Using "credited as" with Japanese script credits for instrument / engineer?


Hi guys,

Fairly simple question. Entering guitar/bass credits for a recording. The credits in the liner notes are in Japanese but they just translate to “guitar” and “bass” for instruments. Is it appropriate to put the original printed credits (so ギター and ベース) in the credited as field in the relationship editor to represent that? Is that what that field is for?



If it’s just saying they performed a certain instrument in a different language then I wouldn’t use the credited as field. This field is more useful for things like a variant of an instrument that’s not in MusicBrainz, but when we do have the parent instrument. Or if it’s an instrument with its own name like many organs or a Stradivarius.


That’s good to know. I was struggling to find any concrete info on what that field was actually for. Thank you!


It wouldn’t be wrong to select the name, but yeah, I also wouldn’t. My main use for that has been stuff like:

  • “organ [specific organ]”: we can link the church, but if the church has many organs there’s no other way to indicate it
  • instruments we don’t have yet (but in those cases, if the instrument is significantly different, do add an INST ticket on Jira too!)
  • a specific model: “electric guitar [Fender Stratocaster somethingorother]”
  • some weird thing that’s not usually seen as an instrument, but is still credited as such: “other [banana munching]”.


I do this from time to time for non‐english credits.
Here it’s English / Katakana but as ギター could both mean Guitars or Guitar, IMO you can go ahead.

I actually already did it for a band that released two simultaneous albums, one with made‐up‐fashionably‐old‐style‐like c/w Latin English instrument names and the other with plain rock‐style katakana English instrument names.

In addition to use it for missing instruments, I can use it to make sure I credit vocal (without s) or vocals, things like that.

FWIW let me detail what I do. I usually use those credirted as when in doubt and when I want or when I think it is good to retain the verbatim visible for reference.
When I see vocal (usually means lead vocal alone but could mean + backing vocals as well) I may use « lead vocals credited as vocal » or « other vocals credited as vocal » when not sure.
And when I see vocals (usually means lead + backing but could mean otherwise) I generally use « other vocals credited as vocals ».
As we don’t have a plain vocals selection (although we do have a plain instruments).

IMO it’s always rather good than bad to verbatim copy, there’s no harm when it’s in the credited as field if it’s faithful and linked to correct matching instruments.


sort of agree with @jesus2099 here, I also sometimes use “credited as” for norwegian instruments when they’re the ones used. This also for vocals.

As for vocals… oh man, that tree has gone trough SO many different changes, tweaks and editions!
in fact, some of my earlier credits entered would now be erroneous. because the names/meanings have been tweaked so much!