• Registered: 2009-11-14

Topic: Band credits vs. individual credits

I'm going to add and correct the relationships on Trespass by Genesis and I was wondering about how to best reconcile some of the credits.

MB:  http://musicbrainz.org/release/f0e2a5a8 … 444e7.html
Album cover:  http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=1332937
Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trespass_%28album%29

On the album cover I've got "All titles composed, arranged and performed by Genesis".  Someone has added "Composed by" relationships for 4 of the 5 contemporary band members at the release level.  They've left off the drummer, John Mayhew, who was only with the band for this album.  Wiki agrees with this, but doesn't cite a reason.  I'm wondering how to correct all this as far as the writing credits are concerned. 

1) My first inclination is to delete the release level "Composed" AR's and add "Written by" track level AR's for Genesis.  This would, in my opinion, preserve artist intent. 

2) I could simply change the "Composed" AR's to "Wrote" AR's. 

3) I could delete the "Composed" AR's and add "Wrote" AR's for the band members at the track level

4) If I choose 2 or 3, I could add John Mayhew or leave him off.

Personally, I think option 1 is the best course.  Especially in light of the discussion I started on the mailing list about Lennon/McCartney songs where the consensus was that we should credit both even on songs where it was known that only one of them had actually written the whole song without any help from the other.

"I say we invite opportunity inside for a nice cup of tea, then hit her on the head and steal her purse." - Kevyn Andreyasn
- Schlock Mercenary by Howard Tayler
  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

We should reflect the release and written by band is more in the same spirit IMO too.
No band member, and no compose as they don't precise lyrics/music on the release.
):

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website

  • From: Singapore
  • Registered: 2007-02-13

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

Track level is correct, and crediting to Genesis indeed reflects artist intent better.

But why change to "written"? You yourself say that on the release it says "all titles composed", so I don't see a reason to use "written"? Written is a more generic credit and we always choose a more specific credit if the information is known.

voiceinsideyou's Website

  • Registered: 2009-11-14

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

All the songs have lyrics.  So their "composed" matches our "written".

"I say we invite opportunity inside for a nice cup of tea, then hit her on the head and steal her purse." - Kevyn Andreyasn
- Schlock Mercenary by Howard Tayler
  • From: Singapore
  • Registered: 2007-02-13

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

I still disagree. If they all have lyrics then the ARs should be added both for "composed" AND "wrote the lyrics for". I repeat: more specific credits should always be added rather than less specific; not rolled up into general credits - that's part of why we add the credits at track level. It's a completely analogous argument that applies to "fuzzy" release level credits - written credits do not imply "did both". They imply that they may have done one or the other, or perhaps both, or perhaps there is no music or is no lyrics on the track. It's imprecise and should be avoided if possible.

The written AR was added recently only to handle the case where tracks are not specific about the roles of artists, and perhaps does not split between composition and lyrics writing (common in electronic music & hip hop, for example). It was not added in order to have some kind of super credit that implies both. If you add a writing credit, I cannot assume that Genesis both composed and wrote lyrics. If this is what you want to convey, add more specific credits for each sub-type of music writing.

voiceinsideyou's Website

6 Reply by Billy Yank (edited by Billy Yank 2011-04-24 14:05:48)

  • Registered: 2009-11-14

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

I see your point but it just became moot.

From the mailing list:

ASCAP lists the following for each song:

Writers:
   BANKS ANTHONY GEORGE
   GABRIEL PETER BRIAN
   PHILLIPS ANTHONY EDWIN
   RUTHERFORD MICHAEL

John Mayhew is absent from this list. I would also choose #3 (it's how I've
dealt with this case before for similarly credited releases).

Michael

"I say we invite opportunity inside for a nice cup of tea, then hit her on the head and steal her purse." - Kevyn Andreyasn
- Schlock Mercenary by Howard Tayler
  • Registered: 2010-02-20

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

Hmm, maybe somebody can help me: What should I do now exactly if on a release the credit is "Band X wrote all songs". Should I add "composed" / "lyrics by" for every member of the band? I mean, it could be that additional members join the band after the release, so using the band would be wrong...

  • From: Singapore
  • Registered: 2007-02-13

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

Personally I've always retained the information the way it's credited (so add AR to band); however you'll probably find this makes it inconsistent with ASCAP or "official" songwriting/composition credits (if American) which will undoubtedly be to the original members' legal names. I've always figured this is a worthwhile tradeoff for artist intent - which could be to credit the band as a group rather than nitpick and ensure individuals of the band are only contributed to the songs they actively had creative input on.

Every credit to a group needs to be interpreted with respect to the time the credit was made; so crediting the band is not /wrong/. It's no different to having an album being a "Black Sabbath" album even though the groups members might be completely different on their last album to their first; it doesn't make them any less a Black Sabbath album.

voiceinsideyou's Website

  • Registered: 2010-02-20

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

Thanks for the answer! Hmm, I understand bands don't want to nitpick who was exactly responsible for what (this would just create conflicts), but database-wise I think it is a great advantage to credit the individual members... otherwise everything clutters at the band page, and you are surprised when you go to the members "relationships" pages and see that they didn't write/compose anything!

I don't think we should stick to the cover if we have further proof... in my example, the song was credited "written by A and B", but in an interview A stated that the lyrics are completely from "B", while composition is A and B.

  • From: Singapore
  • Registered: 2007-02-13

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

I see both sides of the argument here, but have never resolved my internal conflict on the issue :)

voiceinsideyou's Website

  • Registered: 2010-02-20

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

Argh, it is really a difficult issue... it's another day, and I start to think different again... maybe it is wrong for a correct database to attribute "composition" or "lyrics" to all band members, just because they are listed like this in the ISWC database... I mean, it is highly unprobable that all members wrote the lyrics for every song...

12 Reply by jesus2099 (edited by jesus2099 2012-01-28 11:08:21)

  • From: here
  • Registered: 2006-12-19

Re: Band credits vs. individual credits

As voiceinsideyou, I think it makes more sense to not change the artist given credits in MB.
It’s like they want to keep a band spirit, not giving one or the other member bigger spotlight.
I think MB purpose is to keep this kind of artist intent and not to transform/alter information.
By guessing we are adding potential mistakes and the feeling for reader that those are checked verified and correct, faithful, etc. where they are no more.

Now royalties managers job is to distribute money to copyright owners, and for this purpose they explode the band into what member legal names at this time of band history and displays each one of them did write lyrics and music (obviously incorrect, artisticly speaking).
And I don’t think MB’s purpose is the same as them, this is why we don’t need to do this and we usually keep things as credited (performance names, etc.).
It’s hopefully that we don’t need do make this approximation as we know that all members did actually not write the credits and music, but by exploding band members, this is what we would say (even if we know it’s probably wrong).

hrglgrmpf, in case of interviews where we learn from them, who wrote the works, there I think we can/should take those credits (unlike what’s credited on release) but with an annotation explaining why it differs from release and citing our sources.

What I mean is that we should prefer things coming from artist intent (as we want musical/artistry meta data) and not from the royalties managers (this is except if the first kind is just misprint-typo-mistakes of course).

(*) If you readers agree on that, I wouldn’t mind a little support on my Inlay : « WORDS & MUSIC : COMING SOON » edits based on my release scanned inlay (no detailed credits anywhere else)
I’m leaving a link to this thread in main edit discussion.
A vote helper in case you need it.

☞ Musicbrainz forums enhancer (LA TÉLÉ FAIT GROSSIR ET NUIT À L’ÉVEIL DU CERVEAU)
☞ other cross-browser OMG MB scripts for editors and voters (♪ jesus2099)

jesus2099's Website