completely agree with everyone else it should be kept.

at most i can see some clarification being added as to what is considered close enough (it is not clear what "nearly" means). however removing the rule implies that even an exact replica, where no difference can be noticed between the recreation and actual TV Size, should receive Cut Ver., which doesn't make any sense.

peppy wrote:

Can I just make a call of common sense here?

Any song, edited in ANY WAY from the original content, NEEDS A MARKER of some kind in the title saying it has been edited.

End of story. Adjust rules as required for this to happen.

I'm against this. It makes deciding which marker to use harder. Makes checking if people were sneaking "their own edits or whatever" in harder (and unreasonable for bns) and obscures which version the map is supposed to be

It ignores the old discussion that got us to the rule (https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/4181)

the community opinion should mean something.

The thing is that, while that's not impossible to do, it'd either mean making different markers for different ways to edit a track or give a generic (UserName edit) marker for any kind of edit done. So it's not technically impossible.

However, in both cases some important information is lost. Or as it would happen with the Cut ver. issue, we'd potentially be misleading users into thinking that's not the "original" version even when it's trying to closely ressemble it.

RandomeLoL wrote:

The thing is that, while that's not impossible to do, it'd either mean making different markers for different ways to edit a track or give a generic (UserName edit) marker for any kind of edit done. So it's not technically impossible.

However, in both cases some important information is lost. Or as it would happen with the Cut ver. issue, we'd potentially be misleading users into thinking that's not the "original" version even when it's trying to closely ressemble it.

Yeah, definitely doable, but there were reasons for not doing it

and we haven't been doing it for the better part of half a decade....

it just doesn't add much and isn't worth it in my opinion

I'm not a huge fan of cuts or unofficial edits (extensions or otherwise), and I can kind of understand where peppy's coming from.

But as pretty much everyone's said, proper edits are indistinguishable from an official version, and should be treat as such. In particular, I share noff's concern that things such as TV Size songs that do not have a proper release will either end up being worse quality or (imo incorrectly) marked as Cut Ver.

Further, I can see this greatly inconveniencing mappers and BNs alike. There's a distinct possibility that *any* audio that is used in a map is edited (even if only to change the fade in/out a little) by a 3rd party. Does peppy expect people to be able to spot these as well and also mark them as edited?

I'd MUCH rather we just require that people include a remark in the map description, or something in tags, to indicate that its an edit matchign an official version.

If we remove that, audio checking becomes hell

Yeah, definitely doable, but there were reasons for not doing it

Agree, which was kinda my (very vague) point. It can be done, but the negatives may be more than the positives.

Suffice to say, any change that's done shouldn't result in users needing to do an Internet scavenge hunt to be 100% sure whether their audio was edited from the original. And if so how, or who did it.

It just adds an unnecessary layer of complexity that was not really necessary before, as the new direction requires any modder, BN, or mapper to be on their tip toes on how they address the title of their songs.

And TBH that goes against the simplicity we're trying to look up for with the new changes. This just seems like an extra plaster on a problem we didn't use to have.

I understand peppy intention here, but i still think that keeping it is way better and simple.

Personally i already edit some higher quality full version audio and make them into TV size and the differences are nearly close to 0

I also think removing this clause would do more harm than good for reasons already stated by other people.

The only thing that may need to be considered are self-made cuts that are very similar to an official release but still noticeably different. For example, I remember making a GD for this mapset which uses a slight modification of the official TV Size version due to the extended section around 1:14 (see this mapset which uses the actual TV Size version for comparison). Both have been ranked with the (TV Size) marker due to the rather small difference, however in this case it's an intentional edit that does not have the purpose of faithfully and accurately recreating the official version, so I think this should've been labeled as (Cut Ver.) instead to indicate that it's an unofficial cut.

The current wording implies something different, and I'm not sure if that's intended or not but it's probably for this reason that the aforementioned example was treated like the official release in terms of metadata. If the goal is to only allow practically identical recreations, the wording would probably have to be adjusted to make this clear.

I agree with peppy that the proposal to remove "Cut Version" and solely focus on the "TV Size" version in the metadata regulations for songs from shows is a bad idea. One of the key reasons is that edited versions often do not represent the original composition. Official TV versions are typically produced differently and can significantly differ from edited versions. Additionally, labeling a cut version as "TV Size" implies an official status that it does not actually possess. In my view, the term "Cut Version" serves as a clear indicator that the piece has been modified. I also do believe it's important to maintain transparency regarding the source and alterations made to the music.

