A full clip of this song consists of videos, that were sent to Monetochka by her listeners. There’s no any name-by-name list in the description, but they are still important authors of this clip. I wanted to add them as “appears in video” relationship, but didn’t find the needed artist.
A similar approach was taken with this song, but here the listeners sent audio recordings of their own voices, which were compiled into one audio track for the final result. In that case, I have a name-by-name list in the description, so I can add them as separate artists. But I’m not sure if that’s a good solution, because they’re not musicians, so it might be preferable to add them as one group to keep the MusicBrainz database cleaner. Personally, I would prefer to add all of them, because I think it’s important to preserve the names of all artists in music history, but I’m asking advice here
Technically, for the first example you would use the special purpose artist [unknown] as well as adding any individuals that you have successfully identified as relationships.
However, non-technically, this case is not entirely clear. MusicBrainz is not necessarily a database of actors. I’m not sure the community has had this discussion before - MusicBrainz still has a bit to go before music videos are codified. My other question would be if the people that submitted their clips (or the people featured in the clips) intended to be known. If not I am not sure of the value of adding all of them.
For the second case, you can add them individually, if you like. Make sure to add a good disambiguation, if they are not musicians and are unlikely to be used for any other relationships in the database.
Adding them to the annotation is a good alternative if you’d like to save yourself some time and the database some “clutter”. But it’s up to you, there is no requirement for someone to have done music/vocals for multiple projects before being added to the database. The uncertainty that pertains to the actors/film makers does not apply here - if they have created music they can be added.
My other question would be if the people that submitted their clips (or the people featured in the clips) intended to be known. If not I am not sure of the value of adding all of them
I didn’t want to add all of them individually, of course . It’s just impossible to identify every author, because some of the videos don’t even have any identifying information about their authors, such as faces. What I wanted to do was add them as one artist [listeners] or something like that
For the second case, you can add them individually, if you like. Make sure to add a good disambiguation, if they are not musicians and are unlikely to be used for any other relationships in the database.
I try to add disambiguation by default when I add a new artist
I don’t get the point of a relationship that doesn’t contain meaningful data, but in this case you would indeed use [unknown].
For me, it’s meaningful data, because listeners are important authors and they’re not totally undefined to be just [unknown]. This is the artist’s audience, so it’s a little bit more concrete. And it can be interesting to see, how other artists communicate with their audience and give it to be part of their music (like community versions of songs), what is impossible without a separate category or artist
It feels similar to writing an annotation like “this music video has actors in it”
It’s meaningfulness in this case, because if we know actors, we can add them as individual artists with needed relationship, not in an annotation. And if we don’t know, we can add them as “unknown”, because we really don’t know anything about them often. But as I said above, in this case they aren’t totally undefined
MusicBrainz is not necessarily a database of actors. I’m not sure the community has had this discussion before - MusicBrainz still has a bit to go before music videos are codified
It’s a little bit frustrating for me, because YT is my main platform for listening music (because of covers mainly) and video clips are really important part of music impression here. And this is also the reason why I don’t really understand the need to separate recordings for video and audio recordings, if they have the same audio. Because usually the significant difference between them is only in authors of a video. And without information about them, it loses any sense to separate them.
I don’t get the point of a relationship that doesn’t contain meaningful data, but in this case you would indeed use [unknown].
I added this info in the annotation (“Видео для клипа отправлены слушателями” = “The videos for the clip were sent by the listeners”) and added the tag “listeners as author”. Let me know if it’s a wrong way of using tags.
besides the “video” flag, some good reasons for seperate recordings is that videos will almost always have different relationships than the audio recordings, such as video producers, editors, directors, etc. and songs can have multiple music videos too (official or not), which are often distinct enough from each other to also warrant different relationships
also, whether a recording on a release is a video or not is an important distinction, at least in more traditional releases, like this Enhanced CD which includes a video as a bonus track (quite common).
also, I wanted to note that usually music videos should get a release. I believe we’re moving away from simply standalone recordings, since there’s a lot that can’t be adequetly represented that way (release dates, labels, video thumbnails, and more)
there’s currently discussion over here about how to handle what, if you’ve got anything to add~
. It’s just impossible to identify every author, because some of the videos don’t even have any identifying information about their authors, such as faces. What I wanted to do was add them as one artist [listeners] or something like that
