BC / Bad Company unreleased tunes

[haste]

well, even if the cat nos are weird it's still on vinyl so it still exists and therefore is "released".

 

for example, the photek things on prototype aren't released but they exist on wax so therefore should be in the database.

 

i guess my use of the word "released" isn't the best considering the tiny number of these tunes that probably exist. maybe i should say that if it exists on vinyl then it deserves to be in the db. dubs aren't vinyl pressings so they have no place being in the db, but TPs are.

 

sound fair to y'all?

[Logic]

My thing is just that the word "release," by definition, means "made available to the public." The people getting these 50 limited presses aren't really the "public," they're VIPs who know the producers, etc.

 

I'd call it a release if the producer intended for his record to be available to any John Doe at the shop (even if there were only 250 copies).

[haste]

substitute "released" for " exists" then if you're bothered about the meaning.

 

even if they were intended for VIPs only they are still available on vinyl and the general public could get their hands on them (although it is obviously going to be a lot harder than normal releases). why do we already have TP only releases in the db if you are suggesting that stuff that is very hard to find should not be included? if it has to have been available to the general public then you can pretty much take off any TP only release that we have in the database. remember that there are many more sources for getting tunes than just going to the shops and buying stuff new. DJs sell collections & tunes all the time and you never know what will turn up in them.

 

tarzan is a database of dnb related music that exists on vinyl, no matter how hard it may be to track down a copy. if it has been pressed on vinyl it should go into the database. we're lucky that we have people who are "VIPs" to be able to provide us with info that we otherwise might not have had access to. for one thing it gives us a huge advantage and means that we can provide information to others about 12s that most people will never know exist. i can only see having these types of releases in the database as being a big source of extra "exclusive" information that will make tarzan an even more valuable resource

 

perhaps thijs can comment on this one

[Logic]

I think you misunderstood me: I think that all jungle/dnb music belongs in Tarzan. I'm not arguing for the exclusion of anything. But part of the cataloging process requires that we categorize things in this db, and released vs. unreleased is just one way. I just want our definitions of each category to be clear (just being pedantic I guess).

 

So anyway, my point was simply that songs that are deliberately made unavailable to Joe Public should be considered "unreleased" (but should still be put in our db). The word "exists" doesn't suffice when substituted for "release" because dubplate-only tunes weren't "non-existent," they were just "unavailable to the public."

[haste]

ok cool, maybe i didn't quite understand

 

but my way of thinking is, and some other people's may differ, that if it's on vinyl it is "released" no matter how rare it is. if it's on dub only it is "unreleased".

 

if it's on vinyl then it obviously should go in the db but then you're gonna have stuff that's in the unreleased section with info on the vinyl pressing it's on which, to me, makes no sense. also how are you gonna differentiate between stuff that is on vinyl yet is un-released and stuff that is on vinyl and is released. the perfect example of this is the photek things on prototype, a prime candidate for a tune unavailable to the public but if any old bloke like me can get a copy then where do you draw the line?

 

i think that by trying to make the boundary clear you are making the cataloguing process much harder. the simple way is that vinyl = released, dub = not. we all know that no one except a very lucky bugger will get these tunes but they do exist and in my mind are released. i've picked up plenty of so called unreleased tunes over the years so there's no reason to think that some of these might make their way into some average joe's hands at some point. this method makes it way easier for us, trust me!

 

y'unnerstan?

[Logic]

Yeah that's all good. Of course you can't say "if it makes it to vinyl" because we're also considering CDs :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :wink:

 

But in all seriousness, I highly doubt you'd have been able to get one of those Prototype TPs back when they were actually pressed (which was part of my main argument - not that the tunes were never going to fall into Joe Public's hands, just that they weren't available to him when they were originally pressed up). But your definition works fine. I'll shut up now.

 

:x :x :x 8)

[Phokus]

Wahey! Resolved at last!

[haste]

I highly doubt you'd have been able to get one of those Prototype TPs back when they were actually pressed

of course not, but that's my argument. over time these things can become available to the public so therefore they are "released"

 

glad that's all sorted

[xo]

How doesn't it make sense? if vinyl pressings of it exist, then surely it's available, no matter how hard it may be to track a copy down?

 

We're talking 20 or less - sometimes even 10 - where every copy will be in a big-name's house.

 

Ram do this for most of their tunes, as did the BC boys.

 

IMO this definitely doesn't count as "released" because the only way to get a copy would be to break in to the artists house, same as with a dubplate.

 

If one makes it in to the public domain at a later date, then you can change the status of the tune.

 

Some of these Tps will not have cat#s either. (just the name of the tune, like El Hornet said).

[haste]

We're talking 20 or less - sometimes even 10 - where every copy will be in a big-name's house.

