#musicbrainz-picard-development

Bob Swift: Sorry, I had a busy week and little time. I actually don't know exactly which variables could be moved. My general feeling is that a lot here is very specific and really advanced to use. I think this is better hold as part of a plugin. But if there is something that would be used commonly we could add it.

Works for me to keep it as a plugin. Funny thing is that the main reason I wrote it in the first place was because I needed both "standardized" and "as credited" artist names in my file naming script, and Picard only allowed me access to one or the other. Everything else just sort of grew from there. 😀

Why does Picard make collabs like: as a new artist instead of a collab? My naming is scheme is set to $albumartist/$album/ but it still creates a new folder with this as the artist name

da.leo: I don't understand. What would you want it to be in the folder name? If on MB the albumartist is set to "Bruno Mars, Anderson. Paak & Silk Sonic" then that's what you'll get for %albumartist% in Picard by default

@outsideofcontext No, I was looking for the artist to be Bruno Mars and saved under the folder Bruno Mars/Album(this happens when saving under the file structure albumartist and artist) but instead this makes a new artist called Bruno Mars, Anderson. Paak & Silk Sonic which is annoying since my client also interprets that as a seperate artist

It shouldn't be one artist, it should be multiple artists

really sorry if my explanation is bad

it is actually multiple artists in the musicbrainz database - i'm not sure what you'd want in the filename here. the only way you can reasonable handle multiple artists in a folder name is to combine them and treat them as a single artist.

or pick one artist - but how do you decide which one?

if you want to always use the first artist, you could put this into your picard folder naming pattern: $getmulti(%_albumartists%,0)

Or use the "Additional Artists Variables" plugin to separate out the primary artist (either standard or as credited) and the additional artists.

It looks like this is the album in question https://musicbrainz.org/release/ab024522-5649-4... and just looking at the track list and relations i'd probably want it under "Silk Sonic" if only one artist was used :)

i suspect Bruno Mars was listed as the first artist on the release for promotional reasons rather than anything else.

since people might not realize that Bruno Mars was a member of Silk Sonic otherwise :)

kind of odd since most of the other releases in that release group are credited to just "Silk Sonic": https://musicbrainz.org/release-group/97a8636b-...

but that's how it's listed on the linked digital music services, so...

Based on the cover art, I think that the RG and all releases should be credited to "Silk Sonic feat. Bruno Mars & Anderson .Paak"

hmm, so maybe it was actually added as a search hint, so the album would show up in music stores if someone searched for either of the two member artist names

* Anderson .Paak with special guess host Bootsy Collins"

* Anderson .Paak with special guest host Bootsy Collins"

No - MB guidelines say that artists on the cover should be credited as shown - hence my suggestion above.

that cover reads more to me like "Silk Sonic (who by the way are these two people if you didn't know) feat. Host Bootsy Collins"

Well - it literally doesn't read like that.

* like that because the names Bruno Mars and Anderson ., * .Paak are literally & explicitly named on the cover.

it's very clearly "An Evening With Silk Sonic", then labeled pictures of the two members of the group, then a subtitle mentioning the special guest.

The alternative is to consider Silk Sonic to be only part of the title and not include it in the artist list at all.

it's technically a self-titled album, "An Evening With Silk Sonic" by "Silk Sonic" - usually the artist name isn't repeated on the cover of self-titled albums.

Bruno and Anderson are explicitly listed as artists on the cover - you cannot ignore that.

kepstinbrainz: Yes - I agree with that hence my adding Bruno and Anderson as "featuring"

artist intent is definitely that it's a release by the superduo "Silk Sonic", which has members Bruno Mars and Anderson .Paak

No - that is NOT at all definite.

IMO it is definitely artist intent to have the individuals credited because .... um ... the individuals ARE credited on the album cover.

If they didn't want to be credited as individuals they would NOT have put the individual names on the cover.

they're introducing a new supergroup, it's very common to call out the specific artists in a supergroup to highlight them so people who are familiar with the individual artists will see it.

So you either use Silk Sonic as the primary artist or you consider it to simply be part of the title and credit Bruno and Anderson as primary artists.

kepstinbrainz: That is simply your personal interpretation, but literally NOT what the cover explicitly shows as the artist intent.

the primary artist is definitely "Silk Sonic". whether the two individual members of the group Silk Sonic also deserve individual named credits in the artist name is what's up for debate

Travelling Wilburies never did this.

the cover art is not the single source for artist name.

kepstinbrainz: And I am also saying that Silk Sonic is the primary artist, but there is no debate about what is explicitly shown on the album cover because it is literally right there in front of our eyes.

Actually I have found where someone decided it should be “An Evening With Silk Sonic” by Bruno Mars, Anderson .Paak & Silk Sonic - https://silksonic.lnk.to/AEWSSAW

yes - I'm almost certain that was a promotional decision by their label so that someone searching music stores for the individual artist names would find the album.

also, we need support for video cover art on musicbrainz ;) https://x.com/silksonic/status/1459291496604123137

Promotional decisions by music labels are considered artist intent AFAIK.

I think i'd personally go with "Silk Sonic (Bruno Mars & Anderson .Paak)" here, treating it sort of like the title style with the primary artist name in large text at the top and the member artist names at the bottom as a subtitle.

And although all the web sites show attribution as Bruno Mars, Anderson .Paak & Silk Sonic, I think it is a reasonable decision to modify the order and give primary attribution to Silk Sonic

Leave the artist name on the digital release using the as-credited artist order probably makes sense

which is kind of a weird artist name imo, but that's how it's written :/

kepstinbrainz: I could live with that - in fact I was reconsidering whether "feat." should be used because that is NOT written on the album.

It's not an artist name - it is three artists names joined.

* It's not a single (weird) artist name - it is three artists names joined.

But the secondary artists are NOT a subtitle. They are secondary artists.

in the text formatting on the cover, they're formatted like a subtitle, and act as a description of who the people in silk sonic are. so that makes sense to me.

they're not "secondary artists" - they're the same artist.

silk sonic *is* bruno mars & anderson .paak

also, geolocking is hilarious. none of the links to store pages from their link page work for me, all go to blank or 404 pages (but the release shows up if i search for it on most sites)

fwiw, the cover art for their newer single "Love's Train" is very clearly just "Silk Sonic" as the artist name even on online music stores - i guess they felt that they established their name with the first album and can now use just the group name.

No - Silk Sonic is NOT Bruno and Anderson - all three are separate artists. If the Beatles Revolver Album had said on the front "The Beatles (Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Ringo Starr and George Harrison)" then I would bet that the individuals would also have been named as artists in Musicbrainz.

* No - Silk Sonic is NOT Bruno and Anderson - all three are separate artists. If the Beatles' Revolver album had said on the front "The Beatles (Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Ringo Starr and George Harrison)" then I would bet that the individuals would also have been named as artists in Musicbrainz.

kepstinbrainz: Then in MB that release would only credit Silk Sonic.

kepstinbrainz: And indeed that is the definition of artist intent - they intended on "Evening with" to credit the individuals as well as the group - but on later releases they didn't feel that they needed to do so.

in particular, i think the formatting "Silk Sonic, Bruno Mars & Anderson .Paak" doesn't make sense, since that style is generally used when all the credited artists are more or less "equal", but it's pretty clear that "Silk Sonic" is the more important credit from the cover styling - and using "feat." is rarely correct to credit members of a group.

interesting that several of the awards they won for this album use the artist name as formatted on streaming services. ("Bruno Mars, Anderson .Paak, Silk Sonic")