What is the title of the new AC/DC album?

Terve!

What is the correct title for AC/DC - PWR/UP?

Power Up?
PWR/UP?

Something else?

It looks like "Power Up" is nowhere in the packaging, and can only be found on some websites and advertising, including some official sites and their YouTube channel. And even then they often use both.

j.

I believe it is Power Up, judging from the official band store page and wiki page, with it being shortened to PWR/UP for catchier advertising and marketing.

But... Guidelines are:
3.1.3. Sometimes the title is written in a different way on the cover than on the spine or other places. It is best to use the title on the cover, but also consider what is going to be most useful to other s, so the most complete title is better no matter where it appears. In rare cases, it may be necessary to make up a compound title from the various versions of the title on the cover, spine, label, etc. Use the Release Notes field to mention any important differences.

VoittoAnkka
It looks like "Power Up" is nowhere in the packaging, and can only be found on some websites and advertising, including some official sites and their YouTube channel. And even then they often use both.

Pwr Up should be used, per RSG §3.1.2. and the title found on official sites ("Power Up") can be mentioned in the notes.

el_duro
Pwr Up should be used, per RSG §3.1.2. and the title found on official sites ("Power Up") can be mentioned in the notes.

+1

What does the spine say on the CD and LP releases?

VoittoAnkka
Power Up?
PWR/UP?

Something else?

Pwr/Up?

Bong
What does the spine say on the CD and LP releases?

LP spine says PWR/UP with / being the classic lightning bolt.
On CD I only have the deluxe box set that doesn't really have a spine, but the side says the same as LP spine.

Bong
Pwr/Up?

This would sound the most correct to me.

j.

HMV: The most electrifying rock and roll band in the world are back! After years of rumours AC/DC finally have a new album on the way. Now’s your chance to pre-order your copy of POWER UP but be quick, we wanted to include the limited edition picture disc here but it's already SOLD OUT.

I would use as on release though.

VoittoAnkka
PWR/UP

FromLondon
as on release

+1

Please don't use ALL CAPS though.

Despite the band saying it's Power Up. I would use Pwr Up. Mention where Power Up is used, and mention in notes. Also mention the title is in capital letters in the notes too.

The band refers to is as 'Power Up'. That's the most complete title, hence fulfills 3.1.3. (though not on the release, but still). It is also the one predominantly used in the MR, therefore it seems to be the title most useful to s (also something to consider per guidelines). It would be my preference. I am good with Pwr/Up as well but totally against things like PwrϟUp. Pwr Up does not make sense at all to me.Either we go as on release, then the slash should be used or we go not as on release, then it's Power Up. Why create something in between. That's even more confusing than what it is anyways.

Yes, but the release should be the main source first, other sources afterwards.

For what it's worth, CD-text says "PWR UP".

j.

For sure Pwr/Up. Yeah, it looks rubbish, but if the album doesn't have 'Power Up' written anywhere on it, then it shouldn't be used.

Bong

Pwr/Up

^This

If an artist doesn't want their album to get listed under a silly name in public databases, they shouldn't release it with a silly name.

Not that AC/DC cares, probably...

Yeah my vote goes to Pwr/Up too.

Violent-Power
Please don't use ALL CAPS though.

All caps can be used in a main/track title if it is a nonsensical word.
'PWR' is a nonsensical 'word' and so caps here would be ok

RSG §1.2.2.c. "Abbreviations, contractions and hyphenations should start with a capital letter. The rest of the word's capitalization should follow as on the release, except where all caps have been used, which should be turned to lower case." ==> do we consider "Pwr" to be an abbreviation of "Power"?

RSG §1.2.2.d "Intentional capitalization of abstract release or track titles can be entered as on the release. An abstract title is defined as a word or series of characters that doesn't have a meaning in any language." ==> Do we consider "Pwr" as having a meaning?

In any case, it's either PWR/Up or Pwr/Up, but not PWR/UP...

denizen
it's either PWR/Up or Pwr/Up, but not PWR/UP...

Agreed

denizen
do we consider "Pwr" to be an abbreviation of "Power"?

