Talk:Oxygène: New Master Recording

message: :Image:Oxygene3dcd.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Oxygene3dcd.jpg

message: "Live in Your Living Room DVD in stereoscopic 3D High-Definition"
If it's a Video DVD, it's not High-Definition. 85.179.2.202 (talk) 17:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD ≠ HD 

message: OK, I'm a little confused. My copy of this disc, which I bought essentially as it was the cheapest available edition of the album (I'm generally no fan of "remasters", but a full studio re-record by JMJ himself seemed safe enough), is, ignoring a minimal bit of CDExtra CDROM nonsense common to the era of release (a cover picture, a weblink, and some autoplay program that Win7 thankfully ignored), just a standard 2.0 stereo Redbook CDDA.
No DVD was bundled with it or ever mentioned, there's only one disc in the jewel case and it's not a dual layer CD-DVD hybrid, and the contents are pure 44.1kHz 16-bit PCM (despite the rear cover claim that it's 96kHz 24-bit) playable on even the cheapest and nastiest boombox with no DTS decoder required. And the copyright / issue date is definitely 2007 (in fact I ended up here looking for the release date of the original album as it's not mentioned anywhere on the disc, the case cover or the inlay booklet). Foobar's ripping tool (that I just fed it through, and that uses various disc-fingerprinting methods against an online database rather than e.g. CD Text) recognises it as such also, and definitely as the remaster rather than the original. And I bought it brand new off Amazon as an official, cellophane sealed EMI release about five or six years ago... it didn't come free with a tabloid newspaper in a cardboard slipcase.
So this would seem to be a fourth edition alongside the other three fancier ones mentioned, would it not? Shall I go ahead and add it in, or would there be some good reason that "plain audio CD" wouldn't count, here? 51.7.16.171 (talk) 16:03, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three, not four editions? 

message: "In November 26, 2007, Oxygène: New Master Recording was released on EMI label in different editions which included a CD with 5.1 Surround sound recording"
CDs cannot contain surround sound, this paragraph is poorly written. The 2 disc CD jewel case edition features a 5.1 mix of Oxygene on the second disc which is DVD-Video. The 5.1 is presented in both Dolby Digital and dts. There is also the "Live" version of the album presented in stereo and 5.1 Dolby Digital. Dobyblue (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  CD with 5.1 surround sound 

message: I have just removed all except the first sentence of the paragraph:
: In 2008, The Mail on Sunday newspaper distributed more than two million Oxygène: New Master Recording CDs to its readers in the United Kingdom. Disques Dreyfus claimed that the discs did not, in fact, contain Oxygène: New Master Recording, but instead the original recording of Oxygène, to which it owned the rights. Disques Dreyfus stated its intention to bring legal action against The Mail on Sunday and EMI.
I own the Mail on Sunday version of the disc and it definitely is the New Master Recording, not the 1977 recording. Plus the Music Week reference is paywalled. Plus I cannot find anything else on the Internet about the legal threat other than this wikipedia article! Still, the text is as above if anyone can find more information to add to the article. Pelago (talk) 17:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mail on Sunday version