Jazz group vs lead individuals

Hi folks,

I’ve found a group which I believe is listed incorrectly against the two leads of it.

The group is the Don Rendell Ian Carr Quintet, but it is universally credited not to a distinct group, but under the individual leaders, such that it comes up under their individual discographies: Don Rendell - MusicBrainz Ian Carr - MusicBrainz

There is a group allocated to them on Musicbrainz, but their key releases don’t appear under this. Furthermore it’s so sparse that it just seems to be a placeholder added for compilations: The Don Rendell & Ian Carr Quintet - MusicBrainz

Now, I’m pretty sure this is completely wrong. The group has distinct members, which did change, and on every release, they were credited as a group, with members, which all had a part in writing the tunes.

Could we please clarify style in this case? Is there anything key that i am missing, which would mean that the above discographies are actually correct? I can see an argument for jazz in particular, where we might group discographies by the leader rather than the nominal group they are leading, but I don’t see anything about this in the documentation. Nonetheless, as this is a case where the LPs are credited to two leaders, i don’t think such a distinction would apply as they are equally billed.

Furthermore, their first two LPs are in mono but they are linked to recordings which are also appearing on stereo compilations, which is not ideal either. (Their records were all recorded in stereo, but at least the first two records were only released in mono until the recent reissue by Jazzman records circa 2019.)

Thanks in advance.


It’s a longstanding group with defined membership, so you’re correct that the releases should be attributed to the group. There’s some question about how to handle short-lived collaborations but that clearly is not the case here.

If you search for ‘eponymous’ in forum threads, you’ll find some discussion around these questions. However, as you note, that doesn’t apply to this particular case.


OK, makes sense. Thanks for that.

I have now entered edits to fix this. Additional edits mentioned in the edit note to all these edits with regards to fixing the name + group members etc of the group proper: