Ryan Torchia wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Andii Hughes > <gnu_and...@member.fsf.org>wrote: > >> On 21 July 2011 18:07, Kuno Woudt <k...@frob.nl> wrote: >> >> > On most of the physical releases I've looked at the featuring artist is >> > credited in the artist column if there is an artist column on the >> release. >> > >> > So, considering featuring artists are commonly credited as >> > "track title - artist Z feat. artist Y" on back cover tracklistings, >> there >> > shouldn't be any problem with us standardizing on that at the recording >> > level. >> >> +1 >> >> This is my experience too. I can't think of any releases where the >> existing MB >> behaviour of using the track title occurs, other than studio albums where >> the >> primary artist is unlisted altogether (because it's their album). >> > > > That's a rather large "except" though, isn't it? That essentially narrows > down the scope of your sample to title tracks of singles. That also seems > very anecdotal, and hasn't been my experience -- but that comment isn't > any > less anecdotal. So I started looking around, searching for "feat." in > recording titles on singles and EPs, and honestly, I found a lot more > releases like this: > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1958183 > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/7df28f89-7039-40a0-929d-3e7e296dee0a > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=335941 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=69180 (<-- this one's > interesting > because it shows a clear distinction between a "feat." spot and a > collaboration.) > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1904322 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1884794 > ...where the featuring artist is linked with the song title, or this: > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/150bbdaf-95ca-4016-abcb-9ac3ce11d287 > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00009VGGT > ...where the guest isn't listed on the title, or this: > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=41461 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=8506 > ...where the guest name placement is ambiguous, or this: > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/b83f146d-0374-4cbc-8d65-7e7de7f71fca > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/d75937fa-1ea8-4799-8389-700c575f9ca0 > ...where MB has misrepresented the join phrase. > > (I tried to keep my search unbiased and invite people to try for > themselves: > advanced search for Recordings, "feat AND type:single", click open a few > random entries from random pages, try to find cover art and take a look.) > > Actually, it was remarkably difficult to find releases where the guest was > credited "Artist feat. Guest", even when limiting the search range to > singles. The one genre where it was very common was for single-titled > releases (i.e. versions of one track, no B-sides) from electronica acts > with > guest vocalists; those almost always were "Artist feat. Guest" format, > though frequently the "feat. Guest" was in a smaller typeface and on a > different line, not billed equally: > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/84604323-a490-4d66-998e-c0f565315d08 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=301847 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=238949 > http://www.musicbrainz.org/release/9be39dcb-7110-4de1-baa5-0e1a9bb985b3 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=339973 > http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=112659 > > (These turned up more frequently when searching for "feat" in Releases > instead of Recording titles. Searching for it in Artists often resulted > in > bands where the "featured" artist was one of the band members.) > > What we can take from this is that there definitely isn't any consistency > on > how "feat." appears on singles, and nothing that indicates consensus of > use > or meaning. There are some cultural biases and tendencies, but that's not > something we should base a universal standard upon. > > --Torc. > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >
Recording/release group titles shall be normalized. Part of the normalization is to get rid of any cover design specific representations of titles and names. So here I think we have to decide how we want to normalize featured artist credits. My opinion on this: A featured artist is still an artist so the only logical place to put him is the artist field. On covers the featured artist info is often written next to the track/release title because the artist is featured on that track/release by the primary artist. IMO that doesn't mean that the feat. info is part of the title. Christian (MD) -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-327-Featured-Artists-attempt-2-tp3682609p3686305.html Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
