Parts of a recording have different arrangers

continuing from Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread - #1363 by hpwg

Hi there, need help with adding correct work(s) to this live recording:
Recording “The Clearing” by Metropole Orkest and Snarky Puppy - MusicBrainz linked to one work.
It actually consists of two parts separated by applause where the 2nd part is a much shorter and more rocking reprise (da capo) of the 1st part.
I would call the reprise a partly arrangement of the original composition. So how to???
In addition the linked video is split in 2 chapters on the accompanying DVD, transparently overlaying applause and start of the reprise with complete credits in the 2nd.
tia

In fact it is a medley(?) from the original composition and (after applause) the reprise as edit (or partly or both) without any separation on the CD while for the DVD it is split by chapters.
How could this be represented in MB?
Annotation only?

It would have been better if the parts had been separated like on the DVD - unfortunately it’s not and the content of the CD track can be best described as “The Clearing / The Clearing (reprise)”

Both parts (not classical) have different arrangement credits - therefore the arrangers should be credited for arranging recordings. This is not possible for the combined parts, but it could be “a compilation of” two separate recordings with their arrangers. This isn’t ideal, but it’s the best I can think of.

It’s not a medley - they were played one after the other.
It’s not a work arrangement - no separate ISWC (arrangers are not named at all) and I would not use it for Jazz (with few exceptions).

The combined recording is still a “live recording of” the work and I wouldn’t use this relationship twice (although it would be correct). Arrangement could be by Michael League and Jules Buckley, because of the overall credit for the album (exception only for #5).

1 Like

Couldn’t all the arrangers just be credited jointly to that recording? It’s not quite as fine-grained as it could be, but it would be entirely accurate.

1 Like

This would also be possible.
However, I would have “compiled in” two recordings, because they would also have videos (the DVD with 2 chapters).

Should track and recording title be changed then, or just in disamb?
Annotation with durations for Clearing, applause, reprise?
Imo the work title should be left as is.
The video has to be split acc. to chapters with appropriate running times, I think, and both linked to the above recording.

1 Like

For the recording either this or “The Clearing” with disambiguation (including reprise).
And I would suggest two new recordings “The Clearing” and “The Clearing (reprise)” (linked with the “compilation” relationship) and those linked to the videos.
But the videos could also both be linked to the combined recording. It’s the arrangers who can’t be linked to the combined recording.

For the track title I would keep “The Clearing” as printed.

Anything you think is useful.

I think you have two original recordings with two works.

The Clearing and The Clearing Reprise.
You will link The Clearing to its work The Clearing.
The Clearing Reprise to its work The Clearing Reprise.

Then a third, the recording that includes both The Clearing and it’s reprise will become a new recording since it is now a medley, linked to both The Clearing and The Clearing reprise works in it’s respective sequence since you can link two or more works in one recording.

Arranger is a work-artist relationship, isn’t it? You credit arranger in works not on the recordings.

It can be either a work-artist or a recording-artist arrangement. It’s not uncommon in jazz in particular to find “arranged by” credits that really only apply to a specific performance.

2 Likes

Besides the problem with different arrangers for the reprise there is something else that makes it even more complex.
Checking the DVD I realized that chapter 7 (with the reprise) is just entitled ‘Outro’ in the menu.
A disambiguation for the video recording like ‘including applause, The Clearing reprise and transparently overlayed credits’ or similar should be added, I think.

1 Like

I don’t think applause and overlaid credits are necessary, but The Clearing reprise is probably helpful.

1 Like

Do you mean annotation rather than disambiguation? It seems a bit wordy for a disambiguation but fine for an annotation.

2 Likes