[mb-style] Composition/Performer/Production ARs at Release or Track level? - PROPOSAL

[Philipp Wolfer]

On Jan 2, 2008 10:44 AM, Olivier <viapanda at gmail.com> wrote:
> A Release is definitely something more than the sum of its tracks IMHO.
Agreed

> Well, again, it doesn't make any sense to say that Artist A provided
> photography for track A...
> You (usually) provide photography for a *release* (but maybe this
> discussion excluded that AR).
> Same goes for the AR "liner notes": usually (semantically) valid for
> releases, and shouldn't be propagated to tracks... (because that would
> have a different meaning).

This is what regularly comes up in discussions about this topic. But
IMHO this is irrelevant, as it is clear that there are ARs that are
completely valid on release level and don't apply to individual tracks
(of course this needs to be defined).

But Brian explicitly limited his suggestion to "performance and
production ARs", and for those I think he's absolutely correct. I now
really think there is value in allowing the "fuzzy" ARs on release
level and that viewpoint 2 is the way to go.

-- 
Philipp Wolfer