comment on
http://rateyourmusic.com/label/philips_classics says so?

I added PDC as label (or rather imprint), because

- Philips used PDC for at least about a decade to give their newly
recorded full-price classical music a stylish profile. AFAIK these
releases was marketed as PDC releases
- Many vendors used PDC in the label field, see e.g. amazon:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22philips+digital+classics%22+site%3Aamazon.com
- From what I know of "series", this is not one: Series tend to be
focused on one type of releases (Romantic Piano Concertos from Hyperion,
20/21 from Deutsche Grammophon).

Just because vendors use the name, that doesn't mean they've got it right.  It's a marketing tool.

Digital was a great buzzword back around the time these releases appeared, I don't even think it was a serious series, just an opportunity for some cheap marketing.

I am as uncertain as the next guy when it comes to this difficult label
stuff. So, if you are so sure, what makes the claim from that
rateyourmusic comment correct?

Why do you think it's wrong?  There are no references to PDC as an imprint that I can find on the web.

[leivhe]

Peter Ward wrote:
> Why do you think it's wrong?  There are no references to PDC as an imprint
> that I can find on the web.

did you even try?

this took me 30 seconds:

http://www.google.com/search?q=imprint+%22philips+digital+classics%22

from there, click e.g. these

http://pac.transylvaniacounty.org/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&DataNumber=150217736&RecordNumber=64868&SearchAvailableOnly=0&FormId=-68&ItemField=4&Config=pac&Branch=,0,
http://www.hrl.lib.state.va.us/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&DataNumber=550534364&RecordNumber=221716&SearchAvailableOnly=0&FormId=-3461&ItemField=2&Config=ysm&Branch=,0,
http://morris.mcmaster.ca/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=S24204016PB23.224&profile=lib&uri=link=3100015~!2185380~!3100001~!3100002&aspect=basic_search&menu=search&ri=1&source=~!morris&term=Sonatas%2C+piano%2C+D.+840%2C+C+major+--+Schubert%2C+Franz%2C&index=UTL

Leiv


_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[Peter Ward]

Leiv Hellebo wrote:
> Peter Ward wrote:
>> Why do you think it's wrong?  There are no references to PDC as an imprint
>> that I can find on the web.
>
> did you even try?

Of course I did.  What makes you think I didn't?  Quit being snarky and
start trying to get to the facts.  That's all that matters.

> this took me 30 seconds:

About time too.  Sorry to disturb you.

> http://www.google.com/search?q=imprint+%22philips+digital+classics%22
>
> from there, click e.g. these
>
> http://pac.transylvaniacounty.org/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&DataNumber=150217736&RecordNumber=64868&SearchAvailableOnly=0&FormId=-68&ItemField=4&Config=pac&Branch=,0,
> http://www.hrl.lib.state.va.us/TLCScripts/interpac.dll?LabelDisplay&DataNumber=550534364&RecordNumber=221716&SearchAvailableOnly=0&FormId=-3461&ItemField=2&Config=ysm&Branch=,0,
> http://morris.mcmaster.ca/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=S24204016PB23.224&profile=lib&uri=link=3100015~!2185380~!3100001~!3100002&aspect=basic_search&menu=search&ri=1&source=~!morris&term=Sonatas%2C+piano%2C+D.+840%2C+C+major+--+Schubert%2C+Franz%2C&index=UTL

I see nothing convincing there, nothing to say they're not suffering
from the same misconception that we're discussing.  I'm trying to find
out from one of the Decca companies what their opinion is, but they're
uncommunicative.

You're too easily satisfied.  I see you're an autoeditor.  Standards
must be low.

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[leivhe]

Peter Ward wrote:
> I see nothing convincing there, nothing to say they're not suffering
> from the same misconception that we're discussing.

I agree with that, but to say that "there are no references to PDC as an
imprint" is wrong, hence the snide remark.

   I'm trying to find
> out from one of the Decca companies what their opinion is, but they're
> uncommunicative.

That's great, thanks :)

> You're too easily satisfied.

I'm sure that is true for some votes and edits I've entered, yes. I
don't vote or edit without spending some time trying to get things
right, though.

The first thing I did when I saw your original email was to reconstruct
the barcodes from the cat.nos. and I immediately found covers for your
releases, both with "Digital Classics"

http://music.barnesandnoble.com/Bach-Brandenburg-Concertos-Nos-1-2-3/Academy-of-St-Martin-in-the-Fields/e/28940007620
http://music.barnesandnoble.com/Bach-Brandenburg-Concertos-Nos-4-5-6/Sir-Neville-Marriner/e/28940007729


   I see you're an autoeditor.  Standards
> must be low.

Certainly I could be better :)


Leiv

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2009/9/4 Leiv Hellebo <leiv.hellebo@...>

>
> Peter Ward wrote:
> > I see nothing convincing there, nothing to say they're not suffering
> > from the same misconception that we're discussing.
>
> I agree with that, but to say that "there are no references to PDC as an
> imprint" is wrong, hence the snide remark.
>
> >  I'm trying to find
> > out from one of the Decca companies what their opinion is, but they're
> > uncommunicative.
>
> That's great, thanks :)
>
> > You're too easily satisfied.
>
> I'm sure that is true for some votes and edits I've entered, yes. I
> don't vote or edit without spending some time trying to get things
> right, though.
>
> The first thing I did when I saw your original email was to reconstruct
> the barcodes from the cat.nos. and I immediately found covers for your
> releases, both with "Digital Classics"
>
> http://music.barnesandnoble.com/Bach-Brandenburg-Concertos-Nos-1-2-3/Academy-of-St-Martin-in-the-Fields/e/28940007620
> http://music.barnesandnoble.com/Bach-Brandenburg-Concertos-Nos-4-5-6/Sir-Neville-Marriner/e/28940007729
>
>
> >   I see you're an autoeditor.  Standards
> > must be low.
>
> Certainly I could be better :)

Wow, Leiv, you managed to stay calm and polite, I am impressed, I
don't think I could have done the same ;-)

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -
http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

[leivhe]

Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> Wow, Leiv, you managed to stay calm and polite, I am impressed, I
> don't think I could have done the same ;-)

hehe, of course I try to give this thread a more positive spin:

Peter actually contacted someone who should be able to answer this
question. I've many times thought about doing the same, but never taken
the time.

(And sometimes I sound less friendly than I intend to, especially when
I'm answering quick.)

Leiv / leivhe

_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users