Skip to main content
OCLC Support

Merging duplicate sound recording records: A field-by-field comparison

  1. Last updated
  2. Save as PDF
Find field-by-field guidelines for merging duplicate sound recording records.

Introduction

Complete instructions are to be used in conjunction with Bibliographic Formats and Standards (BFAS) Chapter 4: When to input a new record.

 Note: Please contact OCLC Metadata Quality staff regarding any questions at AskQC@oclc.org.

Regardless of cataloging rules, there should only be one bibliographic record representing the same item, per language of cataloging.

Important:

  • When a record has internal inconsistencies, especially between coded and textual data, tend to favor textual data or a preponderance of evidence, when appropriate.
  • Self-reported duplicate records may be merged if the record reported for deletion has the reporting library’s holdings attached.
  • Apply looser criteria if the duplicate record is a vendor record (coded Encoding Level 3) or is batchloaded (Encoding Level M) and has not been edited by another library.

Fixed field amounts

AccMComp

  • A difference does not necessarily justify a separate record. Compare the 5XX, 6XX, etc. to justify a merge.

Ctry

  • A difference in the coding of the element alone does not justify a separate record, see fields 260/264 subfield $a, 500, and 533 subfield $b for actual differences.

DtSt and Dates

  • A difference in the coding of Dates or DtSt alone does not justify a merge. Compare fields 260/264 subfield $c.
  • Use judgment on dates; be aware of different sources for dates and different kinds of bibliographic “events” (original production, re-release, etc.); usually disregard dates of design copyright and/or accompanying material.
  • Also be aware of changing practices regarding the recording of uncertain, questionable, and unknown dates, as well as the different decisions that may be made in those instances.
  • These are the dates of first availability of some of the major audio media. Dates earlier than these cannot be a valid date of publication for that audio medium. Earlier dates may represent such bibliographic events as date of sound capture, release date in a different audio medium, etc.
    • Audio cassette: 1965
    • Audio CD: 1982
    • DVD-Audio: 2000
    • LP: 1948
    • MP3-CD: 2000
    • MP3 file: 1995
    • Playaway: 2005
    • Reel-to-reel tape: 1954
    • Streaming audio: 1999

Form

  • Should match but be aware of incorrect coding.

Lang

  • A difference in this element alone does not justify a merge. Compare fields 041, 240, 245, 377, 500, and 546. Specific differences in the language of text of the item may justify separate records.
  • See also fields 041 and 546.

LTxt

  • Should match but be aware of incorrect coding and differences in interpretation.

Type

  • Should match unless a record is cataloged on the wrong format.

Variable fields

006 and 007

  • Records may be considered duplicates for merging regardless of absence or presence of field 006 or 007.
  • Compare fields 300, 33X, 34X, 500 to justify a merge.
  • Specific differences in the physical format of the item may justify leaving the records separate.

007

  • If present on all records subfield coding should match but be aware of incorrect coding and inconsistencies within each record.
  • Specific differences in the physical format of the item may justify leaving the records separate.

    Examples:

         Subfield ‡b coded "d" does not match subfield ‡b coded "s". However, subfield ‡b coded "d" may possibly match subfield ‡b coded           "u".

         Subfield ‡g coded "g" does not match subfield ‡g coded "e". However, subfield ‡g coded "g" may possibly match subfield ‡g coded           "u".
     
  • Compare fields 300, 34X, 500 to justify a merge.

020

  • Absence or presence of field 020 does not justify a separate record. Although ISBNs should match, be aware that multiple ISBNs may apply to the same item. Different 020s alone do not justify separate records. Compare fields 245 through 5XX to justify a merge. Specific differences in the physical format of the items may justify a separate record.

024

  • Absence or presence of field 024 does not justify a separate record. Different 024s alone do not justify separate records. Differences between identifiers of the same type may indicate other variations. Be aware of the different types of identifiers that may be coded in field 024, their bibliographic significance, and any parenthetical qualifiers. Compare fields 245 through 5XX to justify a merge. Specific differences in the physical format of the items may justify a separate record.

028

  • Absence or presence of field 028 alone does not justify a separate record. Specific differences in numbering, except for minor variations in completeness, justify a separate record. Compare differences in fields 245, 260/264, 3XX, 490, and 5XX to justify a separate record.

040

Subfield $b

  • Records for the same resource, but cataloged in different languages are considered parallel records and should not be merged.
  • Always verify the language of cataloging by checking the language used in the physical description in field 300 and in non-quoted notes in 5XX fields.

Subfield $e

  • Absence, presence, or difference in field 040 subfield ǂe does not justify a separate record.

041

  • Absence or presence does not justify a merge. Ideally, 041s should match, however, a difference in the coding alone does not justify a merge. Compare fields 240, 245, 250, 546, 5XX to justify a merge.

245

  • May not match exactly. Variations in the title proper may be due to differences in the source of information, differing judgments about what constitutes title proper, etc. Compare fields 246, 5XX, 740.

    Example:

         245 04  The four seasons recomposed

         500       Title from container

         Matches

         245 00  Recomposed : ‡b the four seasons

         500      Title from disc label

250

  • If present on all records, should match exactly.
  • You may merge if one says “1st edition” and other says nothing.
  • Compare 245 through 5XX for other differences to justify a merge.
  • Do not merge if one record has an edition statement that makes the item unique and the other record has no edition statement. This includes edition statements supplied by a cataloger under the provisions of RDA 2.5.1.4 or AACR2 LCRI 1.2.B4.

260/264

  • Absence or presence of field 260 subfield $a, subfield $e, or field 264 subfield $a does not necessarily justify a merge. Specific differences in the place of production, publication, distribution, or manufacture may justify a merge.

Subfield $a

  • Always match first place of publication.

