MusicBrainz Forums — Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

Re: Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

null@example.com (Hawke) — Thu, 31 May 2012 17:41:47 +0000

My 2¢: In general, if there are multiple recordings of a particular arrangement then a new work should be created with appropriate arranger ARs. If an arrangement was recorded only once, it should be on the recording.

Re: Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

null@example.com (HibiscusKazeneko) — Thu, 31 May 2012 04:45:53 +0000

salutaurs wrote:

thanx! ;)
Just as I thought. But it should be written in guidelines.

I think it might already be. I remember someone pointed me to some related links when I made this mistake during my greenhorn days.

Re: Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

null@example.com (salutaurs) — Fri, 04 May 2012 20:13:41 +0000

thanx! ;)

Just as I thought. But it should be written in guidelines.

Re: Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

null@example.com (reosarevok) — Fri, 04 May 2012 14:39:44 +0000

In some cases, especially in classical and for versions of traditional music, arrangements are seen as their own works. Also, arrangers are sometimes credited at work level in official work databases. That being said, for most popular music, it makes sense to keep that stuff on recordings.

Arrangement for Work Vs. Arrangement for Recording

null@example.com (salutaurs) — Fri, 04 May 2012 11:09:37 +0000

What is the difference between:
Artist arranged Recording
Recording was arranged by Artist?

Is there any reason for keeping both?
Which one should I prefer?
If I use this AR in work level, is there any use of it in Recording level for recordings that is linked to this arranged Work?

Anyway if this AR is used for Work then some of the recordings can't be linked with it. For example if studio version is arranged then not always live recording will be. Like these recordings should belong to separate works, if this AR is used in Work level:
Jaded
Jaded