Is it ok to create a new artist for a duo?

If the artists of a CD are credited as “Surname1 Surname2” or “Duo Surname1 Surname2” (where Surname1 and Surname2 are replaced by the surnames of the two artists, e.g. “Hazelius Hedin”) do you create a new artist for the duo?


If it’s an actual duo, rather than just a one-off collaboration, then yes, you should create a new artist :slight_smile:


I tend to split them (into two artists) more than I leave them together, because for me I like seeing collabs displayed on both artists pages (instead of having to browse to a new one).
If it’s very clearly a seperate and different project to the artists other work though, a new artist it is!


That’s a good point. I wonder if there is a reason why an artist’s page doesn’t list the releases of the bands the artist belongs to?

I was also thinking along this line: since they now have at least two releases as the duo I found it tidier to create a new artist, even if it felt a bit of an overkill.
I think it is also the only way to add metadata about the collaboration in the database (like the duo’s webpage).

1 Like

Yeah, if there’s at least two releases and some websites, I basically always go for a duo artist.

It’s not always that easy. You’d want only releases the artist actually participated in, not any other releases. Having the dates they were a member helps, but even then, during those dates you can have (older) releases put out that don’t feature the artist yet, and after they’ve left you can have releases that still include recordings they participated in.


Well… you could list band releases that happened while the artist was a member and which list him/her on the release relations.

But, it’s getting complicated – and someone has to implement it as well.

Hello I have a CD which was created by 2 artists. I don’t believe they always work together. What should I do? Set the release group as belonging to one of the 2 artists? Or consider these 2 artists as a single band?

Hey Dave!
If it’s a collaboration, Musicbrainz lets you credit both artists at once!

Here’s an example (my first gif, thanks @jesus2099 @outsidecontext !), let me know if this isn’t clear enough:


Here is another conversation about this issue

:open_mouth: OMG:

Vomit Storm with Spiteful Urinator


Unfortunately that split doesn’t exist, but those are my favourite NZ band names at the moment for sure :stuck_out_tongue:


I generally think that a multi-artist credit should be used in most cases, but if they all work together and promote themselves as a unit then go ahead.

Create new artist for the duo, give artist credit to the duo on the release (and release group), the track, and the recording. Then edit relationships for the recording. Add each member of the duo as a performer.

Example: yksb feat. MiLO×31STYLE is a trio, but since they work together and promote themselves as a unit they are listed as a single artist instead of 3 separate ones on their releases.


Paul Dunmall and Paul Rogers recorded 9 albums together: even if I didn’t find any information about a formal duo, should a dedicated artist page be created?

Similar problem with the 9 albums recorded by Paul Dunmall, Paul Rogers and Philip Gibbs.

1 Like

What is the problem you see with them having a lot of collabs and not being one artist?

Just wondering if there is a practical issue there I haven’t thought of - all I can usually think of is that there is a collab website and social media links etc that need a home.

If that isn’t the case here then I don’t see a problem :thinking:

1 Like

It’s just the problem of structuring the information for a group (discography and concerts included) so that searching and browsing is more efficient than scrolling through lists of different collaborations across multiple artist pages.

Some people will want to see those albums in the artist discographies.

If they don’t ‘market’ themselves as a group then I personally think it’s better how it is now :+1:


For both Dunmall and Rogers, the bulk of their catalog seems to be collaborations in various combinations. Besides Dunmall/Rogers and Dunmall/Rogers/Gibbs there’s Dunmall/Gibbs/Metcalfe and Dunmall/Gibbs/Metcalfe/Rogers and etc… In this case I think creating duo (or trio) artists is just going to fragment the data. (This is only partly a “data” issue and arguably more a presentation issue but it’s the presentation we have today.)

1 Like