What is the right way to proceed?
The artist on the backcover is “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters”
Should I enter the Artist in MusicBrainz as “Curtis Hoback” and Artist as credited to “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” or both Artist in MusicBrainz and Artist as credited using “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters”?
Or using both as standalone Artist in MusicBrainz like “Curtis Hoback” and “The Stardusters”, even if “The Stardusters” never performed alone?
This is only an example.
What is the right way to proceed?
Poll: who uses "Split into separate artists"?
How much did they perform together?
If they e.g. made 2 or more albums or even 2 singles that were not released in the same year then I wouldn’t consider them a short term collaboration and therefore they should definitely have their own artist entity.
If they are a short term collaboration then check if they have external links (e.g. I found a discogs page, but it doesn’t have lots of info). What would then also be interesting is if they have explicitely credited members besides Curtis Hoback. If not it might be best to just credit them as an alias of Curtis Hoback. If other members are known they could be entered as members of The Stardusters.
PS: I think my text above is a bit confusing, maybe this is better:
- “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” (1 group entity) if they have worked together for more than one project or over a span of 2 or more years, with Curtis Hoback and other members added as members if known.
- “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” (1 group entity) if they have only collaborated one time, but have an online presence, with Curtis Hoback and other known members as collaborators.
- “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” (1 person entity) if it’s a solo project of Curtis Hoback (meaning no other members, but maybe supporting artists). Linked to Curtis Hoback with a performs as/legal name relationship.
- “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” (alias of Curtis Hoback) if it’s a solo project, but doesn’t seem to be considered a separate project by the artist, but rather an alias.
- “Curtis Hoback" & "The Stardusters” (2 entities) if some of the following is true: Members of “The Stardusters” are known; they have external links as a group separate from “Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters” or they have performed on their own, without Curtis Hoback.
I am referring to this websites Hobock, Curtis or Curtis Hobock, Curtis Hoback, Curtis Hobeck
for these kind of artists (late 50th or early 60th) there is only limited information about them and for the accompanying group usually nothing.
Most of the time only the artist name is named on a tracklist and on other tracklists the artist name inclusive his accompanying group is named with the same song. Usually the name of the group members are not known and the group never performs alone.
On Discogs there are three Curtis Hob…
Curtis Hobock, Curtis Hoback and Curtis Hoback & The Stardusters. And if you take a look at the tracklist of the CD Curtis Hobock – Hey Everybody! you see that all songs which are mentioned there are songs that are named as songs from the other two artist too. So in this case I would prefer to add in every case 1 person entity
the artist as Curtis Hobock and Curtis Hoback & His Stardusters as Artist credit
or in other case
the artist as Curtis Hobock and Curtis Hobeck And The Kool Cats as Artist credit
This way to indicate “variations” in an artist’s name is the easiest way for me to use, but maybe I’m wrong.
To be honest: If the information is insufficient to make a really informed decision you can pretty much go by your gut feeling, but if ever more information comes to light don’t be mad if someone changes things up.
There doesn’t seem to be any consistent usage of what is a “Curtis Hobock” recording vs a “Curtis Hobock & the Stardusters” recording. In a case like this I think a single artist entry (with ACs as needed) makes sense.