No - it's a disemvowelled word

denizen
Do we consider "Pwr" as having a meaning?

No - you can't use 'pwr' in a sentence and expect the sentence to have meaning

So for me: 'PWR/Up' to follow Discogs capitalisation guidelines
( we're not applying logic or sense, but interpreting guidelines. There's bound to be examples across the DB, but I can't immediately think of any)

Found 2:
FKY - Keep PWR On

Reminds me of this recent Hard Times article: "Indie Band on Wheel of Fortune Not Familiar With Vowels"

https://thehardtimes.net/culture/indie-band-on-wheel-of-fortune-not-familiar-with-vowels

Any more input on this? It seems like there's a consensus coming...anyone want to stick their head over the parapet and make the changes yet?

If they wanted 'Power Up' to be the title, they'd have / they should've called it 'Power Up'.

'PWR/Up' for me.

PWR/Up for me.

We are also translating the ⚡️ symbol to / but that’s also how we handled the band name too, so at least it’s consistent.

Just no one enter it as PWR⚡️Up please. :)

baldorr
Just no one enter it as PWR⚡️Up

too late!

Looks like a mass edit will be required, looking at the MR

Perhaps invite some of the OSs for additional comment?

Either way this thread will need to be linked to when doing all the edits.

bobbley
denizendo we consider "Pwr" to be an abbreviation of "Power"?
No - it's a disemvowelled word

https://www.allacronyms.com/power/abbreviated

bobbley
No - it's a disemvowelled word

To me a disemvowelled word (nice word, BTW) is good enough as abbreviation.

Aside, I think PWR/Up would look even stupider dan Pwr/Up, but that's just preference I guess.

So my vote is for the latter, but I don't have strong feelings either way. Main point is that I think it should not read Power and it should not have a lightning bolt.

bobbley
Perhaps invite some of the OSs for additional comment?

I think that would be fair.

Please read the Band's official website https://acdcstore.com.au/ On there website they clearly detail that the title of the release is Power Up. PWR/UP is simply a stylised version, for artwork / artistic purposes, of Power Up. All release should have Power Up as the title.

derek.king
Please read the Band's official website https://acdcstore.com.au/ On their they clearly detail that the title of the release is Power Up. PWR/UP is simply a stylised version, for artwork / artistic purposes, of Power Up. All release should have Power Up as the title.

This ^

Pwr/Up as on release

Abbreviation, not abstract, so Pwr is fine
Not an initialism or acronymn so Pwr not PWR
Release > websites

RSG §1.2.2.d

"Intentional capitalization of abstract release or track titles can be entered as on the release. An abstract title is defined as a word or series of characters that doesn't have a meaning in any language."

PWR is such a word. Arguably 'PWR/UP' is a phrase but it's at least;

PWR/Up

AndyEvans2
"Intentional capitalization of abstract release or track titles can be entered as on the release. An abstract title is defined as a word or series of characters that doesn't have a meaning in any language."

PWR is such a word

It's a common electrical abbreviation that has obvious connections to their band name.
Besides that, it's also used as an abbreviation elsewhere. Ever seen a PWR mode in some cars?

cheebacheebakid
Pwr/Up as on release

As on release would be without slash... the ϟ is a insertion design element

And greek small letter koppa ≠ thunderbolt

As per “Unicode characters should only be used when it is the correct literal usage of the character” by https://discogs.versitio.com/forum/thread/5215048b94697336111ab10c#3090800

derek.king
Please read the Band's official website https://acdcstore.com.au/ On their they clearly detail that the title of the release is Power Up. PWR/UP is simply a stylised version, for artwork / artistic purposes, of Power Up. All release should have Power Up as the title.

+1

VoittoAnkka
Power Up

and in the MR notes (not each submission) "Title is stylized as "PWR/UP"

Duplicate.

I think it’s totally fine to add a release note comment that mentions something like, “This release is referred to as ‘Power Up’ on the band’s official website.”

