[place] (special purpose artist)

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f7cf7df0c70> #<Tag:0x00007f7cf7df0ba8>

I think we should have a special purpose artist for recordings of places, [place]. Like in the way that [nature sounds] are recordings of nature, [place] would be for recordings of identified places or areas, often man-made.

Currently these are put under [unknown], and I feel that is incorrect given that [unknown] implies it is possibly knowable at a later date. Recordings credited to locations don’t seem like any potential performer could be knowable and should be moved to a different artist.

1 Like

Since you are seeking to distinguishing this from [nature sounds], the purpose is to credit ambient sounds in a built environment as opposed to an ecological environment, right? For sounds like chatter, traffic noises, etc.? If that’s the case, then I would say that [no artist] or (in some cases) [dialogue] would be more appropriate than [unknown].

Regardless of what artist entity is credited, certainly this is a case where the “recorded at” and “recorded in” relationships are useful.