Is there any "live" style for track ETIs?


How should the live tracks from this release be entered? e,g track 3:

Actually (Live at the BBC / Marc Riley Session / 19/01/16)

should this be entered into the tracklist as-is? Or as one of?:

  1. Actually (live at the BBC: Marc Riley session 19-01-16)
  2. Actually (live at the BBC: Marc Riley session)
  3. Actually (live at the BBC)
  4. Actually (live)

I realise there is a live recording style guideline, where the ETI is moved into the disambiguation and formatted as:
Actually (live, 19-01-16: BBC Studios, UK)

Just wondering if something similar should be applied at the track level?


Yes, the ‘recording’ guideline is meant for ‘tracks’, which are kind of interchangeable terms in MusicBrainz most of the time.
So you’ve already figured it out :slight_smile:

edit: to clarify, you’ll be editing the ‘track’ to be just ‘Actually’, then ticking the ‘Update the recording title to match the track title’ box in the recording tab, and applying those changes.
Then click on the track/recording, and edit that to add in the disambiguation.
Let us know if anything isn’t clear!


Thanks. The thing that confused me is the examples given in the live recording style guideline - all the track titles seem to retain the live ETI’s. E.g. recording Train in Vain has the live ETI at the track level - is this technically incorrect?


Hmm, I’ll let someone else answer that, I’m not too sure.
Some of those examples are weird, especially the Alanis Morissette one, where the track example doesn’t match the format of the other tracks, or what’s on the back of the packaging…

Generally speaking I would try to keep the track name the same as it is on the packaging, eg leave stuff like (live) in, but move precise performance details to the disambig

For almost all recordings, extra title information should be kept in the recording title. The exception is live recordings, where any performance information should be transferred to the disambiguation using the Live recordings guideline.


If we apply a standard to recordings, it should use international date format: 2019-01-16 or 2016-01-19.

We should keep tracks as printed, though. :slight_smile:

Except that I don’t consider tie-up info (this that movie/game/commercial theme song) or (bonus track)/(previously unreleased) notices as ETI and I do remove those from tracks (I use release annotation instead).


This particular release is digital, so there is no printed cover art as such - just a tracklist.
Should I enter track 3 (release level) as?:
Actually (live at the BBC / Marc Riley session / 2016-01-19)

or, tidied up?
Actually (live at the BBC: Marc Riley session 2016-01-19)



I would personally keep the track as is, that is Actually (Live at the BBC / Marc Riley Session / 19/01/16).
The recording could be normalised to something, but I would let someone who feels strongly about it to do it.
I would release the date ambiguity by linking with a date to the work.


I don’t think this is accurate. Recording titles should follow Style / Recording and track titles Style / Titles. The former specifies that live recording titles should be standardized, the latter specifies that live track titles should follow Extra title information. So when entering a new release you would enter the tracklist as printed and then edit the recording disambiguation afterwards.