Artist/Type: Difference between revisions

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(link to ArtistTypeProject (Imported from MoinMoin))
((Imported from MoinMoin))
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 19: Line 19:
==Discussion==
==Discussion==


The introduction of [[Publisher Relationship Type|PublisherRelationshipType]] implies the existence of a new artist type, which should probably called "Company". This could be handled by the existing "Group" artist type, but I'd suggest that a new type be created. Other types might be created in future, such as "Label". It's also worth considering formalising the difference between [[Legal Name|LegalName]] and [[Performance Name|PerformanceName]] this way: which is discussed further on [[Musical Association Relationship Class|MusicalAssociationRelationshipClass]], [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000136.html here], and [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000138.html here].
* The introduction of [[Publisher Relationship Type|PublisherRelationshipType]] implies the existence of a new artist type, which should probably called "Company". This could be handled by the existing "Group" artist type, but I'd suggest that a new type be created. Other types might be created in future, such as "Label". It's also worth considering formalising the difference between [[Legal Name|LegalName]] and [[Performance Name|PerformanceName]] this way: which is discussed further on [[Musical Association Relationship Class|MusicalAssociationRelationshipClass]], [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000136.html here], and [http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2005-June/000138.html here].
* What if the artist is in the form "Artist 1 & Artist 2"? Should the type be "Unknown" or "Group"? (I suppose it can't be set to "Person" because this type is for natural persons) --[[User:NeoKilly|NeoKilly]] {{DateTime}}
<ul><li style="list-style-type:none">That's going to pretty much always be a group, since it's not a person. --[[User:KrazyKiwi|KrazyKiwi]]
</ul>


[[Category:To Be Reviewed]] [[Category:Terminology]]
[[Category:To Be Reviewed]] [[Category:Terminology]]

Revision as of 22:47, 1 December 2006

Types of Artists

Note: Attention.png There is a proposal for a new ArtistTypeProject.

An "artist" is one of the fundamental data types of MusicBrainz. This is usually either a person or a group of persons. Artists are the people responsible for creating music. Every release has one PrimaryArtist considered to be the most important author of the release. They are also used in many different AdvancedRelationships, and in that context they can fulfill all kinds of roles, from producers, publishers, lyricists, conductors and many more.

To distinguish the different kinds of artists, there are different types available. The type of an artist can be modified by clicking the "Edit artist" link in the artist box.

  • Person:
  • This indicates an individual person. Note however that there may be several different artist records for the same person, representing different ArtistNames.
  • Group:

There are also several SpecialPurposeArtists, for example "Various Artists" used on compilations, and "[unknown]" used in some situations where no artist makes sense.

Finally, there is ArtistAlias, which is not a type of artist, but a completely different entity.

Discussion

  • The introduction of PublisherRelationshipType implies the existence of a new artist type, which should probably called "Company". This could be handled by the existing "Group" artist type, but I'd suggest that a new type be created. Other types might be created in future, such as "Label". It's also worth considering formalising the difference between LegalName and PerformanceName this way: which is discussed further on MusicalAssociationRelationshipClass, here, and here.
  • What if the artist is in the form "Artist 1 & Artist 2"? Should the type be "Unknown" or "Group"? (I suppose it can't be set to "Person" because this type is for natural persons) --NeoKilly Template:DateTime
  • That's going to pretty much always be a group, since it's not a person. --KrazyKiwi