There have been a number of new Audio Drama-specific relationships added to MB over the last couple of years. I was discussing what might still be missing with @kellnerd and it became apparent that some common credits align with existing relationships. However, these are not immediately obvious.
I have drafted some examples to be added to the Audiobook guideline page (there is no separate Audio Drama guideline page).
Feedback and further suggestions welcome! Our new additions to the Audiobook guidelines > Relationships section are marked in italics below.
Relationships
Relate all tracks on the release to the narrators that appear on them, using the spoken vocals relationship.
If a track features a theme or background music, also add relationships for the performers of the music, where known.
As well as the more obvious ones, please use the following relationships for audiobook/audio drama credits:
Thanks for adding this, itâs already helpful for me. Most audiobooks will mention a producer at the end, which might be worth mentioning. Another common relationship I see is âdirectorâ, which I add as âaudio directorâ. Maybe I should be attributing them to âspoken vocalsâ as well? Iâve also had several mention the recording location. I guess that one can also be attributed to âspoken vocalsâ.
There are also a couple relationships that are common for audiobooks that canât be added yet. A âproduced byâ Label-Release/Recording relationship, STYLE-983, and a âpost-productionâ Label/Artist-Release/Recording relationship, STYLE-2679.
Much less common credits include âquality controlâ, âproduction supervised byâ, âsound editing byâ, âaudio production atâ, âdialogue recording byâ, and ârecorded byâ.
The intent (at least for now) was to clarify relationships that are non-clear, because audiobooks/dramas use different nomenclature/names.
The examples youâve given seem to be reasonably 1:1, e.g.
For the producer credit the âproduced / producerâ relationship should be used, which seems straightforward enough.
Typing âdirectorâ into the relationship field should also immediately bring up âaudio director for / audio directorâ, and the description for that relationship specifically mentions audiobook and audio drama.
Recording location seems like a standard relationship as well (ârecording location for / recorded atâ [place]).
Sound editing and the recording credits also seem like they would use the same relationships as music releases with the same credit.
I hope that makes sense. If Iâm missing a detail that makes them harder to figure out, let me know! Or maybe you would like to draft a more extensive overhaul/more specific audiobook/drama guideline page - I basically just wanted to add a few ones that I really struggled to figure out
Thatâs what I do - Iâm not sure if it should be specified in the guidelines. I guess I always assume that users should always enter the specific task, if available. Maybe thatâs a call for @reosarevok to make, depending on the norm for guideline specifity.
As I understand it, âdialogue editorâ in this context means they edited the audio.
One question I have regarding relationships like these for audiobooks, is whether they should be added at the release or recording level. Given most of the audiobooks I add have a single track release and a release with multiple tracks. Since these are always digital releases in my case, I get the extra relationships by listening to credits at the end of the audiobook.
Producers, Engineers, etc can be on all tracks as same people tend to work on the whole thing.
Actors it is tricky as they should only be on the recordings that they were actually speaking on. So a lead actor may be on all the recordings, but most of the other actors will only be on a few recordings. If âThe Majorâ is killed off in act 2, you canât really credit him to recordings later in the show. This something that can only really be worked out by ear.
It is why generally you find all the acting credits just put down at Release level.
A Single Track release is therefore easy. You can put all the credits on the one recording. A Multi Track release is harder to split up correctly.
Yep, as @IvanDobsky has implied, the rules for audiobooks are the same as for (all?) other release types - add the relationships at the most specific level that you are able to confirm.
Theses are some of the relationships that are unclear to me:
Writer to release/work: Adding some additional qualifiers to indicate adapters and original writers
Work to release group: adding the ability to relate works to release group. Audiobooks often have many tracks which are almost never re-used for releases. This cause work pages to be difficult to browse for releases.
Character to release: Musicbrainz supports a character type for the artist entity. I am not sure if there is a clear way to indicate when a character appears on a release. I guess vocal credit makes sense, but it might be worth explicitly mentioning it.
Theme song work and recording relationships: I think it makes sense to create a distinct recording entity theme songs used in multiple recordings but how should these recordings be related to audio drama recordings?
Composer work relationships: Should composers be added to the audio drama work? Or should they be credited to a separate soundtrack work? And how should these works be related to the audio drama recordings.
One more crazy suggestion: Would it make sense to have a Cast Series for capturing artists who appear on long running series?
Thanks @aerozol and @IvanDobsky, that helps. For using the audio credits at the end of a release, I think Iâll default to adding relationships for all recordings when there are multiple tracks and thereâs only a single person for a given role, like a producer, engineer, post-production, etc. When there are multiple artists with the same role, making it unclear which recordings they may have specifically worked on, Iâll add them to the release unless I know exactly to which recordings they contributed. One exception to this is probably executive producers, which seem to be preferred as release relationships regardless.
Even if there is only one artist for a particular role, some roles may only be present on certain tracks, like instruments, or even the narrator when a different individual not mentioned on the release does the opening or ending credits.