This will assist with searching yet still retain the presentation as on the release.

baldorr That is not what I am suggesting. If you want to add PWR/UP as a reference in Notes fine but not as the title of the Album. The Band clearly intends the title of the album to be Power Up - nice and straight forward.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

no.signal
cheebacheebakidPwr/Up as on release
As on release would be without slash... the ϟ is a insertion design element

And greek small letter koppa ≠ thunderbolt

As per “Unicode characters should only be used when it is the correct literal usage of the character” by nik
https://discogs.versitio.com/forum/thread/5215048b94697336111ab10c#3090800

Neither the slash or the greek symbol are detailed anyowhere on the release. That solution doesn't work

Clem_Button
VoittoAnkkaPWR/UP

FromLondonas on release
+1

PWR/UP nor Pwr/Up with the slash (no lightening bolt) is detailed on any of these release.

derek.king
PWR/UP nor Pwr/Up with the slash (no lightening bolt) is detailed on any of these release.

But it's a lot closer to those than it is to "Power Up".

AndyEvans2
derek.kingPWR/UP nor Pwr/Up with the slash (no lightening bolt) is detailed on any of these release.

But it's a lot closer to those than it is to "Power Up".

Disagree ... look at the matrix details of the Australian CD release and read the Band website

derek.king
AndyEvans2derek.kingPWR/UP nor Pwr/Up with the slash (no lightening bolt) is detailed on any of these release.

But it's a lot closer to those than it is to "Power Up".

Disagree ... look at the matrix details of the Australian CD release and read the Band website

So we're discussing what's on the release and you refer me to a website?

AndyEvans2
derek.kingAndyEvans2derek.kingPWR/UP nor Pwr/Up with the slash (no lightening bolt) is detailed on any of these release

But it's a lot closer to those than it is to "Power Up".

Disagree ... look at the matrix details of the Australian CD release and read the Band website

So we're discussing what's on the release and you refer me to a website?

Yes as I also said look at the details of the Australian CD release.

Also, the database guidelines details using websites as a means and as a source of determining the common title of a release.

derek.king
Yes as I also said look at the details of the Australian CD release.

Also, the database guidelines details using websites as a means and as a source of determining the common title of a release.

A website and a matrix overriding all the printed materials? I'll leave you to argue this one because it honestly doesn't look like you're that interested in us recording what's on the release. The band had it entirely within their gift to call it 'Power Up' on the release. They chose not to.

AndyEvans2
derek.kingYes as I also said look at the details of the Australian CD release.

Also, the database guidelines details using websites as a means and as a source of determining the common title of a release.

OK. I'll leave you to argue this one because it honestly doesn't look like you're that interested in us recording what's on the release. The band had it entirely within their gift to call it 'Power Up' on the release. They chose not to.

Which the Band do in all their communication - press material and on their website.

derek.king
Which the Band do in all their communication - press material and on their website.

That's so close. And yet, where it really mattered on the product, they didn't. Does it look stupid as 'Pwr/Up'? Yes.

There's a lot of things Discogs does that I think make the data look stupid. This one isn't Discogs' fault. We'd literally be replicating (as best we can) how the product was released.

I have nothing to add.

Your suggestion of the best replication we can isn’t detailed anywhere, neither on the release or any source material. The simplest and easiest sourced evidence / material as the title Power Up has been provided.

Title as printed on the release.

Alternative names can be added to the release notes.

It’s simple, and the standard way we do things here on Discogs. Anyone who is able to update all these releases should be free to do so and refer back to this forum thread for the consensus.

baldorr
Title as printed on the release.

Alternative names can be added to the release notes.

It’s simple, and the standard way we do things here on Discogs. Anyone who is able to update all these releases should be free to do so and refer back to this forum thread for the consensus.

That is not the consensus as I understand it.

AndyEvans2
There's a lot of things Discogs does that I think make the data look stupid. This one isn't Discogs' fault. We'd literally be replicating (as best we can) how the product was released.

I agree with this. Even if the title does look a bit stupid this way it would be easily understood by a browser of the site.

derek.king
The simplest and easiest sourced evidence / material as the title Power Up has been provided.

