Track Artist vs Main Artist

OPTION A
Track Listing Section (Change to allow track artists as on release)
RSG §12.3.1. This field is for the main artist(s) for each track. It is possible to use more than one artist and fields by clicking the [+] button. The same guidelines apply as to the main artist(s) (see RSG §2.2.1).
A) This field should not be used if all the tracks are the same as the Main artist(s).
B) If the track artist(s) have the same PAN as the Main artist(s) but different ANVs see RSG §2.5.6.
C) If there are artists presented on a track that are clearly main artists and differ from the main artist on the cover, these can be entered as track artists (see White Christmas / If You Are But A Dream

OR====OR====OR====OR====OR====

OPTION B
Track Listing Section (Change to allow main artist as on media)
RSG §12.3.1. This field is for the main artist(s) for each track. It is possible to use more than one artist and fields by clicking the [+] button. The same guidelines apply as to the main artist(s) (see RSG §2.2.1).
A) This field should not be used if all of the tracks are by the same artist.
B) If the track artist(s) have the same PAN as the Main artist(s) but different ANVs see RSG §2.5.6
C) If there are accompanying artists on the release that are not on the cover, those artists can be added as credits. Example White Christmas / If You Are But A Dream

“Otherwise billed as such” Per Iron Lion Zion

OR====OR====LEAVE ALONE====OR====OR====

CURRENT
RSG §12.3.1. This field is for the main artist for each track. It is possible to use more than one artist and fields by clicking the [+] button. The same guidelines apply as to the main artist. This field should not be used if all of the tracks are by the same artist.

RSG §2.2.1. The artist field at the top of the Submission Form is where we put the main artist for the release. This is considered to be the artist or artists named on the front cover of the release or otherwise billed as such.

TBQH here - If the credit guides get changed/fixed/clarified as outlined in the "other", the original "problem" is fixed. May not be the best solution but it's a step in the right direction without causing a tidal wave.

I been running across more and more releases using track artists in lieu of credits. I think Option A is the best. Leaves it flexible and discretion. Nix my last post.

TopCats45s
C) If there are artists presented on a track that are clearly main artists and differ from the main artist on the cover, these can be entered as track artists (see RSG §12.3.1). Example 'Round About Midnight

Given how long the discussion went on about this before fizzling, not sure I have any thoughts remaining!

If we do proceed with this one, I wonder if it just needs this slight tweak:

C) If there are artists presented on a track that are clearly main artists and differ from the main artist on the cover, these can be entered as track artists, even if the track artists are the same for all tracks (see RSG §12.3.1).

TopCats45s
E) Duplication of the same role (track artist AND credit) is discouraged.

This part is unclear to me, could you elaborate or give some examples?

auboisdormant
This part is unclear to me, could you elaborate or give some examples?

Agreed, I'd like clarity here.

j_lit
even if the track artists are the same for all tracks

That's why the change in the one line is needed:
Current: This field should not be used if all of the tracks are by the same artist.
Proposed: A) This field should not be used if all the tracks are the same as the Main artist(s).

auboisdormant
Duplication of the same role

I can't think of one off the top of my head Diognes_The_Fox do you where/when/what we were "talking" about? It's basically if the track artist is Elvis & The Jordanaires - then there should not be a "vocal" credit for the Jordanaires. EITHER they are main/track artist OR secondary credits. And yes, I see this type of thing all the time.

What would be better wording?

auboisdormant Duplication of the same role

I can't think of one off the top of my head Diognes_The_Fox do you where/when/what we were "talking" about? It's basically if the track artist is Elvis & The Jordanaires - then there should not be a "vocal" credit for the Jordanaires. EITHER they are main/track artist OR secondary credits. And yes, I see this type of thing all the time.

Perhaps an example like this?
Various - Carbon Drum Compilation Vol 1 - Hardcore Metal Punk
Where track artists have incorrectly been given a "Band" artist credit. If that sub were to be corrected per RSG §12.3. ... but the "Band" credit was left as is.

j_lit
If that sub were to be corrected per RSG §12.3. ... but the "Band" credit was left as is.

Exactly. And it needs correcting for sure, LOL

TopCats45s
do you where/when/what we were "talking" about?

Possibly those jazz records that are only credited to the performers and not a central group?

Diognes_The_Fox
Possibly

Yeah, maybe. Is that sentence needed/wanted? If yes, how can it be made more clear?

TopCats45s
It's basically if the track artist is Elvis & The Jordanaires - then there should not be a "vocal" credit for the Jordanaires. EITHER they are main/track artist OR secondary credits.

j_lit
Where track artists have incorrectly been given a "Band" artist credit.

Thanks. I was afraid it was meant to "discourage" entering certain credits for a track artist even when the credits are on the release. :E

TopCats45s
Is that sentence needed/wanted?

It never hurts to put things that s struggle with in the guidelines. I'm not sure how to improve the wording though.

auboisdormant
improve the wording though.

Actually ... I think I should delete that and change the sentence over in "other guidelines" under "Artist Credits & Credit Roles" to: ... C) Main artist(s) and track artist(s) should only be given an additional “credit” if it is explicitly printed on the release. Example: Blues Changes
What do you think?

TopCats45s
I think I should delete that and change the sentence over in "other guidelines" under "Artist Credits & Credit Roles" to: ... C) Main artist(s) and track artist(s) should only be given an additional “credit” if it is explicitly printed on the release. Example: Blues Changes

You're right, it seems to fit better there.

Do we need a note about classical releases as they present things a bit differently? The composers are often not explicitly given a composing credit on the releases, but it's a long-standing practice to give them one in Discogs. Or is that something we are trying to get rid of?

auboisdormant
fit better there

Will adjust - anyone else opinion?

auboisdormant
classical releases

Uh Oh, no no no. I seem to always forget about those pesky classicals. There should be an exemption there. I was joking around awhile back - Classical seems to be exempt from most guidelines and should have it's own set of rules :) Will play around with wording unless someone pops in with a good line or two here.

TopCats45s
I was joking around awhile back - Classical seems to be exempt from most guidelines and should have it's own set of rules :)

Haha, yeah. :D

Classical and file releases.