Auto-creation of work for new recording; tags in audio files with unknown/multiple possible releases

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fd2a5e94e20> #<Tag:0x00007fd2a5e94d08>

Why work entities are not created automatically for every recording the same way release group created for release? Auto-created works would contain performance (recordings) relation to manually added recording.
It is common for band to create work and then record it for an album. Sometimes they create new recording of it some years later.
Should I add works for all recordings I’m adding?

There’s also related practical issue: say I found two recordings of the same song by a band (a band probably doesn’t exists by now). Recordings are clearly differently arranged. I may or may not discover any additional info in future. For such files I manually picking tags after metadata import in Picard removing all release related tags: MBID’s, album, total discs, total tracks.
With “work MBID” available I would have a way to link such file to (community) managed metadata.

Creating a work for every recording would cause chaos for a compilation album. Doesn’t really make sense as you’ll be left with dozens of duplicated works to merge into the originals.

When adding a new Release it is literally just couple of clicks to make a full set of new Works for that Release using the Edit Relationships page.


Found it. Sorry I’m new :blush:

It could be one of checkboxes in release creation interface (don’t know if it is a good idea).

But my main question: is spamming with a work for each recording is wanted, should be used only when needed, or should be avoided.
(in my situation I’m talking about indie bands)


The interface is complex, but powerful. Just ask and someone will point out a trick or two.

It is certainly preferred to go and check for a Work before you add a new one. There is a search built in to that “Add Related Work” link. Or you can speed that up by going to the Artist’s page and checking this list of works before bulk adding new ones.

If you do add an extra work in error, it can be merged into the older one.

I don’t pretend to know why “the powers that be” do what they do, nor do I claim to speak for them.
But there is simply so much wrong with your initial statement, and it makes assumptions that would only apply to about 10% of the music from about 1960-2020, that I don’t even know if I can make a qualified comment about it.

However, at least this much I can say: You can make “batch works” after you create a release.

Thank you for the answers.

Sorry, yes, I was trying to point out I’m dealing with modern music.

If it is about writing style errors I’d gladly hear if there’s anything worth/could be noted.

It’s not “spamming” at all - ideally, every work for which it makes sense (so, not stuff like interviews, and we generally also skip improvisations) should have a work :slight_smile: If you’re fairly sure the works don’t exist yet (new songs, not covers, etc), just batch-add them. If you have a cover album, a compilation or whatnot, then do check carefully whether some already exist :slight_smile:


I think it should be used when needed.

When do we need work?

  • When we want to link at least 2 recordings to it or
  • When we want to set work credits (writers mostly) or lyrics URL or even just its lyrics Language

Creating empty works, linked to only 1 recording each, is somehow useless and time waste.


I think all’s ok here: I’m trying to be careful (not saying I’m not making mistakes but I try to minimize edits number), always checking all combinations/parts/aliases of titles/names on both languages for every thing I’m adding.

I’m also backed up by the fact that I manually excavate underground history and need to add everything starting from bands, labels and recording studios. Already existsing works? Nah :slight_smile:


Hmm. I could show some examples in a new thread. It may be fun and interesting. I would need to find a good place it could be streamed from, though.

1 Like

This is the fun bit I like about MB too. Lots of research into favourite obscure bands, and then sharing that with others.

You can add a lot of the URLs to an Artist and Label. And there are Annotation Fields on everything if you want to add other gems of wisdom.

Ah, yeah, I know those kinds of bands. :grin: Even more fun when filling in the missing gaps in MB’s knowledge.

The main thing that MB likes to see is some details in Edit notes about sources of information.

1 Like

but that is the reason why these things aren’t automatically done.
It only applies to a handful of songs.

yes, I see now

@IvanDobsky, here are the rest of the emojis Discourse prudently did not allowed me to mark your post with :point_up_2::point_up_2::grin::grin::heart::grin::grin::grin::heart::+1::+1::+1::point_up::point_up:

1 Like

Hahaha :laughing: Yeah - some of us try to be more welcoming of the new guys. The guidelines are initially confusing and you will annoy people until you get your head around their oddities. There is logic to the madness - sometimes it takes some hunting for.

I’m here to enjoy my music, learn more about my music, share knowledge about music, but also respect the guidelines so I don’t get shouted at.