    Examples:

    New York matches New York, Toronto.

    London, Orlando matches London, Toronto.

    New York does not match Toronto, New York.

    New York, Bombay does not match Bombay, New York.
     

     Note: Places of publication within the same country are considered a match and justify a merge (e.g., New York, Chicago matches Chicago, New York).

  • If one record has "[Place of publication not identified]" and the other has a place provided in brackets, consider them duplicates for merging if all else matches on the records (e.g., “[Place of publication not identified]” matches “[London]”).

Subfield $b

  • Publishers should match, but be aware of differing interpretations of publishers, distributors, production companies, manufacturers, etc.
  • If one record has "[publisher not identified]" but the other has a publisher provided in brackets, consider them duplicates for merging if all else matches on both records.

Subfield $c

  • Use judgment on dates; be aware of different sources for dates and different kinds of bibliographic “events” (original production, re-release, etc.) pay special attention to recorded dates if present in 26X field (also see 518); usually disregard dates of design copyright and/or accompanying material.
  • If one record has "[date of publication not identified]" and the other has a date or partial date provided in brackets with or without a question mark, they may be considered duplicates for merging if all else matches on the records.
  • If one record has questionable dates in brackets with or without a question mark, or specifies a range of dates, and the other gives a specific date within that range, they may be considered candidates for merging if all else matches on the records.
  • Be sure to see additional guidance under DtSt and Dates.

300

  • Information present must match.
  • Specific technical differences justify a separate record (e.g., analog versus digital, mono versus stereo, 33 1/3 rpm versus 78 rpm, etc.).
  • Specific differences in the size of the medium justify a separate record (e.g., 10 in. versus 12 in.).
  • Compare fields 007, 33X, 34X, 5XX to justify a merge.

Subfield $e

  • A resource issued without accompanying material and the same resource issued with substantive accompanying material may be cataloged separately. Accompanying material may also be cataloged separately; however, accompanying material should still be noted on the record for the parent item. Records for items reflecting each of these options may coexist and are not duplicates.
  • Judgments may vary on how substantial accompanying material is, so use your own judgment when considering the presence and/or absence of accompanying material.
  • Be sure to see additional guidance under AccM.

306

  • Absence or presence does not justify a merge.
  • Compare fields 300, 500, and 505 to justify a merge.

33X

  • Absence or presence does not necessarily justify a merge.
  • An incorrect content, media type, or carrier type may justify a merge. Compare fields 007, 245, 300, 34X, and 5XX for other differences to justify a merge.

34X

  • Absence or presence does not necessarily justify a merge. Specific differences in the physical format of the item may justify leaving the records separate.
  • A difference that is incorrect may justify a merge. Compare fields 300, 33X, and 5XX for other differences to justify a merge.

490/8XX

  • Absence or presence does not necessarily justify a merge.
  • Variation of series statements present may justify a merge.
  • If the resources are issued in different series, separate records may be justified.
  • Compare fields 245 through 5XX for significant differences in series information.

501

The use of field 501 implies that there must be separate bibliographic record(s) for the resource(s) described following “With:” and that when all of those records are considered together, they describe the complete resource. If cataloged correctly, each of those records would describe only part of the complete resource, a fact that would be reflected in the 300 field.

  • Records may be merged regardless of the presence or absence of fields 501 only if they represent the same complete resource, with fields 300 matching (according to the field 300 criteria) and all constituent parts of the resource being accounted for in fields 245, 505, and or 1XX/7XX
  • In current cataloging, field 501 is primarily for rare, historical, and other special materials

505

  • If present on all records considered for merging the information should match. Differences due to using a subfielded or unsubfielded contents note, or a note showing less complete contents or coverage do not justify separate records. A contents note showing actual differences in the content of the item justifies a separate record.
  • Compare fields 245 through 5XX for other differences to justify separate records.

508

  • Contributors should match if present but be aware of differences in placement of the information, completeness, and accuracy.
  • Compare fields 245, 5XX, and 7XX.

511

  • Performers if present should match but be aware of differences in placement of the information, completeness, and accuracy.
  • Compare fields 245, 5XX, and 7XX.

518

  • Absence or presence of field 518 does not justify a separate record. Specific differences in date, time, and/or place of event or recording justify a separate record.

    Example:

    518     ‡o Recorded live: ‡d 2019 July 5, ‡p Auer Hall, Indiana University, Bloomington.

    Does Not Match

    518     ‡o Recorded live: ‡d 2019 July 7, ‡p Auer Hall, Indiana University, Bloomington.

546

  • Language note absence or presence does not necessarily justify a separate record.
  • Compare fields Lang, 041, 5XX to justify a merge.

6XX

  • Records may be considered duplicates for merge even with absence, presence, or differences in 6XX fields. Differences in form and/or genre information and/or medium of performance may indicate the existence of a different item. Compare the Fixed Field and fields 0XX, 245, 250, 300, and 5XX for other differences to justify a merge.

7XX

  • Records may be considered duplicates for merge even with absence, presence, or differences in 7XX fields. Compare fields 245 through 5XX to justify a merge.

Vendor records

There are looser criteria for merging records from vendors that are less-than-full level (Encoding Levels 3, M, K, etc.). They are often very brief in content; usually consisting of a title, publisher, date, and ISBN, but consider fullness based on the individual record rather than its Encoding Level alone. Remembering that these records are often based upon pre-publication data, if ISBN, title, and publisher roughly match, the date is fairly close (within a year or two), and the record is clearly less-than-full, consider merging into the fuller record.

These records are candidates for potential merging with other records.

Please refer to Vendor list for merging for a list of the vendors and additional guidelines for merging.

Revision history

Date Last edited by Description of changes
08 Dec 2020 Shanna Griffith Revised 501 section