Ahh, I did not see this, I will look again.
Agree. I mentioned this on an edit you commented on, where there is a missing piece between recording and release. I see how you are addressing it though now.
So you prefer a mastering company to be entered as a label, and the relationship applied as mastering by label? I did not consider that one much as a mastering company does a small portion of the job, depending obviously though on what exactly is being called “mastering”.
I checked the release I am working on, and there is not an option for a label relationship to mastering.
Here is specifically what I am working with:
Tracks 1-6 Mastered by Calyx Mastering
Tracks 7 and 8 were mastered by Clay Jones at Pete’s Room, Oxford, MS.
Tracks 7-8 are easy enough, there is an artist + place. But for Calyx Mastering, it is unclear. This is not really an artist, and not really a place either. As it is a company, the actual “artist” could be one or many. As it relates to a place, it is also not specific to a place, as Calyx Mastering could do said mastering at its own facility, at another facility or even in the home of one of its owners or employees.
Do you prefer Calyx Mastering to be entered as an artist, as I believe you intended to suggest? I am just clarifying, and giving you a specific example so you know my facts as well. I can see artist working, in the same sense that an artist can be a person or group. I also do not see where you would like such an annotation on tracks, could you specify exactly which entry field you want used?