• mjb
    290

    Show this post
    Following from discussion at https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/746788 ...

    RSG §2.3.1 reads, in part:
    Unknown Artist is to be used for music releases which are not credited to an artist.


    Several of us agreed that it would be helpful to change it to something more like this:
    Unknown Artist should be used for music releases for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.


    This would be more in line with how we actually try, wherever possible, to avoid using Unknown Artist. For example, we routinely will infer an artist name from a photo on the release, or by listening, or using external sources or even other releases (as we do with gobs of white labels, test pressings, and unmarked promos). We don't need to get into these details, though. How to use external sources and release notes is already covered elsewhere in the guidelines.

    Permalink
  • truedream
    1.8k

    Show this post
    +1. Unknown Artist shouldn't be used when the artist is known.

    Permalink
  • discosanddragons
    399

    Show this post
    +1 there, +1 here.

    Permalink
  • SeRKeT
    52.1k

    SeRKeT edited over 8 years ago
    mjb
    it would be helpful to change it to something more like this:


    agreed, it makes a lot of sense

    mjb
    We don't need to get into these details, though. How to use external sources and release notes is already covered elsewhere in the guidelines.


    maybe some additional wording and a link to the guideline for how and when to use other sources, something like this :

    Unknown Artist should be used for music releases for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined, for use of external sources to unnamed artists on releases
    see rsg xxxx (i can't find the guideline atm)

    IMO if the wording can be changed adding simple link to the other guideline won't do any harm eh?

    edit :
    10.7.1. Credits that do not appear on the release can be added only under certain circumstances. The (credible) credit source must be stated in the submission notes, and the credit must be labeled with [Uncredited] in brackets after the credit role.

    the above doesn't mention how we deal with white labels/test presses without any credits
    and the next guideline kinda opposes our method of using official release info :)
    10.7.2. Credits should not be transferred between releases.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    SeRKeT
    and the next guideline kinda opposes our method of using official release info

    RSG §10.7.1. talks about Credits.

    SeRKeT
    guideline kinda opposes our method of using official release info

    It is allowed for Main Artists and Track Artists. See RSG §1.1.2. and RSG §1.7.1.

    Permalink
  • berothbr
    1.3k

    Show this post
    To start, I think RSG §2.3.1's current "Unknown Artist" definition is good enough as is. However, I do think the proposal would be an improvement nonetheless. A tiny suggestion:
    Unknown Artist should be used for music releases and music tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    (Reason for the suggestion: I encounter this more frequently on compilations and DJ Mixes where I'm usually torn between whether it should be "No Artist" or "Unknown Artist" and assume I'm not the only person who cycles between RSG §2.3.1 and the release while trying to decide.....)

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    berothbr
    Unknown Artist should be used for music releases and music tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    I like it.

    Permalink
  • velove
    598

    Show this post
    +1 for some amendment

    Permalink
  • mjb
    290

    Show this post
    +1 for the "and music tracks" addition.

    I don't want to muddy this proposal by getting into the credits guidelines.

    I'm indifferent about adding e.g. "If using an external source, refer to RSG §1.1.2 (when & how to use external sources) and RSG §11.2 (suggested release notes content)" because I think it goes without saying that the rest of the guidelines still apply and must be followed.

    But if we do do go down that road of referring people to other guidelines, we should refer to RSG §1.7.5 too (if we want to say it's OK to pull the artist name from other parts of the release), and we may also want to refer to RSG §1.7.2 & RSG §1.7.4 as applicable (if we want to regard a completely absent artist name as an "error" to be corrected).

    Permalink
  • _jules
    12

    Show this post
    Yes, please.
    Proposed amendment sounds good. Not too keen on referencing other § as it's just making the guidelines look more involved than they really are.

    Permalink
  • SeRKeT
    52.1k

    Show this post
    i made my suggestion as i noticed you have to read more than part of the RSG to make sense of what to do when no artists are listed,

    DonHergeFan
    It is allowed for Main Artists and Track Artists. See RSG §1.1.2. and RSG §1.7.1.


    while i know what to do in those situations :)
    a new may struggle having to go to various parts of the RSG when they have
    for ex: a white label with no info
    the rsg could do with a better layout for situations like this :)

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    I a change here.

    [quote=]Unknown Artist should be used for music releases and music tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.[/quote]

    I a change here. Any objections / last minute amendments?