It's easily sourced but not printed on the release. If we can't go with the title that is on there than we at least need to ensure it is close enough to be easily recognised by s that are not necessarily familiar with the work of AC/DC (sic).

..........

Thanks for the discussion.

Another for Pwr/Up (or Pwr Up, either one).

derek.king
Thanks for the discussion.

I have deleted the comment above. It was not my intention to try to force this discussion to a close, only to agree with a statement.

derek.king
That is not the consensus as I understand it.

I’m on my phone so I can’t do a proper tally, but this is about as clear of a consensus as you’ll find. There at least 12 people who don’t think it should be entered as “Power Up”, but instead some version of “PWR/Up”, “Pwr/Up”, or “Pwr Up” (seemingly in that order).

https://www.sonymusic.co.uk/artist/acdc/
https://bestclassicbands.com/acdc-power-up-reunion-2020-11-13-20/
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/acdc-back-fighting-off-black-album-74174413
https://www.nme.com/en_au/news/music/ac-dc-shot-in-the-dark-new-single-pwr-up-2772428
https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/rock/9466293/ac-dc-new-album-power-up-interview
https://www.amazon.com.au/s?k=ac%2Fdc&crid=2H2EA25P4J1XB&sprefix=ac%2Fdc%2Caps%2C301&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-a-p_1_5
https://www.walmart.com/search/?query=ac%2Fdc%20cd&cat_id=4104&typeahead=ac%2Fdc
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-album-reviews/ac-dc-keep-riding-the-highway-to-hell-on-power-up-1089089/

derek.king
The Band clearly intends the title of the album to be Power Up - nice and straight forward.

Just to repeat:

rdvriese
If an artist doesn't want their album to get listed under a silly name in public databases, they shouldn't release it with a silly name.

Intentions are secondary considerations. All of the websites in the world won't do any good if they contradict what's obviously printed on the release.

Another vote for Pwr/Up - Pwr Up.

baldorr
Title as printed on the release.

Alternative names can be added to the release notes.

It’s simple, and the standard way we do things here on Discogs.

Agreed.

It's not for us to interpret what PWR/UP means, just to record here what it says on the release. And in accordance with the guidelines we're discussing the application of the Capitalisation of said title.

'PWR/Up' if we agree 'PWR' is not a generally accepted/recognised abbreviation of the word 'Power'

'Pwr/Up' if we agree 'Pwr' is a generally accepted/recognised abbreviation of the word 'Power'

Why not do like it's been done on this record https://discogs.versitio.com/Primal-Scream-Exterminator-XTRMNTR/master/28150?

bobbley
It's not for us to interpret what PWR/UP means, just to record here what it says on the release. And in accordance with the guidelines we're discussing the application of the Capitalisation of said title.

'Pwr/Up' if we agree 'Pwr' is a generally accepted/recognised abbreviation of the word 'Power'

For what it's worth I would simply enter the title as on release: Pwr Up

and mention the lightening bolt design, as well as any 'official' titles, in Release Notes.

PennyCentury
Why not do like it's been done on this record https://discogs.versitio.com/Primal-Scream-Exterminator-XTRMNTR/master/28150?

Also should be changed IMO to 'as on release' with additional info in Release Notes.

IMO the title should be entered as Pwr/Up

derek.king
That solution doesn't work

what kind of solution do you imagine to see in my post?

actually i just said that the "greek small letter koppa ≠ thunderbolt" and "Unicode characters should only be used when it is the correct literal usage of the character".

indeed we do already invent (transliterating) a design element to a slash. but i meant "as on release would be without slash" because the thunderbolt is not a slash...

PennyCentury
Why not do like it's been done on this record https://discogs.versitio.com/Primal-Scream-Exterminator-XTRMNTR/master/28150?

AC/DC – Power Up (PWR/UP) would be a true "Swiss-style" compromise

vormloos
should be changed IMO to 'as on release' with additional info in Release Notes

seems (like David Bowie - ★ (Blackstar)) it was a forum consensus, the MR links to the thread(s) - so this already established method does solve also here the AC/DC PWR/UP issue and many others too

no.signal
seems (like David Bowie - ★ (Blackstar)) it was a forum consensus, the MR links to the thread(s) - so this already established method does solve also here the AC/DC PWR/UP issue and many others too

For some reason Bowie always gets a for stuff other artist ain't allowed to have here.

no.signal
because the thunderbolt is not a slash...

