On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 23:50 +0100, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On 6 June 2011 18:22, Paul C. Bryan <pbr...@anode.ca> wrote: > > Sorry for jumping into the discussion so late in the game—real life has been > > demanding much of my time lately. > > > > I would suggest the test could boil-down to whether a new artist work AR is > > required to distinguish one remix from another (if a particular remix > > contains new content, and has additional composer/lyricist/etc. credit). If > > so, then a separate (but related) work would seem to be in order. If not, > > then the original work would be used. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Pretty much what I think too. It has the benefit of being a very > straight-forward test based on clear technical grounds (do I need an > AR specific to this mix --> Yes, add a new work). > Now it would be nice if we actually had a work to work remix AR to go > with that...
One thing that concerns me a bit with a work→work remix ar: Remixes are typically based on a specific recording of a work. How do we represent this in Musicbrainz? Should we continue to use the recording→recording AR alongside the work→work AR on any remixes which are based on a specific recording, but also add e.g. new lyrics? -- Calvin Walton <calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca> _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
