On 26/03/06, Cristov Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 26/03/06, Steve Wyles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Simplifying is good, but not when it could be > > misinterpreted. To a > > > >> native English speaker "Recorded By" has various meanings in the > > > >> context of musical works. The situation is far worse for > > non-native > > > >> speakers, where they might need to refer to a dictionary. > > > > > > > > On the contrary the non-native speakers do not seem to have a > > > > problem with this :-) > > > > > > > > What phrase would you use? > > > > > > I would either leave it as it is, or use 'Engineered' > > > > engineered by could be an entirely different role. 'recorded > > by' does not neccesarily mean any engineering involvement. it > > is sometimes synonymous with 'producer', with all that that > > entails. we definitley need engineer, recorded by, and > > producer to be seperate roles. > > I disagree. The person who handles the sound board is the engineer recording > the tracks. They are the same thing. While a producer might well be manning > the board there isn't someone recording and someone else engineering.
http://www.discogs.com/release/529445 that's exactly as written on the sleeve. 'recorded by' infers anything from 'pressed 'rec' on the 4 track' to 'mixed, produced, mic placement' and so forth. engineers aren't all neccesarily involved in the commiting to tape - they may be just placing mics, or something like that. the 2 roles have a certain amount of crossover, but if sleeves make the distinction, then so should we. _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