Does that seem right? Hopefully, Iâm on the right track with all of this.
Iâve also been confused on how to do this. In my case, the end credits list each actor as having voiced such-and-such characters. The artists themselves are credited on the release instead of the characters, so Iâm not exactly sure how to indicate that Artist voiced Character on this recording/release.
@IvanDobsky Thanks! Iâd seen that, but wasnât quite sure if that was correct since the characters in question already exist in MusicBrainz as artists, so I was wondering if there was a specific way to link back to those specific character in MB.
This one I have not seen yet. One problem with Characters in MB is I donât think there is a way to say âas played by XXX on dd/mm/yyyy on release ZZZâ. Someone like Doctor Who is a good example as many actors have played him\her\it.
The âSpoken Vocalâ on a Release makes sense to link to the actor as it is the actor who speaks.
My impression is that the Doctor Who artist should eventually disappear, once all the releases there have been properly credited (to the author). The character credit is used in edge cases, where thereâs no other entity that can be used and still make sense.
Iâm not totally clear on that though, we have a few different conventions in MB. For instance âDie drei ???â is a very well-edited series/artist, that does not follow that convention (pinging @kellnerd in case he has thoughts).
But for Doctor Who/Big Finish I would follow the standard set by the rest of the releases, and collate them by series instead of âartist: characterâ.
Hopefully Iâve understood your questions correctly - FYI these are all âas far as I understand itâ and not necessarily canon!
There is a (new) specific âadaptedâ relationship you can use.
I agree that the work pages can get very messy, but in terms of the broader MB schema I think it would be opening a massive can of worms to allow relating works to releases/release groups.
This might be something better solved via the UI - for instance, collapsing multiple tracks from the same release, in the works page view.
Already answered, but this again makes me think a guide/walk-through for audio drama/audiobooks could be a good idea. Since style guidelines are not intended to help with general nuances of editing.
Never thought about it
I guess your only option would be to relate the work to the recording using âmedley includingâŚâ, but that feels wrong. The recording - recording relationships donât look great either. I got nothing sorry!
If this is the person who composed the music for an audio drama, I have been adding them at the release level. My understanding is that the work = the script, basically (this is my head-canon, please let me know if you disagree, anyone!). If an audio drama was edited to have different music, we would still use the same work. Even if a different cast performed it (which I havenât come across, but theoretically speaking) I think I would use the same work? Hence a preference for release or recording credits for pretty much everything except for writing/adapting.
If the music across a drama is distinct enough to have its own work, then thatâs a different matter - I havenât come across that before.
I donât think series is quite right to capture this. This is probably the way to do it: Doctor Who - Relationships - MusicBrainz
(I didnât see these relationships when I mentioned that this artist would probably disappear⌠oops!) Iâm not sure if this is a widely agreed upon way to credit character actors. The artist/character feels a bit orphan-ey, as it wonât really be linked to recordings, but these relationships seem to make sense schema-wise?
I work on some Recordings that can get multiple different splits. A grouping\split within the Work page for âpartialâ works grouped by Release would make things tidier.
Some shows I edit will get an original release as a single recording, then a CD release as 20 parts, and a CD reissue as 10 parts. Same recording, split different. Having a way for the Work page to recognise which âpart 2â is part of which recording would be neat.
Yeah, I agree with this. When I work on some 1960s BBC shows there are musical interludes. Iâll link the music to the âWorkâ of the song they are singing. Not to the âWorkâ of the show that is performed around the musical piece.
If the theme tune of a show is sung by different actors then linking them to the common Work they are singing makes sense. (But I also doubt this happens)
I think what the Question was pointing at is when the exact same theme tune is used for each show.
A couple questions on this, using the following as my example:
I placed âScript Editorsâ Matt Fitton/Robert Valentine as just âEditorâ on the release level, I wasnât sure of a way to specify âscriptâ. I also put this on the release as they are the editors for all three works on this singular release, I hope thatâs correct.
One that I wasnât sure how to include, is the âSenior Producerâ credit to John Ainsworth. Thereâs no âseniorâ attribute under producer. Does anyone know a way to incorporate that?
Well, those all came from notes Iâve been keeping while adding audio dramas, so I donât entirely remember what prompted them in the first place
This would also be useful for operas and musicals, but i can understand why there is reluctance.
Bingo. Compiled in seems wrong, perhaps a remix or sample relationship? After all the recordings are mixed into a new audio track for the audio drama. This release might be a good starting point for examples..
The Box of Delights release above is a good example of what would be distinct works. I first encountered this with this radio drama.
This case is rather unique in that the script specifically indicates music should be played at certain moments, but each recording has a different composers interpretation. The way I resolved it was to create a work for the script and a work for the score and link them both to the recording.
I think it definitely makes sense for relating the voice actor to the characters, it does seem a shame there is no way to see the Dr. Who releases from that page.
Last time to say itâs dumb!
