The scope of Roots-Archives

[kalcidis]

During the period when Roots-Archives was offline the Discogs database grew a lot and has eclipsed the R-A database. This is Discogs strength and weakness as it has "everything" but also makes it more difficult to have an overview.

I don't know if the best approach of R-A is to compete with Discogs on being a complete reggae database. I would rather see it refocus into being a complete database of a specific time period such as Jamaican music on full length from 1950's up until 1985.

Interested to hear peoples (and the admins/moderators) thoughts and opinions on what the future of R-A is.

The obvious strength for me is the forum as this is missing on Discogs.

[hans]

Good point, kalcidis.
​From my point of view: keep it as it was, keep it as it is.
​Maybe some small, minor improvements.
​Discogs is okay, but sometimes information is a little hard to find.
​And yes, the RA forum is definitely an added value.

Hans

[seb]

Hey Joakim,

Thank you for your message; very clear and thoughtful, and much appreciated. Also thank you for all the help you’ve given us over the years; whether it was information, corrections, or covers, it has always meant a lot.

Since the recent attempt to bring Roots Archives back to life, around 9 months ago, the question you raise; why should it exist today; has been very much at the centre of our thinking.

When we restarted the site, it quickly became apparent that both the website and the database were no longer really usable; not so much because of the content itself, but because of how it was presented and maintained.

As you point out, Discogs has grown considerably in the meantime, and in many ways now covers almost everything related to the 1970–85 period we focus on. It would probably not make much sense to try to compete with that in terms of sheer completeness alone.

At the same time, this apparent strength can also make things more difficult to approach; having dozens of versions of the same release does not necessarily help when one is simply trying to understand or discover the music.

Perhaps this is where Roots Archives could still have a role to play; not as an exhaustive marketplace-oriented database, but as something more focused, more readable, and possibly more curated around that specific period.

Another aspect which has been mentioned, and which I personally also value, is the forum. It represents something that is increasingly rare; a space for discussion, shared knowledge, and a certain depth that is not always easy to find elsewhere.

Bringing it back in a usable form has not been entirely straightforward; and it remains uncertain how much place forums still have today. Still, it feels like something worth trying to preserve alongside the database itself.

In practical terms, a number of changes have been happening over the past couple of months; although most of them are not yet very visible, as they are more related to rebuilding tools and structure in the background.

The intention, over time, would be to improve both the quality and the coherence of the database, while also making the site more accessible visually; with more images, contextual information, and artist-related content.

A few small initiatives have also started recently; such as a giveaway organised with Tabou1 and TRS, which has brought some encouraging participation so far. A few others are already planned in the coming months.

So at this stage, it is perhaps less about presenting something entirely new, and more about trying to rebuild something that could still make sense today; in a slightly different way.

It will likely remain a work in progress for quite some time; and in many ways, its relevance will depend on whether people still feel like contributing, discussing, and sharing knowledge as before.

Also, apologies for the English; I am using a translator.

Seb

[kalcidis]

Perhaps this is where Roots Archives could still have a role to play; not as an exhaustive marketplace-oriented database, but as something more focused, more readable, and possibly more curated around that specific period.

Totally agreed. Curation around the music. I was thinking about this just yesterday on how tagging albums in order to group them to different segmentations based on characteristics not defined by hard data such year/studio/label.

Another aspect which has been mentioned, and which I personally also value, is the forum. It represents something that is increasingly rare; a space for discussion, shared knowledge, and a certain depth that is not always easy to find elsewhere.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Looking forward to see how R-A evolves. Go deh, natty!

[seb]

I’m curious … do you have any specific idea about a better way to present master / release / reissue relationship inside an album ?

[kalcidis]

To be honest I think the way you do it is pretty good. There are some things I don't think are as clear as they could be.

I'm not entirely convinced by is the tracklisting being hidden within the collapsable issues. This page as an example:
https://www.roots-archives.com/album/3027

I think if there is an issue regarded as the parent of the different variations then the tracklisting for that one could be lifted out to a dedicated tracklisting section. Possibly when loading the other issue variations the issue tracklist could overwrite in that section. It's a complex issue to solve.

When it comes to reissues I understand the reasoning to put them in a tree structure beneath the parent. This also gives the option of putting reissues of variations beneath the variation parent. Here I'm thinking of scenarios of albums such as Herbs of dub that has a 1:1 variation with different packaging and title in the issue of Kaya dub. Both have been reissued and it only makes sense for the Kaya reissue to be under the Kaya variation and not under the Herbs of Dub parent. But I would also write out reissue to make it very intuitive from the start. Not everyone is going to be clear with the logic of the tree structure.
https://www.roots-archives.com/album/1887

Send me a PM and I can show you an example on how I approach this specific issue in a private project.

[rollingco:w]

I just browsed through the "stats" page and i think expanding on this further would be interesting, being able to see who was most active in which years and other various stats on one page helps make the history clearer to see but you obviously need to include everything to make these stats really meaningful.
You could potentially use discogs API for your source data but display the results in a much more meaningful way than discogs is the key.

Detailed artist bio's would be nice to see too as discogs info is limited and a bit messy and often lacking photos for many singers.

The Forum i hope gathers momentum again, alot of people including myself have moved away from the big social media platforms due to the tracking and privacy issues associated with using them so seeing RA forum back gives people an good alternative, hoping it takes off again.

[seb]

Thank you both for the messages.

The stats page is indeed very basic and need improvements .
Joakim, i sent you a PM

[Skanker]

Afternoon Mash,

Roots Archives is much better than Discogs. Information comes
and goes on Discogs. I will check on the albums in Roots Archives.
If the album I'm thinking of is listed. It will always be there!

All the very best
Ray