Discussions on Steve Lacy & Mal Waldron
Start a New Discussion
-
-
It's pretty common in the jazz world for a bunch of independent artists to record an album together. This doesn't really make them a "group" in the traditional sense, but MusicBrainz seems to think that they are.
Should these be typed as a musical group with the various members added or should they get deleted (after updating the album with the individual artists)?
-
They should be collaborations (and actually, MusicBrainz does distinguish between groups and collaborations). In Freebase, IMO, the right way to model them is to say that the album or track is just by multiple artists; “Under Pressure” is rightly both by David Bowie and by Queen, not by a group called “David Bowie and Queen.” However, that means that the MusicBrainz identifier for “David Bowie and Queen” (or “Steve Lacy & Mal Waldron”) has nowhere to connect. Metaweb punted on that decision and never, as far as I know, got back to it.
-
What is the best practice now (2011) in dealing with Musical Artists that are not really a Musical Group, and probably never were represented as any official group during their media run or entertainment experience ?
Example: Back in Baby's Arms
Our wiki http://wiki.freebase.com/wiki/Commons/music/musical_group says "When multiple Artists or Musical Groups collaborate, they should only be typed as a Musical Group if they have designated a new name for their Musical Group."
So, if there is no group name, then to list the individuals themselves, rather than creating new topics with compounding join characters like "&" , Correct, so says the wiki now ?
-
You are correct. "Back in Baby's Arms" should be recorded by "Sissy Spacek" and "Beverly D'Angelo" as two topics; the topic "Sissy Spacek & Beverly D'Angelo" really should be deleted. This is a holdover from an old MusicBrainz load from the old MusicBrainz schema (pre-NGS).
-
YES! Thanks Jeff. Finally, some progress and agreement on moving forward with MusicBrainz cleanup ! ;)
-
