Guidelines - 4. Label / Catalog
Label
This field is used for the label or record company involved in the release. If there is more than one brand, label, or record company on the release, list them all. If the required label is not in Discogs yet, it will be created when you submit.
Label Names
Please check (using the search function) for slight variations in the label name (for example with or without 'Records' on the end).
For smaller 'independent' labels, such a variation is usually unintentional, so you can usually adjust the label name to match the existing Discogs entry. Please make a note of any adjustments in the release notes and the submission notes.
For larger 'major' labels, any difference may be significant, in terms of defining a separate branch, brand, or company. These should be entered as on the release, unless there is good reason to think it is simply a variation for the exact same brand or company.
For example; "EMI Records Ltd" and "EMI Records Limited" are the same company and should be listed on the same page, whereas EMI Music Australia Pty Ltd is a separate company and should be entered on it's own page. Note that these companies will probably appear on a release along with the brand 'EMI' or 'EMI Records', which should be added separately.
The onus is on the user wishing to amalgamate label or company names to provide proof that the entity they are trying to amalgamate is indeed one and the same. If the name may reflect changes to the label or company, different periods in time, or other such information, the names should not be amalgamated.
Legacy Label Names
The label cataloging system at Discogs has been under review to allow a greater degree of accuracy when adding the labels and companies involved in a release. In the past, 'false' labels were created to amalgamate both the branding and company on a release. This is especially relevant for major label releases, which can have many labels and companies involved.
Please be aware of this when submitting, don't automatically change the information presented on your release to 'fit in' with what is currently listed on Discogs for major labels.
Always ask in the adding and updating forum http://www.discogs.com/help/forums/board/17 if you are in doubt.
Unofficial Release Label Names
Care should be taken with counterfeit recordings, which are packaged to resemble the original as closely as possible. Often, the packing will include the original label and company names. Enter these items using a separate label; For example, if the original label is "LabelName", and the suspected counterfeit contains this label name, it should be entered as "LabelName (2)" - thereby creating a different label. The profile of this label should be filled out to explain it's circumstances.
Catalog Number
The catalog number is usually the most prominent number printed on the release - often on the spine, on the back cover, and on the label etc.
The catalog number should be entered directly as it appears on a release - it shouldn't be altered (as has been done in the past at Discogs) for conformity with other catalog numbers listed on the label page.
Where no catalog number exists, you must enter "none" into the catalog number field (note the lower case n).
If the catalog number appears in different formats on the release (for example "ABC-001" and "abc1"), enter all the versions of the catalog number in separate catalog number fields.
Matrix numbers can be listed in the release notes if required. A matrix number is used during the manufacturing process to keep track of the process, for example to mark the sides of a record. Often the matrix number will be the catalog number followed by a side identifier, for example ABC-001-A and ABC-001-B. If there is no apparent catalog number on the release, use the matrix number as a catalog number, dropping the side identifier suffix. Please mention this in the release notes, such as "No cat# appears on the release; ABC-001 is derived from the runout area etchings."
Be aware that Amazon.com codes (prefix: B000) used as catalog numbers may indicate the submitter has taken the information from Amazon, and not from the release itself. It is forbidden to use any source except from the release itself as the primary source of information, please see the general guidelines. Note, however, that that [../label/Universal Records Universal Records] and subsidiaries / sub-labels can have a similar catalog number prefix.
Please be careful not to add Label Codes or Distribution Codes into the catalog number field. More information about these codes can be found on the wiki Label Codes page and Distribution Codes page.
Sometimes individual discs in a multi-CD or multi-LP set will have their own cat#s printed on them, separate from the main cat# on the packaging. These cat#s should be entered in the notes unless the package is just bundling items that were also sold separately.
Sometimes individual tracks on a vinyl release will have their own ID numbers printed on the labels, usually in a smaller font, and sometimes in parentheses, separate from the main cat# of the release. These ID#s should be entered in the notes.
Different Labels With The Same Name
For labels that share the same name, a number in parentheses should be used, for example "LabelName", "LabelName (2), "LabelName (3)" etc.
Not On Label
Releases which have no discernible label, such as self-released albums, limited edition tour merchandise, white labels, bootlegs, etc. should be listed under the "Not On Label" meta-label. Before choosing Not On Label, please check for any catalog number or other markings that could associate a release with a particular label, or labels. Often, white label records can be tied back to a label by the catalog numbers found in the run-out grooves, and some CDs with limited information present might include a label logo, if no catalog number is clearly present.
Not On Label page has grown along with the rest of Discogs, and pseudo-labels have been created to gather distinct series of releases without labels. The most common groupings are based on similar content and catalog numbers, and by artist.
The original naming scheme for these pseudo-labels was 'Series/ArtistName' (White), implying that the associated releases were white labels. As not all releases of these sorts are white labels, a more common naming scheme is now recommended:
- Not On Label (ArtistName) -- for unofficial releases containing music by a certain artist
- Not On Label (ArtistName Self-released) -- for music released specifically by an artist, as found on tours and sold via personal websites
- Not On Label (SeriesName Series) -- for material with a clear pattern but no actual label name associated, like sequential catalog numbers and similar content, or the inclusion of an email address
Multiple labels and catalog numbers
It is possible to list more than one label on a release. This should be used for a joint release between two or more labels, or where an individual release has multiple catalog numbers on one label. This should not to be used for the same release being re-issued by a different label. This would require a unique Discogs entry.