 

Ram do this for most of their tunes, as did the BC boys.

 

IMO this definitely doesn't count as "released" because the only way to get a copy would be to break in to the artists house, same as with a dubplate.

 

Some of these Tps will not have cat#s either. (just the name of the tune, like El Hornet said).

but as i said earlier, i don't care how limited it is. if it's on vinyl and we can get the info then it goes in the db as "released". i don't really see why there's a difference between a "big name" dj and your average punter anwyay. if someone has it on wax then i think it should be in there. a cat no doesn't have to be XX001 or something, it's just a means to identify the release. if it's just a tune name then that's still a cat no if you ask me.

 

maybe we should just leave these things out if it's gonna cause that much of a problem. you can always put a note on the release saying "there are only 20 copies of this in existance" so people don't go out hunting for it

If one makes it in to the public domain at a later date, then you can change the status of the tune.

nah, i think that's a silly idea. the rules for what is released and unreleased need to be simpler than that. we're not gonna change the status just cos joe bloggs got one by chance and then told us. but also then where are you gonna distinguish between a big name dj and a not big name dj. some people i know are well known and have tunes that would fit this category. some djs from years back are not well known now but were at the time and have these types of tunes....the boundaries for this are impossible. that's why my proposal for it being on vinyl means it's released exists. it's not ideal and does bend the meaning of "released" a bit but it's the simplest solution to a situation that is quite hard to resolve

[eXtreme]

i think they should be added, because in a few years time if a dj sells his collection the tunes are then in the public & someone could look on here thinking 'hmm whats this white label ive just found'.

 

 

 

but what about this, i have a 1-off vinyl (yep vinyl) of 4 tracks i done 2 or 3 years ago. can i add it to the database.

[haste]

but what about this, i have a 1-off vinyl (yep vinyl) of 4 tracks i done 2 or 3 years ago. can i add it to the database.

hmmmm

 

well, i have loads of tracks that were on dub at some point or another but were never really used by anyone except me. i haven't put these in the db but have included the dubs that plenty of people cut and the TP run of my label that was given out to lots of people and played on radio etc

 

i think that if it's just one copy then maybe it's best not to include it as it would have only been you who was playing it. if you had tunes that djs were playing on radio or in clubs at the time then i see no reason why it shoudln't be included. the db is mainly for artists who have had proper vinyl releases though

[eXtreme]

but what about this, i have a 1-off vinyl (yep vinyl) of 4 tracks i done 2 or 3 years ago. can i add it to the database.

hmmmm

 

well, i have loads of tracks that were on dub at some point or another but were never really used by anyone except me. i haven't put these in the db but have included the dubs that plenty of people cut and the TP run of my label that was given out to lots of people and played on radio etc

 

i think that if it's just one copy then maybe it's best not to include it as it would have only been you who was playing it. if you had tunes that djs were playing on radio or in clubs at the time then i see no reason why it shoudln't be included. the db is mainly for artists who have had proper vinyl releases though

 

i was only joking really

[haste]

i was only joking really

:wink:

[Logic]

I've created a monster http://pages.infinit.net/bluefire/Images/zombie1.gif

[haste]

http://pages.infinit.net/bluefire/Images/punchballs.gif

[komando]

fight fight fight

[noisemonkey]

Moving Fusion vs Bad Company - Splatterhouse

 

I think this is one of those 2001 dubs which never made it past the dub stage...

[xo]

that's why my proposal for it being on vinyl means it's released exists. it's not ideal and does bend the meaning of "released" a bit but it's the simplest solution to a situation that is quite hard to resolve

 

Ok well how about in the release info we have a note which says "no release" or "10 or less" or something else to indicate that the vinyl are extremely rare?

[haste]

Ok well how about in the release info we have a note which says "no release" or "10 or less" or something else to indicate that the vinyl are extremely rare?

it'll be listed as a test press only if it's one of these types of releases. we can easily put something in the comments field saying that there are only 10 copies in existance or whatever.

 

i don't see any reason to make a new type of listing for them though. maybe we could do this at a later date if it's necessary but not for now

[Logic]

i don't see any reason to make a new type of listing for them though. maybe we could do this at a later date if it's necessary but not for now

 

Agreed, we should keep "release" status binary; any limited releases can be noted as such in the comments

[Phokus]

From a 1xtra show that D-Bridge guested on:

 

UNREALESED SECTION

BC & Fierce & Loxy ? Only One ? (White)

BC UK & Moving Fusion - Splatter House ? (White)

Concord Dawn ? Blow ? (White)

BC UK ? Dust Pool ? (White)

[sumo]

There's a tune he played in that section i absolutely love man. Groove used to play it around 96 sort of time, do you know which one it is?

[tactical]

Rigmasher

[Phokus]

Which was Drum Kru