Release Group Secondary Type "Live & Studio" for compilations is required

MusicBrainz Style
, , , ,
1

Many compilations of widely known pop artists include his studio and live recordings, without any notion of that (live or studio) in release title and in its tracklist.
Examples:

  1. https://musicbrainz.org/release-group/7de6c17c-2243-426e-b194-eba3bd9afbfc
  2. This 10-track compilation https://musicbrainz.org/release-group/9a20d9e9-b733-3efb-8eec-388bbc49a5eb contains:
  • five live recordings from two different concerts (tracks 1, 2, 4, 8, 10);
  • two studio recordings with added (by compilers) fake audience noise (tracks 3, 6);
  • three studio recordings (tracks 5, 7, 9).

What type should be assigned to such a Release Group?
Simply “Compilation”? But that is not exact, because the releases contain also live recordings, whereas a compilation (without Secondary Type “Live”) refers to compilation of studio recordings only.
“Compilation + Live”? But that is not exact, because the releases contain also studio recordings, whereas a compilation with Secondary Type “Live” refers to compilation of live recordings only.
So, it would be useful to introduce the Secondary Type of RG “Live & Studio” for this kind of releases.
Please visit this ticket.

1 Like
2

A compilation is a compilation, I don’t infer anything about specific tracks being live or not, unless it’s specifically a compilation of live performances (e.g. Indigo Girls’ 1200 Curfews). I would expect recordings in the database to reflect if they are live.

In the case of the fake “live” tracks, I might call that one live since they were trying to make it seem live, but of course the real status should be noted at least in the recording and maybe release annotation

1 Like
3

Related thread:

2 Likes