I’ve been working on songs from the brony music community, and it’s common there for people to mark songs as “Artist Name Remix” when arranging an existing work: for example, Vicious Lies (Stars In Autumn remix) (on MB) uses the melody of and samples the vocals from d.notive’s original (on MB), but the instrumental track was rewritten in a different style and Stars in Autumn “rerecorded” it (whatever the terminology is for electronic music) himself. I’ve realized that my issue with the format described in this recent thread stems from this usage of the terminology, where the “remixer” is closer to a cover artist, and while I can appreciate the reasoning behind it in the standard case, I’m not sure it’s the best way of handling the idiosyncratic brony “remixes”.
While I’m still mostly in albums of original compositions, what do y’all think is the best way to handle recordings like this? My take would be to treat them as covers despite the wording, and add a “cover recording of” relationship to the original work (unless it’s sufficiently innovative to add a second “arrangement of” work) along with a “samples” relationship to the original recording, but credit the arranger rather than the original composer in the “Artist” field. That does wind up dropping some of the “printed” title information, though.
For that matter, what is “sufficiently innovative”? Would the above example warrant that “arrangement of” work? I think I get the difference between arrangement, revision, and based on, but the documentation could certainly be a bit more clear on when each apply.