#musicbrainz

Hi all: I've uploaded data for a CD with Christmas music and credits two performers, but not any composers. But I entered the composer name in the "Artist" field. How can I add credits for the performers, and indicate that "Artist" is actually the composer?

...and how should I have done this correctly in the first place?

Also, the two performer entries I created were deleted by ModBot, before I had the chance to add them to the recordings... Annoying...

This is the entry I'm working on: https://musicbrainz.org/release/c1d9ce51-2db0-4...

I did read the fine manual (wiki), but it has not cleared things up for me

bobjonkman, the performers should be listed as the artists on the tracks (unless it is classical music), and then the tracks should be linked to the appropriate works using the relationship editor. Because all of these are well known works, I expect thatthe composers should already be attached to the works.

thx rdswift. Because many tracks are traditional/old/well-known I thought this was more like classical music than modern pop. I'll re-edit the CD to put the performer in as "Artist".

All in all, I find the term "Artist" somewhat ambiguous. I'd much rather have explicit fields like "Performer", "Composer", "Arranger", &c.

Those are actually identifed as relationships on the tracks (but not composer, which is attached to the work).

i'll add the work for the first track so you can see what I mean.

Sorry, I guess arranger is also attached to the work.

I'll get the hang of it eventually. I'm the self-appointed librarian for a community radio station, so I understand the importance of getting things right (and even more importantly, being consistent!)

The entities are things like "Albums / Releases", "Tracks", "Recordings" and "Works".

When entering things like performer relationships against a track, you can specify many different types of roles from things like "Recording Engineer" to "Mixer" to "Producer", and even what instruments a performer played on a track.

Bumper sticker: "Oh no, not another learning opportunity!"

I've added the work for the first track, so now when you go to https://musicbrainz.org/release/c1d9ce51-2db0-4... you should see all the relationships attached to the work for this recording.

For an example of a release with more relationships attached (including performers by instrument played), have a look at https://musicbrainz.org/release/1735de3f-eee8-4...

<bobjonkman> Bumper sticker: "Oh no, not another learning opportunity!" Yup. ;-)

The system is pretty powerful and thus a bit complicated, but once you work with it a while before long it actually begins to make sense.

aerozol, what is the link to the unofficial discord server ?

nm found the link in the forum

idislike that this excists fwiw

well it's not bad it *excists*

but important edit discussion should NOT take place tere

I mean, I get it - Discord is a lot more understandable for younger people than IRC :p

As long as edit notes are added for stuff, then it's fine

I prefer IRC, but apparently there is an album of the week thing going on there and I'm curious to listen

in fact, I dislike Discord heh

I did say *younger* people

Let's sahre a BBS node...

teehee

hrm

"Titled Bad MFs, the 14-track project is exclusively available through the Metaverse for a limited time"

do we have a [metaverse] area ?

^_____^

Mt. Westmore — the rap supergroup comprised of West Coast legends Ice Cube, Snoop Dogg, Too $hort and E-40 — has released its debut album via blockchain-based platform Gala Music.

I guess it's a 'store'

That's just digital, but wannabe fancy :p

I have an extension (userscript) to play a MB release on ListenBrainz.. how does that work exactly ? releases are matched to youtube by track names ?

I'm listening to an explicit version but LB is pushing me clean versions :p

Is there something I can do to fix the match ?

Lotheric: I would ask lucifer in #metabrainz, but tbh that kind of matching seems impossible to get perfect :S

(Which means lucifer could probably still do it :p)