Misc roles for labels (STYLE-1891)


We have a “miscellaneous role” relationship for artists, allowing us to indicate what a person or band did when it’s not really a thing we expect a relationship to be added for. For example: this release has an “audio reproduction consultant”, a “production supervised by” and an “assistant to Joseph Byrd”.

There’s one problem: some people have started using this for things that are not people, not really groups either, and where adding them as “artist” seems to be kind of… pushing it. For example, Millenium by Backstreet Boys has some reasonably sensible choices (a “stylist”, an entry for “hair and make-up”)… and then has “artists” Armani, Gucci and Prada providing “wardrobe”. The ticket asks for those to be entered (if they are to be entered) as labels instead, since they are large organizations that match what we use “label” for a lot better.

Basically, my doubt here is: is this data we want to store to the point where it would make sense to have Armani as a “label”, or should we just tell users not to do this at all? I think there’s probably a fair point that if we support this for individual people it might make sense to do the same for companies, but maybe the community thinks we should just not allow this at all as a relationship, so I’d like to make sure :slight_smile:


I think “label” is already a slightly confusing concept for some, so I am wary of overloading it further.


If we have ‘miscellaneous’ for artists, I’m sure it would be useful for labels*? If people are hacking their way around restrictions then I don’t see the harm in letting them enter that data in at least a ‘more’ correct way.

*esp since ‘label’ in MB basically means ‘an organisation’

1 Like

I added the relationship to both releases and recordings, but I also added a guideline note:

Before adding a new company as a label only to use it for a miscellaneous role, consider whether it makes sense to store this information in MusicBrainz. While there is no clear limit of what belongs and what does not, it might be unnecessary to add a company that is credited for something like, say, “financial advice”.

Hopefully that’ll avoid the weirder uses, while still proving useful :slight_smile:

1 Like