    SeRKeT
    the rsg could do with a better layout for situations like this :)


    +1

    Permalink
  • tsivihcra
    51

    Show this post
    Why is it being limited to music? Non-music releases also have unknown artist from time to time.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    tsivihcra
    Why is it being limited to music? Non-music releases also have unknown artist from time to time.
    I think because we should use "No Artist" for Non-music releases.

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    People speaking can be artists!

    Personally, I'm more apt to use No Artist for Sound Effects / Field Recordings and stuff like that.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    tsivihcra
    Why is it being limited to music?

    I would say this is a second discussion.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    DonHergeFan edited over 8 years ago
    Diognes_The_Fox
    Personally, I'm more apt to use No Artist for Sound Effects / Field Recordings and stuff like that.

    Then maybe change RSG §2.3.1. to

    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    ► No Artist for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings and so on.


    Does that make sense?

    Permalink
  • Clogwhistle
    37

    Show this post
    Sorry to be a bore again, but the question of library music arises here where the composers are credited but no artist is credited. We have had numerous discussions and at the moment I have a number of submissions credited to Various Artists with Unknown Artist as the track artists. Consider Various - The Orchestra Plugged where the composers and the performers are known but there is no Main Artist, nor are there clear Track Artists.
    There is a convention that "composer = artist" for library releases and you can find many other library releases on Discogs where this has been applied but I have been advised in the past not to do this and in trying to apply the Guidelines I've tied myself up in knots.
    It would probably be counter-productive to create Guidelines for one specific area of the music industry but I would welcome a statement in the Guideline to cover this kind of situation (composers & / or performers known, but no Artist credit).

    Further reading - https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/726556 .

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    Clogwhistle
    Sorry to be a bore again, but the question of library music arises here where the composers are credited but no artist is credited. We have had numerous discussions and at the moment I have a number of submissions credited to Various Artists with Unknown Artist as the track artists. Consider Various - Short Cuts . In addition there is Various - The Orchestra Plugged where the composers and the performers are known but there is no Main Artist, nor are there clear Track Artists.
    There is a convention that "composer = artist" for library releases and you can find many other library releases on Discogs where this has been applied but I have been advised in the past not to do this and in trying to apply the Guidelines I've tied myself up in knots.
    It would probably be counter-productive to create Guidelines for one specific area of the music industry but I would welcome a statement in the Guideline to cover this kind of situation (composers & / or performers known, but no Artist credit).


    My approach is:
    Main Artist - Unknown Artist
    Composers as credits only.

    We don't know if it's actually multiple various groups involved. It could be one big studio orchestra doing all tracks. I'd only Use Various / Unknown Artist in tracks if there's evidence it's something more akin to a compilation.

    The composers are usually listed as composers and that's it. I find it's best to keep things as simple as possible for those situations.

    Permalink
  • Clogwhistle
    37

    Show this post
    Diognes_The_Fox
    We don't know if it's actually multiple various groups involved.

    I'll go along with your suggestion but it is obvious to me that most of the library tracks concerned were performed by the composers and the Anthony Phillips, for example, is performed by an uncredited orchestra,
    Diognes_The_Fox
    Main Artist - Unknown Artist
    Composers as credits only.

    I've got 75 releases in my possession that I'm prepared to adjust to this scheme, but it will qualify as a mass edit. I'll start another thread...

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    DonHergeFan
    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    ► No Artist should be used as an artist on releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined. Use No Artist for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings and so on.


    Yeah! I like it!

    Thoughts?

    Permalink
  • esque
    2

    Show this post
    The first sentence describing the use of No Artist is almost identical to the usage of Unknown Artist. That creates ambiguity.

    Permalink
  • Disaster_Area
    3.3k

    Show this post
    DonHergeFan
    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    ► No Artist should be used as an artist on releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined. Use No Artist for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings and so on.

    The first sentence of the second bullet point is a copy-and-paste of the first bullet point.
    Either this was an error or meant as a joke no-one got.
    It has to go. Then all looks good.

    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    ► No Artist should be used for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings and so on.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    Disaster_Area
    The first sentence of the second bullet point is a copy-and-paste of the first bullet point.
    Either this was an error or meant as a joke no-one got.

    No, I wanted it this way.
    For "No Artist" it's the same game: If there is an artist on the release, or the artist can be billed otherwise - then we don't use "No Artist". That's why I added it, even if it looks weird.

    Permalink
  • Disaster_Area
    3.3k

    Show this post
    I believe you meant to say the following:

    ► No Artist should be used for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings etc. and for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined. .

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    Clogwhistle
    I've got 75 releases in my possession that I'm prepared to adjust to this scheme, but it will qualify as a mass edit. I'll start another thread...