Moreover, the focus on TV shows in the discussion might overlook other genres where songs are shortened. This raises questions about consistency in terminology across different contexts. If we shorten a game OST to match in-game lengths, what marker should we use? Introducing a new term that explicitly denotes editing, like "Edited Version," could indeed be a viable option. However, implementing such a change may introduce its own set of challenges and potential confusion. Considering it, just sticking with Cut Version seems to be the best option to me.

I think that a marker like a cut version has no impact on player numbers and it won't reduce interest in the song/map. This being said, I think that we need a decision to reflect the diverse needs within the community, beyond just anime openings.

Krimek wrote:

I agree with peppy that the proposal to remove "Cut Version" and solely focus on the "TV Size" version in the metadata regulations for songs from shows is a bad idea. One of the key reasons is that edited versions often do not represent the original composition. Official TV versions are typically produced differently and can significantly differ from edited versions. Additionally, labeling a cut version as "TV Size" implies an official status that it does not actually possess. In my view, the term "Cut Version" serves as a clear indicator that the piece has been modified. I also do believe it's important to maintain transparency regarding the source and alterations made to the music.

If the version would differ significantly it would require another marker. If you're matching their official versions closely enough you should match the original metadata, that's the whole idea here

The example you list would probably not be reproducable in that way and would need a different marker

I understand the point, but I would still disagree. “Closely enough ” is not an original. We are not in a position to call products original if we have modified them independently. Of course we don't call it original mix or anything like that, but we imply a source where the song came from. If we are all fully aware that we have shortened a long version/original version to resemble a TV size, then we are also fully aware that it is not the source from which the song comes from. Of course, in theory, TV size just means that it is similar to the length of the TV version, but it is something that most people will not understand as such and will believe that this is the source, therefor implying it would be the original version.

I would also go so far as to say that many mappers don't have the expertise to create a perfect replica. Many TV versions have additional or modified content. Even implementing a fade out straight away is extremely unlikely. Mappers rely on their hearing and don't have access to the artists workflow or project file. Corrections are adjusted by further changes, such as changing the lyrics, etc. All of this distorts the result and should not be referred to as such. Even if it comes "as close as possible", factually speaking, it's not the TV version.

I still doubt that the rule change will bring any benefits. But that's all just my opinion and I don't want to discredit the intention or possible advantages. The points above are my doubts on the subject.

Krimek wrote:

I understand the point, but I would still disagree. “Closely enough ” is not an original. We are not in a position to call products original if we have modified them independently. Of course we don't call it original mix or anything like that, but we imply a source where the song came from. If we are all fully aware that we have shortened a long version/original version to resemble a TV size, then we are also fully aware that it is not the source from which the song comes from. Of course, in theory, TV size just means that it is similar to the length of the TV version, but it is something that most people will not understand as such and will believe that this is the source, therefor implying it would be the original version.

I would also go so far as to say that many mappers don't have the expertise to create a perfect replica. Many TV versions have additional or modified content. Even implementing a fade out straight away is extremely unlikely. Mappers rely on their hearing and don't have access to the artists workflow or project file. Corrections are adjusted by further changes, such as changing the lyrics, etc. All of this distorts the result and should not be referred to as such. Even if it comes "as close as possible", factually speaking, it's not the TV version.

I still doubt that the rule change will bring any benefits. But that's all just my opinion and I don't want to discredit the intention or possible advantages. The points above are my doubts on the subject.

Following this logic, changing the audio bitrate from 320 kbps to 192 kbps is also a self-made modification and therefore the audio file is no longer the original, but that doesn't mean it should warrant a change in the metadata.

If the TV size version has different mixing, instruments etc. and recreating it from the full version is not possible, then yes, a simple cut should not count as official TV size. But if there are no perceivable differences, I don't see why the original metadata can't be kept.

if the edited version has no noticeable differences from the TV Size to a point where I could even say I got the official TV Size when it's actually edited, and nobody would even notice the difference, using Cut Ver. in that case would be misleading instead of TV Size.

in that sense, I can see "nearly" in the rule being changed to "exactly" so only edited versions that match 100% receive the TV Size marker

I think we should just clarify that this is what has been "unspoken rules" in the current Cut ver rule as well as in the draft. we will try to do that with https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/11122 as well

(i'm talking about this part)
Note: If an unofficial cut contains matching sections in the same order and is roughly the same length as an official TV size, short version, or game version, it will instead count as an official cut and use the appropriate marker. Covers and remixes do not count.

we will probably replace it with something that further clarifies when this exception actually is applicable

Serizawa Haruki wrote:

Following this logic, changing the audio bitrate from 320 kbps to 192 kbps is also a self-made modification and therefore the audio file is no longer the original, but that doesn't mean it should warrant a change in the metadata.

This is such a horrible comparison. We are not solely talking about wether or not the song is original in terms of their audio quality, but if the edit that mappers do is similar to the original from the TV version.

