Another Milestone In Just Nine Months: 11 Million Releases On Discogs!

There are now over 11 million unique releases cataloged in the Discogs Database. It’s only been nine months since the contributor community added the 10 millionth release to Discogs. To put that in context, the first million releases took 90 months.

How is something like that even possible? Well, it’s thanks to 69,632 dedicated Discoggers – that’s how many people have added releases to Discogs in the last nine months. To put that in context, only 27,604 people added a release in the first 90 months!

How many releases do you think there are in the world? I come from an electronic music background, and I don’t come across much music I can’t find on Discogs unless it’s fresh off the press. Even then, it typically only takes a week or so before someone’s added it. No surprise there though. Discogs was started by a DJ, after all.

When I wanted to start contributing to Discogs, I didn’t have a single record in my possession not already in the database. I literally had to walk around Amsterdam asking stores if they would let me go through their inventory. Of course they obliged. It’s not easy to enter all the information into the right fields in the submission form – as I’m sure anyone who’s tried would know.

Almost none of the releases I found were electronic, and most of the piles I was looking through were full of releases from countries outside of North America and Europe. Although there’s a lot of music in those countries still to be added, this pattern matches what we’re seeing on a large scale: Discogs is becoming a truly global project.

This has been happening organically for a while now. For example, there were 164 release countries across the first million releases added to the database. That’s compared to 249 in the last million added. Many of the release countries expanding the fastest in the database are from Central America, South America, and Southeast Asia.

However, we’re now working hard to make sure the infrastructure to support a truly global project is in place. One big way is by translating the website into many different languages and offering support in those languages. We recently began translating the submission guidelines — which is decidedly not an easy task. But hey, the guidelines are the backbone of Discogs; the product of 18 years of community-driven discussion about the best way to catalog something as wildly varied as “all the music in the world.”

We’re on a mission to build the biggest and most comprehensive music database the world has ever known, a site with discographies of all labels and all artists, all cross-referenced, and that simply would not be possible without a complex data structure and an incredibly passionate community of volunteer contributors. Reaching 11 million releases is a testament to the commitment of worldwide around the world trying to build something truly special.

Big thanks to all contributors, wherever you are!


Return to Discogs Blog
26 Comments
  • Apr 30,2019 at 13:39

    Hello, hello, English is not my native language but when I read Discogs, I understand “Disc” :-)
    So what ‘s the problem with digital release ? It’s not a “disc”. Get off.

  • Apr 13,2019 at 13:47

    it is just an idea: Why not to make new website called Digicogs, very similar to Discogs, and put in there all the digital contents? – ehm, ya, digital content should be free for download. Physicals are genuine ant expensive. I know. Collectors dont care about. DISCOGS a true professional Database and a place to find.

  • Apr 11,2019 at 06:21

    Why not just an OPTION to those who complain about digital releases not to appear them. Easy: Click “Do Not show digital for me ’cause i think digital is evil” Voilà! Only physical stuff will show for digital-hating people.

    CDs/Vinyls is half my collection and i used to prefer it. Digital is half my collection too (mostly the unreleased remixes NOT physically available from the same artists) or the new stuff commercially good nowadays. I’m converting ALL my old physical collection to digital. A million thanks to the great work of Discogs allowing in both worlds because I’d be drowning in complete darkness.

    By the way… Unofficial CDs, Mp3 CDs, Counterfeit Russian/Chinese/Ebay CDs are physical but are as polluting as well! I also have a lot of Vinyls Promo/Test Print written with pencils. I find it just about equally irritating to see them listed as accepted releases but i’m used to it because i filter what i want to look for. I had about a hundred of Cassettes but gave them away! In my opinion, I do not consider it a good physical media but I’d be selfish asking to remove them ALLtogether from the database because: sounds bad, deteriorate and not enjoyable physically but with an OLD tape deck deteriorated as well.

    Nothing is perfect, especially with millions of people using or contributing to a site/service that’s main mission is to accurately repertory and inform anyone about ALL the music, good or bad taste, in the world! Most of us; music is a hobby or passion deep so you get picky). Let’s not find problems or restrict but solutions… Like an option to not show a user’s disliking media format. Or not permitting vague, unofficial, submissions without referals, proof, artist link or offical webstore, etc…
    Just my 2 cents!

    Again, Great wonderful job Discogs!!!! Have a good day you all!!! (written in digital letters not physically) :P

    Mike

  • Apr 10,2019 at 23:35

    Fully agree about ‘Non physical’ product.
    If you can’t A/ Put a stylus on it.
    B/ Put it in a CD / digital compact disc player.
    C/ Put it in a cassette player or 8 track.
    D/ Play it on a reel to reel
    IT SHOULD NOT BE HERE! Then there is the debate about what a “proper” physical release is, which is beyond me…

  • Apr 9,2019 at 14:32

    I’ve picked up a fair few releases in Thailand over the years, most of which weren’t listed on Discogs until i added them myself. It’s good to know that Discogs contributions from South-East Asia is growing. The translation tool will no doubt help accelarate this. great stuff!

  • Apr 9,2019 at 10:56

    In this digital releases context, I would love to see a ‘Bandcamp-only’ exception rule to the guidelines, allowing to enter all available filetypes in only ONE database entry.

  • Apr 7,2019 at 06:07

    Can you link an example of kid with a computer recording a bunch of MP3 files of himself farting, giving them all profanity-ridden titles, and listing on Discogs as a “release”?

