Categorizing RG of acoustic and featuring (feat.) versions

MusicBrainz
, ,
1

Hi guys! What time is it over there? It’s 5pm here. Anyway, have a good day!! :partying_face:

I have a couple of specific issues I’d love to get your thoughts on regarding how I categorize certain types of music releases in MusicBrainz.

I often find myself unsure about the best way to categorize acoustic versions of songs. Currently, I end up using “Remix” for these releases, but I don’t think this is entirely accurate.

According to MusicBrainz, a remix is defined as “a release that primarily contains remixed material.”

Acoustic versions, on the other hand, are typically re-recordings of songs using acoustic instruments and a simpler arrangement.

Should acoustic versions be categorized as Remix? If not, would adding “Acoustic” as a new secondary type help in more accurately representing these releases?

Another issue I encounter is how to categorize songs featuring additional artists (e.g., “Artist A feat. Artist B”) when there is already an original version by Artist A. I sometimes categorize these as remixes, but I’m not sure if this is the best approach.

When there is an original version by Artist A and a new version featuring Artist B, should the featuring version be categorized as a remix? If not, what is a better way to label it?

I’m really interested in hearing your thoughts and experiences with these issues! :nerd_face:

*Note: This post contains some translated parts. If the expression is unclear, plz lemme know💀！

1 Like
2

Acoustic is not remix. It is just a song played in a different way. There is not specific label for acoustic versions in MB.

Also “featuring” is not a remix either. It is just a new version of a recording.

A remix will literally take the original recording and cut and paste chunks of it around while adding new parts to it. A remix should include parts of the original recording.

And it is 9am here in the UK…

3 Likes
3

Thank you. Good-good moring, Hope you’re having a nice day!:star_struck:

I was referring to RGs, not recordings/works.:skull:

For example:

  1. original version:
    Release group “yes, and?” by Ariana Grande - MusicBrainz
  1. version with another artist(s):
    Release group “yes, and?” by Ariana Grande & Mariah Carey - MusicBrainz

So, is the second version considered a remix of the first version?

If there’s another upcoming version: “yes, and? (acoustic)”, should it also be considered a remix?

Maybe I can try applying for a new secondary type for acoustic versions through the Tickets, even though I’m not very familiar with it yet.

4

I was also talking of Release Groups. I assumed you were talking of singles. And a single will have Recordings on them. If the main recording is a remix, then the single is classed as a remix.

In these examples I don’t know the music. But if the two people walked back into the studio to do a new duet. That would make a new recording and not a remix.

If Mariah Carey just took an old Ariana Grande single and sung over the top of it, whilst also adjusting some of that original recording, then it would be a remix.

From reading the Wikipedia page it looks like this is what happened. They call that version a “remix”. So that implies to me that Ariana and Mariah were not actually in the studio together doing something new. They have taken the recording of the music from the original single and sung over the top of it. A remix with new vocals

5

So the new single (the feat version) is indeed a remix of the original single based on the following points:

  1. New Elements: The new version includes additional vocal parts or lyrical content, or altering the instrumental arrangement, or modifying the production to create a new version of the song.

  2. New Artist: The new version features a different artist, which can serve various purposes such as introducing a new artist, pairing a well-known artist with a less-known one, or for commercial considerations.

Am i right?:nerd_face:

6

The first point is the key one. They have taken the instrumental recording from a previous single, added a new vocal track to it, and likely adjusted other part of the instrumental arrangement. Also the artist themselves called it a remix.

Take what you already have, mix it up, add and subtract, to make something new. That’s a remix.

1 Like
7

I would not really called this duet a remix but anyway…
There is no intention to change the instrumentals, just add a vocal track, I guess.
No intention to change the mood of the instrument tracks to trance, to 2-step, to disco, to dub, etc.

The acoustic version is not a remix, it’s another single RG, because different instrument recordings.
I guess they will reuse the vocal tracks and thus someone could call that a remix, as well…
But I don’t see this one either as remix.

Disclaimer : I never heard the songs, so take my comments as purely theoretical chat.