Applying your logic, everything we listen to is "not original". TV shows won't display uncompressed files. YouTube applies their own compression. Literally every streaming service does. This is the reason why diferent versions of music exist, e.g. Original Mix, Radio Edit, VIPs, TV Size, and so on.

Of course the quality of a song doesn't match the version fresh out the oven. Unless you don't download songs from their official source as lossless format, this will never be the case. But that does not mean that different audio formats are different in terms of their arrangement, mixing and mastering. THIS is the part where we have to consider if it's an edit (Cut Vers./Community Edit/Call it what you will) or an original (TV Size/Official Mix).

Obviously we will not point out the quality of the audio in their respective metadata, nobody does that lol

-Flashlight- wrote:

in that sense, I can see "nearly" in the rule being changed to "exactly" so only edited versions that match 100% receive the TV Size marker

That's something I could agree with. We need a clear definition and quality check if we are willing to label songs as TV size. It should be equal to the original and not "as close as possible" imo.

Updated the wording for the note in Cut Ver to clarify when doing this is okay, and when it isn't:


Added an analogous note to Extended Edit from community/forums/topics/1891796?n=1

both changes are part of https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/11122

merged a slightlier morer editeder version of above^

Sorry if I shouldn't be responding to this (it says [assigned] in the title and I don't know if this is taking more input) but I have a few edits to suggest regarding -

Okoratu wrote:

Updated the wording for the note in Cut Ver to clarify when doing this is okay, and when it isn't:

1. Unofficial cut versions of songs must add a (Cut Ver.) marker at the end of the current title. If a length marker is already in the title of the track, (Cut Ver.) would replace it. This is to distinguish unofficial cuts of a song from full length versions. Songs that are shortened in ways that nearly match their official versions, and songs that are a full loop of a looping track will not be considered cut.
   
   1. Note: This only applies to songs that can be cut to match official versions in ways that are nearly identical. If the version of the song is noticeably different, the (Cut Ver.) marker must be used instead. Covers and remixes do not count.

Added an analogous note to Extended Edit from community/forums/topics/1891796?n=1

1. Unofficial extended versions of songs must add an (Extended Edit) marker at the end of the current title. If a length marker is already in the title of the track, (Extended Edit) would replace it. This is to distinguish unofficial extended versions of a song from official extended versions. This does not apply to songs that are extended in ways that match an official version in terms of content, order and length.
   
   1. Note: This only applies to songs that can be extended to match official versions in ways that are nearly identical. If the version of the song is noticeably different, the (Extended Edit) marker must be used instead.

both changes are part of https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/11122

Currently, I feel that this is a little ambiguous to how the recreation edits of unreleased official versions should be named, implying that shorter/longer/otherwise different versions would have the same title as the main official version. I would instead change this to the following (changes in blue)



The wording may not be perfect but I think adding a guide to which marker to use will lessen the ambiguity of which marker to use in the title and will prevent things like this and this with the same title but different versions of the song which are indiscernible through title alone (former is full version, latter is SDVX version.)

As for the "(Long Ver.)" marker, I was inspired by this song which uses "Long Version" and I think that "(Long Ver.)" looks more official than "(Extended Ver.)" Also it contrasts with "(Short Ver.)" better lol

Alternatively, the title marker can be indicative of where the version is featured. I remember when this map was originally using a different official version of the song (it was a demo, here for reference) I think that either a (Demo Ver.) tag or "(A2B2 Night of Fire Ver.)" would work in this context (Context: "A2B2 Night of Fire" was the name of the event where this demo was shown.)

Summarizing: If the official unreleased version is from...

1. a TV Show or Anime -> Use (TV Ver.)
2. a Movie -> Use (Movie Ver.)
3. a concert or live event -> Use either (Concert Ver.) or (Live Ver.) or a marker denoting the name of the event or concert where the version is from (like the A2B2 reference above.)
4. a demo version -> Use (Demo) or (Demo Ver.)

Hopefully this all makes sense, basically add more to the criteria to explicitly define what tags should be used on official unreleased versions of songs depending on their length compared to the released version or where that version is from. I'm mainly suggesting this because otherwise the different versions will appear identical on the site and in clients and with markers, it's easier to differentiate between the different versions of songs.

OsuMagic360 wrote:

Sorry if I shouldn't be responding to this (it says [assigned] in the title and I don't know if this is taking more input)

further discussion is welcome but for reference the most updated wording is now live on RC, in this section wiki/en/Ranking_criteria#standardisation (starting with the "Unofficial cut versions of songs [...]" bullet)

cool ideas, we have something very similar in community/forums/topics/1894663?n=1, please check that draft out