If it's not a slash in the title it shouldn't be considered one in the artist name either.

no.signal
seems (like David Bowie - ★ (Blackstar))

We all know that some artists get special treatment on here. He's one of them. Whether it's this or "scare quotes".

Silvermo
If it's not a slash in the title it shouldn't be considered one in the artist name either.

bingo!

however as we can see it's common practice and there are surely more examples this method would be helpful, so i don't see a reason not to do the same here
^ the orthodox s do not need to quote me/answer and object to this, they'll just do it because they can and not for the sake of (the nik gospel of) -friendliness...

rdvriese
For some reason Bowie always gets a for stuff other artist ain't allowed to have here

bingo!

plus Beatles, Led Zeppelin and other/certain dinosaurs...

AndyEvans2
some artists get special treatment on here

also to the opposite: ★ for Bowie is O.K. ★ for other Stars printed in the name not (without burry out certain skeletons)...

no.signal
seems (like David Bowie - ★ (Blackstar)) it was a forum consensus, the MR links to the thread(s) - so this already established method does solve also here the AC/DC PWR/UP issue and many others too

Interesting. wasn't aware of this...

I like the idea of naming them PWR/UP (Power Up) and XTRMNTR (Exterminator), like it was done for Bowie. It' an elegant solution.

I would not object to Pwr/Up (Power Up) as the title.

Pwr is definitely an abbreviation of Power in my opinion and should not be left in full caps.

Yes I agree, I do like Pwr/Up (Power Up) as an all around solution.

Any objections?

I don't think that solution should be applied here.

It could be argued that it was applicable with Bowie because the title was a symbol. Just like the Love symbol is just called TAFKAP here. Personally I think the title for the Bowie album should have been just Blackstar, not that symbol. This aside.

But in the case under consideration we have an actual title with letters on the sleeve. Why add something between brackets? Those are normally reserved for subtitles, so could give a false impression.

rdvriese
But in the case under consideration we have an actual title with letters on the sleeve. Why add something between brackets? Those are normally reserved for subtitles, so could give a false impression.

Agreed. PWR/Up is nearly exactly what's on the title. It is using all standard characters, not an unusual unicode symbol like the Blackstar example. Again, for searching purposes a release note can be added to mention it is often referred to as "Power Up".

rdvriese
It could be argued that it was applicable with Bowie because the title was a symbol.

Yes.

I wouldn't then have brought in a languaged title from elsewhere but using a symbol necessitated a decision.

That doesn't apply here and a hybrid of "as on release" and "what the website says" is very unattractive.

rdvriese
the Love symbol is just called TAFKAP here

That blatant invented PAN should be changed to “Love Symbol” as printed on releases) is "Love Symbol"« but... (this is discogs]

PWR/Up is not detailed anywhere or nearly exactly what is on the physical release.

The cover says PWR⚡UP
The spine says PWR⚡UP
The liner artwork says PWR⚡UP
The CD-Text says PWR UP

So +1 for Pwr/Up, or Pwr Up.

The reason I lean towards the slash variant is how AC/DC uses the ⚡ to replace the slash in their name, both on this release and on many others.

If the ⚡ doesn't mean slash on this release, and instead replaces a space, then technically this release should have an ANV of 'AC DC'

edit: typo

derek.king
PWR/Up is not detailed anywhere or nearly exactly what is on the physical release.

It sure seems like there are variations of PWR/UP, but nothing that says "Power Up" on the release:

randomdestructn
The cover says PWR⚡UP
The spine says PWR⚡UP
The liner artwork says PWR⚡UP
The CD-Text says PWR UP

Pwr Up in my opinion looks like S***, I'd much rather prefer PWR UP. Think that all streaming services and reviews all are saying Power Up. This website will look like a joke.

PennyCentury
This website will look like a joke.