If a release has both sublabel and parent label catalog numbers, they should all be listed, in order to complete the relevant discographies. If it was released on multiple labels but one label was more involved in the release, list that label first.
For each label field that is added a catalog number field will also be added. These must be completed. The sequence of catalog numbers should match the sequence of label fields, for example if three labels are listed the catalog number assigned by the label in the third label field should be added to the third catalog number field. If all labels used the same catalog number this should be added to all catalog number fields
Where an individual release has multiple catalog numbers on one label, the first catalog number field should contain the catalog number that best matches the label’s catalog system. It helps to mention in the notes section the location of the multiple catalog numbers on the release.
DIDX and other DID_ Codes
DID_ codes are the numbers used by Sony's manufacturing company, Digital Audio Disc Corporation, to identify the master copies of CDs duplicated in their pressing plants.
These codes should not be used as catalog numbers, please only enter them into the notes section.
DADC has used a number of different DID_ code series over the years:
- DIDC - Classical recordings released on Sony-affiliated record labels.
- DIDP - Popular (i.e., non-classical) recordings released on Sony-affiliated record labels.
- DIDX - Recordings pressed by DADC by released on non-Sony-affiliated record labels.
- DIDY - Recordings pressed by the US division of DADC for the Columbia House Record Club.
- DIDZ - Recordings released on WEA Japan. (This code was only used from 1983 to 1985.)
A DIDX code on a release doesn't necessarily mean that copy of the release was actually pressed by DADC. As more CD pressing plants opened around the world, the record labels would often have other manufacturers press later runs of releases originally manufactured by DADC, but wouldn't necessarily remove the DADC mastering code from the CD's packaging. In some cases the DIDX codes also appear in the matrix codes of CDs manufactured by other companies.
The CSIG code that appears on some 3" CD singles may also be a DADC-assigned mastering ID, making it a close cousin of the DID_ codes.
Examples of labels and companies release processes
The minimum necessary
This chart shows the process stripped to the bones. The artist records their work, duplicates and packages it themselves, and then sells it direct to the public. Labels, distributors, manufacturers, and retail outlets are removed from the path entirely.
The release will be 'Not On label' at Discogs, unless the artist creates a label name for the release.
Small or medium sized label release model
This chart shows an idealized path for the artists release, from the recording studio through to the public.
The label here is one and the same as the record company, they both have the same name and are the same entity.
This is a standard path for releases on small or medium sized labels operating in probably one country or territory. Non-major label releases in the rock, folk, and jazz genres are likely to follow a path close to this. If you substitute the recording studio for the artists own studio, the model also fits a lot of electronic releases.
Note the gray path representing an 'import'. The importer will be another business in another territory, that buys a certain number of copies of the release from the distributor, and has their own distribution path in the separate country or territory. The import will be exactly the same release, it is physically shipped to the importer.
These releases are usually reasonably easy to catalog on Discogs - there will be one label which we can file the release under.
A major label release model
This is one of a myriad of possibilities for a major label release. The main difference that drives this model is the release is manufactured and sold in different places by different companies.
The label here is really only a brand. It is used by the record company to give a distinct identity to the release.
Once the part of the company that deals with the logistics of creating the release (recording, mastering, packaging) finishes that stage of the process, the release master is then sent to separate regional branches of the record company for manufacturing. These regional offices are likely to be in different countries or territories around the world. The master package will include the audio and any artwork required to replicate the release during manufacturing. One of the main benefits of doing it this way, rather than just shipping imports, is costs are kept down by manufacturing close to where the item will be sold, rather than shipping container loads of releases around the world.
If the record company doesn't have a branch in a particular territory, it may license the release to another company in that territory, and they will arrange the manufacturing and distribution of the release. This company could be a record label (and associated brand), or it could be a distributor, manufacturer, or any other company that has the ability to organize the manufacturing and distribution of the release.
Usually, each separate branch of the chain will include their name on the release, as well as the label (brand) name. Also, manufacturers and distributors may be mentioned on the release artwork.
These releases are the hardest to catalog clearly on Discogs. The most factual method is to list the record company regional branch, licensee, or other entity as well as the label (brand) on the release.
A digital download release model
This is a model for digital releases - MP3s, WAVs, AACs etc as sold at online shops such as iTunes, Beatport, Juno etc.
It is apparent that the structure is similar to the major label release structure above. However, there are a number of differences. The label / record company have a much smaller role, and the (online) distributor and (online) shops a much larger one.
The digital distributor can also act as a record company / label and publisher.
There is no manufacturing. The digital file is passed down the chain in various stages of preparation for sale. The final version of the file only comes into being once it is encoded, which is often done by the online shop.