    It's a fair concern that it could be that the composer is also the performer, but, until confirmed, maybe, maybe not.

    Disaster_Area
    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.


    Disaster_Area
    ► No Artist should be used for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings, etc., and for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined. .


    I like these. (Added some extra commas in the second one though)

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    Diognes_The_Fox, I would also link all Special Artists in this guideline and add one release example per release.

    For example:

    Special Artists

    RSG §2.3.1. The following artist names are used as generic pages when the credit isn't for a specific artist:

    ► Various should be used when there are several different artists on a release, and no one is billed as the main artist.
    Example: Various - 100% Reggae 3

    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.
    Example: Don Carlos - Re-Mida (Hunee Edit)

    ► No Artist should be used for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings, etc., and for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.
    Example: No Artist - Sound Effects No. 1

    ► Traditional - Used for traditional songs that are credited as such on the release. Only to be used for composition type credits.
    Example: Leslie Sarony - The Old Sow / On Ilkla Moor Baht ‘At

    ► Folk - Used for folk songs that are credited as such on the release. Only to be used for composition type credits.
    Example: Comedy Harmonists* - How Can It Be / Must I Then

    ► Anonymous - Used for artists who are credited as 'anonymous' on the release.
    Example: Anonymous - Ophiolatreia

    Permalink
  • Disaster_Area
    3.3k

    Show this post
    ^^^^^^^ YES!!!!

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    Disaster_Area
    YES!

    Ok! :D Let's go with it...

    Permalink
  • TopCats45s
    248

    Show this post
    DonHergeFan
    For example: Special Artists RSG §2.3.1.


    +1 Really nice work & clear cut.

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    I like it!

    https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/356624?page=1#7421152

    Let me know if I missed anything!

    Permalink
  • mcr1
    361

    Show this post
    Great work, thanks.

    Does that mean that we can now invalidate "artists" such as this Various - Wild London: Sounds Of The City's Wildlife Field recordings?

    Devil's advocate type question.

    Permalink
  • mcr1
    361

    Show this post
    I ask as previous guideline was:
    No Artist should be used as an artist on releases where there is no musical artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, and so on.
    Now:
    No Artist should be used for releases and tracks where there is no artist performing, such as radio / TV ments, movie samples, blank tracks, sound effects, field recordings, etc.
    I think the answer is retain them, as it follows:
    "and for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined."
    Just trying to be clear while the subject is fresh.

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    mcr1
    Devil's advocate type question.


    This is covered under RSG §2.10.1. - That definition could be expanded to it's current accepted use.

    Permalink
  • mcr1
    361

    Show this post
    Yes, that works, thanks.
    At least the question and response is here, near to the link from the guideline update thread, in case it's needed.

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    Diognes_The_Fox
    Let me know if I missed anything!

    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.
    Example: Unknown Artist - Untitled

    This is missing in your update. :)

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    Diognes_The_Fox
    Let me know if I missed anything!

    ► Unknown Artist should be used for releases and tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.
    Example: Unknown Artist - Untitled

    RSG §2.3.1. is still incomplete.

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    DonHergeFan
    This is missing in your update. :)


    Done.

    Permalink
  • truedream
    1.8k

    Show this post
    Diognes_The_Fox
    library music


    Diognes_The_Fox
    My approach is:
    Main Artist - Unknown Artist
    Composers as credits only.

    is not consistent with
    Diognes_The_Fox
    Unknown Artist should be used for music releases and music tracks for which an artist is not credited and cannot be otherwise determined.

    IMO

    Permalink
  • mjb
    290

    Show this post
    The release being used as an example, Don Carlos - Re-Mida (Hunee Edit), has the artist and title identified in comments and videos attached to the release. Maybe it is not the best example, then, since someone could reasonably come along and enter the artist and title along with a note saying it's just not printed on the release (as is typical for white labels, test pressings, etc.).

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    mjb
    Maybe it is not the best example, then, since someone could reasonably come along and enter the artist and title along with a note saying it's just not printed on the release (as is typical for white labels, test pressings, etc.).

    Right then, let's find a better example. And let's edit this release.

    Edit: Look at the release history, artist name and title was already there!

    Permalink
  • DonHergeFan
    12.1k

    Show this post
    https://www.discogs.sie.com/release/5620402

    Permalink
  • mjb
    290

    Show this post
    Yes, that example may work.

    Permalink
  • Diognes_The_Fox
    Staff 457

    Show this post
    I've updated it.

    Permalink

You must be logged in to post.