[mb-users] wrong use of AR?

[Don Redman]

On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:12:07 +0200, azertus wrote:


> Yes, that's what I meant originally, but only minutes after I sent my  
> mail, I had another idea. It's related to your post in the "Performance  
> Name and Legal Name" thread.

That is on mb-style see  
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000145.html  
and the follow-ups.

> The rule before AR definitely was to move the tracks to their composers.  
> Now we can keep the album under the *basic* artist "Erich Kunzel and The  
> Cincinnati Pops Orchestra" and all the *complicated and detailed*  
> information is entered using AR. So the performing orchestra and the  
> conductor should also be linked individually (not to the basic  
> placeholder "Erich Kunzel and The Cincinnati Pops Orchestra") and every  
> track linked to their composer.
>
> This post has evolved into some kind of a proposal (one could say an  
> interim measure until there's a solution for the required primary  
> artist). I'll keep this limited to classical and soundtrack releases.
>
> "Every track/album should be filed under the artist they are attributed  
> to on the album sleeve, and all other info is to be duplicated and  
> expanded using AR."

I proposed something different: Every track/album should be filed under  
that MusicBrainz entity that gives the simples possible and the most  
intuitive clustering.

I really start to hate these collaboration artists, but I have no idea how  
to remove them from the database.

   DonRedman



-- 
Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages:
Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation  
around! :-)