  • Apr 4,2019 at 14:20

    @Jazzman_Gerald have you tried looking through the ‘How Can I Get Removed From The CIP?’ article:
    https://support.discogs.com/hc/en-us/articles/360007185634-How-Can-I-Get-Removed-From-The-CIP-

  • Apr 4,2019 at 01:50

    Congratulations for team ´bout this marvellous universe. And fortunately we´re in!!

  • Apr 2,2019 at 15:16

    TrustyDee expresses well the site’s genius (and dilemma) of “(h)aving most the work done by others and making money from them on sales in the meanwhile. Until one fruitful day someone offers to buy the database at a offer that cant be refused. Then who knows what will happen.” That’s absolutely correct and should make users very humble. Instead you get a clique of hall monitor types who aren’t paid a dime but think they are experts on the Guidelines and misuse their voting power, so that people with large, interesting, undocumented collections making innocent mistakes wind up in CIP and can’t contribute (as noted by Jazzman_Gerald). The biggest problem here isn’t a lack of supervision of releases, it’s a lack of supervision of the supervisors.

  • Apr 2,2019 at 08:13

    The question of whether or not a digital-only release is ‘valid’ is an interesting one, and it’s only going to become more topical as time goes on. It’s a challenging subject. It’s kind of like how, according to former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, every couple of days we now create the same amount of information that we did from the dawn of civilization all the way up until 2003. The same kind of formula is true for music. But is it worth saving? Or is it meant to be ephemeral and of-the-moment? Does every facebook comment a person writes deserve the same archival treatment as a book or an article? How do we determine quality?

    And if you’re uncertain if there’s any quality to be found in digital-only releases, I happened to do an entire radio show on that exact subject last month. Here’s the link, for interested parties:
    http://www.afterfm.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/shows.permalink/showID/21/showDate/2019-03-11/showName/The%20Afternoon%20Sound%20Alternative/kgnuShowID/160940

  • Apr 2,2019 at 00:34

    serious Netlabels including they stuff for download should be considered as valid submissions. I refer to this kid labels with tons of aliases (they just want to celebrate what?), how CuriousMutation mentioned before. For me Netlabels are cool as well. But not spamming Labels with kid fart recordings :) ok im sorry, joke biside. Discogs for me ist the best and greatest Music Database ans should not be abused, also for the reputation of serious netlabels.

  • Apr 2,2019 at 00:12

    You wrote “I don’t come across much music I can’t find on Discogs” – Really? Apparently, you don’t look for music on shellac. I input my shellac collection and over 38 percent is new to Discogs.

  • Apr 1,2019 at 23:12

    Agree that all digital formatd like mp3 flac and stuff like that should be removed.

  • Apr 1,2019 at 13:46

    There is a lot of sick stuff that is released as MP3 with some free Twitter labels. Insanity pure. Flooding the discogs database with non-sense, plagiarism, until self-glorification. This people claims himself great artist but with no attention from others. Discogs should remove all of this spamming stuff. I see they are also users with more accounts who talk to themselves in the edit section. For sure there is now 11’000’000 Releases. This Non Sense Labels and the resulting garbage should not be part of a serious platform. If you do not put that off, this virus will spread and in three months we’ve reached the 20,000,000. Just my opinion

  • Apr 1,2019 at 10:37

    I would discount all files for more real and conservative way to se the numbers ;-) and also apply around -5% to total releases for future merges
    Anyway, file format is necessary on database to reflect these days.

  • Mar 31,2019 at 23:30

    How many of these are produced in some kids basement and released in a limited edition of one? Just my opinion but I see a lot of useless garbage being submitted.

  • Mar 30,2019 at 08:41

    Yes. All nonphysical releases need to be eradicated. No mp3 or flac or any of it. If you can’t hold it, it needs to be stripped off this site.

  • Mar 30,2019 at 07:41

    Hawnster, unfortunately, Music become an industry, before that it would self adjust and self-bias but artists and wannabe were at the mercy of the big companies so we can not have it all, on the other hand, the consumer is always been in charge of his/her own ears and that would define you a bit strict in deciding what noises people can or can not hear.

  • Mar 30,2019 at 00:17

    I have many records to add to Discogs but I am on the CIP and despite asking other contributors and looking it up on the forums there is no way out of it. You need votes… votes from who? How? VERY confusing. Look on the forums, I’m not the only one who is having problems with CIP. There needs to be a clear way out. At the moment there is no clear way, if any way at all. Ridiculous.

  • Mar 29,2019 at 23:25

    … and I haven’t even started on my singles!

  • Mar 29,2019 at 21:25

    Oh no Hawnster, whatever shall we do without recording industry gatekeepers to decide what is or is not a music “release”?

  • Mar 29,2019 at 18:49

    Lousy kids…

  • Mar 29,2019 at 18:35

    You have got to be kidding. There are Genre’s that are missing thousands of records. I am retired and just in my collection I have over a thousand I am trying to add. We are a long way off from completing the vintage vinyl sections. Maybe in Rock and Roll but half of the Canaan label is missing, Broadman records is missing 300 plus.

  • Mar 28,2019 at 23:50

    1st Discogs is great.
    I wish i thought of the idea of owning a database like this. Having most the work done by others and making money from them on sales in the meanwhile. Until one fruitful day someone offers to buy the database at a offer that cant be refused. Then who knows what will happen.
    This is not out of contempt. As i love using it. But it is reality.

  • Mar 28,2019 at 21:25

    I’m not sure that this is any great accomplishment when Discogs policies allow any kid with a computer to record a bunch of MP3 files of himself farting, give them all profanity-ridden titles, and list it on Discogs as a “release”.

Leave A Reply