[mb-users] Fake Collaborations. WAS: Legal names and performance names

[artysmokes]

drsaunde wrote:
> 
> While I might agree with that statement for original releases, released
> with the artist's input, there is a distintion that needs to be made for
> reissue and compilations titled for marketing reasons.  Releases have been
> issued under the following names:
> Van Morrison & Them
> Eric Clapton & the Yardbirds
> Rod Stewart & the Faces
> 
> There are many more examples, but even though releases have been titled
> under these "artists" they are not actually artists, they are marketing
> creations used to highlight a member of a group who ended up being more
> famous than the group.  These are bogus artists and should never be used.
> 

I don't like the term "bogus" artists. To millions of people who buy records
with these marketing-led constructions, they aren't bogus. Individual tracks
can be assigned to one artist or the other, but where do you file a
compilation album that says "Rod Stewart & The Faces" on the sleeve? It's
not a Rod Stewart album, or a Faces album, but mixture of the two. Put it
under "Rod Stewart" and Faces fans will be upset, and vice versa. In my
opinion, the artificial collaboration should be used as the ReleaseArtist,
but not as the TrackArtist. Using "Various Artists" would be of little use
to anyone, so the compromise position - using what the record company used -
seems the obvious option to me. As editors, we should document releases, not
make judgements on who the "real" artist is. I recognise, by the way, that
some editors have very strong views on this, and unless a strict MBz
guideline is formulated, we will never gain a consensus on this issue.
--
Arty

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Legal-names-and-performance-names-tf3973253s2885.html#a11468568
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.