Author Topic: specify what defines an Artist  (Read 1198 times)

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3580
  • MB Version: 3.4.7573 P
Everybody seems to have missed this part in the OP:

This would fix problems of having to have special work-arounds for same-named artists

I currently use similar (and in some cases exactly the same) methods for dealing with same-named Artists and Album Artists that have various iterations.

This request was only for same-named Artists eg.
The Angels - American girl group from the sixties
The Angels - Australian pub rock/ hard rock band
The Angels - South African vocal group from the 80's
etc
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

hiccup

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4237
Everybody seems to have missed this part in the OP:

This would fix problems of having to have special work-arounds for same-named artists

I don't think it was missed. It was commented on that it would probably not be realistic to expect that such a solution would be less complicated and easier to maintain compared to using a custom tag for the purpose.

Suppose it would be something like your mock-up:
Artist name, MusicBrainz artist id, and Country define an artist.
That would work if all tracks of your 'The Angels' example have all these tags populated exactly the same.
But realistically, there will be tracks that are not matched at MB and won't get an MB ID automatically.
Then MusicBee will split up that same artist as two different artists.
Now suppose one or more tracks don't have the Country tag populated. Or perhaps just written differently.
Now MusicBee will again split the same artist into different ones.

So using your three 'The Angels' artists as an example, you could now easily end up with MusicBee showing some 10 or more 'The Angels' artists.
It would be a lot of work to maintain and correct that.

And even for a unique artist in your library it would be a hassle. As soon as you have one of his tracks tagged with either a country or a MB ID, you will be forced to check all of that artist's tracks and make them all uniform.

So unless I am missing something in how you imagine this working, I don't believe it would be either useful, nor easier to use compared to just having a single custom tag, that you only have to maintain for your duplicate artist name artists.

But, in the future, with technology and databases progressing, this might perhaps be more realistic some day.

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3580
  • MB Version: 3.4.7573 P
Suppose it would be something like your mock-up:
Artist name, MusicBrainz artist id, and Country define an artist.
That would work if all tracks of your 'The Angels' example have all these tags populated exactly the same.
But realistically, there will be tracks that are not matched at MB and won't get an MB ID automatically.
Then MusicBee will split up that same artist as two different artists.
Now suppose one or more tracks don't have the Country tag populated. Or perhaps just written differently.
Now MusicBee will again split the same artist into different ones.

Have you never used the 'the following fields define an album:" interface?
The tags in the drop-downs are only tags that you have locally.
So, yes all the matching tags would be populated the same.
I'm not suggesting MusicBee is querying and populating the MusicBrainz ID tag itself.

Just like if you're using the Album grouping, you have to make sure your files are tagged correctly or you will end up with orphan files not grouped to the desired album.
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

hiccup

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4237
Have you never used the 'the following fields define an album:" interface?

Of course I have.

Quote
The tags in the drop-downs are only tags that you have locally.
So, yes all the matching tags would be populated the same.
I'm not suggesting MusicBee is querying and populating the MusicBrainz ID tag itself.

Your mock-up shows a MusicBrainz Artist Id. I am assuming that's on purpose? (it would be a likely candidate for this, so I would agree on using this)
That tag contains some seemingly random 32 character alphanumerical code, which you will not have entered manually, but you will somehow have retrieved it from MusicBrainz' database.

Not all songs for all artists are on MusicBrainz. So not all songs from an artist will automatically get that tag populated, so then MusicBee will see them as different artists.
So it will be a lot of manual work to fix that.
And to repeat myself, this goes for all your artists, not only for the ones that have identical named colleagues.

But even forgetting about possibly using MusicBrainz' artist id, if the content of even just one of these defining tags for only one of the artist's songs changes, you'll have to make sure all songs from that artist get rectified and matching.


So, instead of the single custom tag solution, where you only have to worry about the custom tag for only your same-named artists being in line, your proposal will affect your whole music library and all of it's files, and you'll now need to make sure they are all in order, and that they are kept in order.

Are you not worried about that?
Last Edit: January 15, 2020, 11:37:39 AM by hiccup

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3580
  • MB Version: 3.4.7573 P
Your mock-up shows a MusicBrainz Artist Id. And I am assuming that's on purpose?
That is not a tag for which you have entered the content manually, but you will somehow have retrieved it from MusicBrainz' database.

Not all songs for all artists are on MusicBrainz. So not all songs from an artist will automatically get that tag populated, so then MusicBee will see them as different artists.
Of course the MusicBrainz Artist Id. was on purpose.
And that's what I'm talking about musicbrainz_artistid not musicbrainz_recordingid or musicbrainz_trackid.

In all the time I have used MusicBrainz Picard, I've only had one instance where an Artist wasn't in the database.
That was an obscure trance artist that only ever had one release, and I fixed that.

But even forgetting about possibly using MusicBrainz' artist id, if the content of even just one of these defining tags for only one of the artist's songs changes, you'll have to make sure all songs from that artist get rectified and matching.

Are you not worried about that?

No more than I am about maintaining all my other tags!  :o
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

hiccup

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4237
In all the time I have used MusicBrainz Picard, I've only had one instance where an Artist wasn't in the database.

Then wouldn't just using MusicBrainz' Artist Id be enough to define and separate your same-named artists?

Bee-liever

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3580
  • MB Version: 3.4.7573 P
Then wouldn't just using MusicBrainz' Artist Id be enough to define and separate your same-named artists?

But then they won't show as separate artists if I just use <Artist> in MusicBee.
That's the whole point of this thread.
MusicBee and my library - Making bee-utiful music together

hiccup

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4237
If I understand how this would work, it would not add any benefit in relation to things such as searching, filtering, playlists, or anything like that, correct?
So it's only purpose would be to get songs from different artists with an identical artist name sorted or grouped together and not get displayed mingled up?

Wouldn't you be able to achieve that by using a virtual tag that you could integrate in your sorting/grouping rules?

E.g. something like this:

Artist (V) = <Artist>{contrast: 0}<musicbrainz_artistid>


edit:
The contrast thingy is obviously so that that tag could also be used to be displayed nicely.
Last Edit: January 18, 2020, 08:22:00 AM by hiccup