#musicbrainz

outsidecontext: sorry for the double ping, I would also like to reply to this post, but only if I can add anything helpful: https://mastodon.social/@coldclimate@hachyderm....

French speakers: Hard to tell with a translator - what do you think, is this LLM generated? https://critiquebrainz.org/review/c52bab8c-6d1b...

aerozol: I answered on mastodon

aerozol: regarding the encoding issue that usually means some character encoding was used that differs from the encoding actually specified in the file. Hard to tell without knowing the file format and how the actual output looks like

Also often tricky to fix.

looking for thoughts on this group: https://musicbrainz.org/release-group/f7e52239-...

the american release was merged in forever ago

what throws me though

the 93 japanese one and 96 american one have totally different music

actually, so doe sthe 86 cd

im confused as to how they're "the same thing"

wait ... hang on .. my browser might be lying to me

ah T.T yup ... disregard

it messed up my tab order and i lost track of what was in what group >.<

Thank you outsidecontext!

kellnerd: ping

Hey reosarevok, I am here now

Hi! For STYLE-1117 - what would you expect to see that under?

STYLE-1117: Create a “sound effects” relationship https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/STYLE-1117

performance? production?

(in https://beta.musicbrainz.org/relationships/arti... / https://beta.musicbrainz.org/relationships/arti...)

Hmm, production I guess? Field recordist is also there, so it might fit the best next to that one (that is, under "engineer").

If we would have separate rels for "sound effects" and "foley artist", I would place foley artist under performer.

As I understand "sound effects" to be the person who added the sound effects to the recording, while the foley artist performs the sounds using utilities.

Hmm, ok

I'll just do a sound effects in production for now - but not sure if it should be by field recording (that's specifically under recording engineer) or just under production :)

Yeah, it depnds on how you interpret the role of somebody credited for that job.

Probably safer to have this on the higher level (under production) for now.

Let's do that

I love half-done translations

"Add a new Artista-Publicación relationship type"

Hehe, time to go translating again, or is this an untranslatable admin string?

I think it might be the latter, now that I think about it

Hmm

"did sound effects for"?

Good question

Sounds good if this is a generic did and not the specific "they literally performed that sound"

Yeah, I just dunno, "performed" doesn't seem right so I think the most generic possibility is just "did" :)

Ok 👍

I guess there's no such thing as "sound effectist" :D

(if that's wider than this "foley artist" thing)

So I guess I'll just have "did sound effects for" there too for now

Or maybe just "sound effects for"

I guess it's understandable that the person did it, and is not personally the sound effects :)

👍

Looks good, not all link phrases start with a verb anyway

"This indicates an artist that did the sound effects for the recording." seems like enough for now, then we don't (yet) get into issues with put together vs recorded directly

Have you seen additional / associate / etc credits for this'

*=

... *? :D

Not really, it is mostly credited as "effects" only.

Ok

Let's not add them in the beginning then

Thanks!

Cool, I guess I have a few releases to update now :)

And as always, I am unsure whether I should add the rel to the release or all its recordings.

If you're sure it applies to all recordings then to those, if not to the release, as usual )

* :)

Yeah, I know, but there is usually only a single "sound effects" credit for the release and in almost all cases, I am like "sure, why should this not apply to all X tracks this audio drama was split into" where X is a number between one and a few hundred :)

I guess it still makes sense to add it to the recordings, but for larger X I am always wondering whether I am supposed to check whether each track contains sound effects (like you would do it for vocalists).

Honestly, probably not

It's not a big problem as sound effects are always present in modern audio dramas (unless there are separate tracks with just music or spoken credits), but for voice actors this is more problematic: There is one list with all roles, but not every role appears in every track 😢

So far I have been a bit inconsequent and added them to the release if there are many tracks (as that makes it easier to fix potential mistakes and wrongly attributed roles) while I was adding them to the recordings if there is only one or two (one track per side of an LP or MC).

I guess you could also see it the other way around: It is better to fix it for X recordings shared by Y releases than having to fix Y releases for which the same credits have been duplicated.

And if anyone is interested in precisely crediting the actors which have perfomed on a specific track of the overall audio drama "recording", they could still do that by removing the superfluous rels (which were added to all recordings earlier).

Yeah, I dunno. Honestly, I've done that for classical sometimes (if I know that X and Y perform in a specific work, I'll add them to all recordings of the work, without checking whether both are really in *all* parts)

I think it's not a huge issue, but people can improve it further if needed

Ok, so I will just relax and add recording credits most of the time :)

reosarevok: Is it intentional that "sound effects" comes after "misc" on https://beta.musicbrainz.org/relationships/arti... while it comes before "misc" for the recording rel type?

kellnerd: no, will change the child order of misc

Done

Thanks

reosarevok: If you feel like adding more rel types to make audio drama editors happy, there still is STYLE-2363, probably the last major relationship type which is missing :)

STYLE-2363: "adapted / adaptor" Artist-Release relationship https://tickets.metabrainz.org/browse/STYLE-2363

kellnerd: https://beta.musicbrainz.org/relationship/a3005... is also borked for you, right? (the examples)

Literally posted about hat in #metabrainz a few seconds ago, so yes

If a release is credited as "A Label X Production", is it appropriate to use the "produced for" label-release relationship type (as it is under "contracted tasks")?

And similarly to use the "produced at" place-release relationship type for "A Studio X Production"? Sometimes "Studio X" rather refers to a team than a specific place.