The title looks like a joke, so that's how we should have it here.

PennyCentury
Pwr Up in my opinion looks like S***

The only person you have to criticize is the designer who decided to make it "PWR/UP" on the artwork. Seriously, Discogs just copies what's on the release. No one here told AC/DC to name their record like that.

This is the only reaction I have to your comment: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

PennyCentury
Pwr Up in my opinion looks like S***, I'd much rather prefer PWR UP. Think that all streaming services and reviews all are saying Power Up. This website will look like a joke.

Yes they do, it should be Power Up.

derek.king
it should be Power Up.

baldorr
[there is]...nothing that says "Power Up" on the release:

baldorr
Discogs just copies what's on the release

randomdestructn
The cover says PWR⚡UP
The spine says PWR⚡UP
The liner artwork says PWR⚡UP
The CD-Text says PWR UP

bobbley
And in accordance with the guidelines we're discussing the application of the Capitalisation of said title.

..and also now the use of "/"

baldorr Incorrect: see the matrix details of the Australian CD release.

derek.king
baldorr Incorrect: see the matrix details of the Australian CD release.

Okay, that's a fair point. But in no way can that be used as the title of the release. Matrix codes can have all kinds of different information, none of it would be used for the title. Rarely, but sometimes can you use the matrix for a catalog number if there's no other printed catalog number.

I'm not sure why people are so hung up on translating the title. It really is simple - we catalog what's printed on the release. There are many records which have a colloquial name, but we don't add that here. The compromise is we can add it as a release note.

derek.king
see the matrix details of the Australian CD release

RSG §3.1.3."... also consider what is going to be most useful to other s, so the most complete title is better no matter where it appears"

Awesome. ... great point!

no.signal
RSG §3.1.3."... also consider what is going to be most useful to other s, so the most complete title is better no matter where it appears"

Unsurprisingly selective quotation.

That's in a guideline which exclusively discusses where on the release to select from.

So, it's not a "good point". It's entirely mistaken at best.

AndyEvans2
where on the release to select from

is the matrix not on the release? https://discogs.versitio.com/release/16204201-Power-Up/history?diff=2&page=1

RSG §3.1.3."... In rare cases, it may be necessary to make up a compound title from the various versions of the title on the cover, spine, label, etc. Use the Release Notes field to mention any important differences."

no.signal
is the matrix not on the release?

You really should take a step back and look at all the versions of this album with "PWR/UP" printed on covers, spines, labels, credits and ask yourself if it's credible that you're arguing for the naming of it to be based on the matrix on one version.

All that print and design but, because it happens to be how how you'd like to see it, you're latching on to a matrix.

AndyEvans2
that you're arguing for the naming of it to be based on the matrix on one version.

sorry i don't. i just point to it that the matrix is on the release and include the normal words 'Power Up' and quotet the rest of the guideline ;-) i know intentional misunderstanding and response to that is a trend since a few years... however, my actual proposal is still the same: we should keep things simple and friendly and continue with the already established STRNGENME (Strange Name) method

Although I'm still in favour of Pwr/Up, I think Pwr/Up (Power Up) would work as a compromise, especially if there's a precedent with that Primal Scream album.

no.signal
AndyEvans2that you're arguing for the naming of it to be based on the matrix on one version. sorry i don't. i just point to it that the matrix is on the release and include the normal words 'Power Up' and quotet the rest of the guideline ;-) i know intentional misunderstanding and response to that is a trend since a few years... however, my actual proposal is still the same: we should keep things simple and friendly and continue with the already established STRNGENME (Strange Name) method

Agree

Sk8r_Dad
if there's a precedent with that Primal Scream album.

I would say there isn't.

The Primal Scream master says;
"Sometimes another part of the release disagrees and fully spells out one word or the other. Test pressings call it Exterminator"

That's quite different from here (I haven't validated how accurate that statement on the Primal Scream album is btw)

There's now 26 releases of this album with 5 different titles being used. Which is faintly absurd by any standard.

cellularsmoke
I would not object to Pwr/Up (Power Up) as the title.

+1 to that.