the internet lyrics database
en
5
Back to old website

Updated additional artists tagging system

Follow 3
Share
Add topic
Search
Ray
5
Ray | 12:29
Hey guys,

You've probably noticed the bunch of site updates for the last couple of weeks. One of the updates was on the additional artists system. So what's new:

1. Additional artists on albums

Albums now also accept additional artists. You'll find a similar functionality at the album edit forms as you know from the song edit forms. For albums that are a join project of two (or more) artist, it's not needed anymore to create new artist maps that holds the name of both artists. Now simply add the album at one artist and add the other to it. Thanks to Sierra for suggesting this option .

2. Related type "with" dropped

The "with" relation type has been dropped. It's close to (if not the same as) "and". So use "and" now. Additional artists tagged as "with" in the system have been converted to "and".

3. Related type order change

Artists related as "and", "duet" and "vs" will be presented before artists related as "feat.". "feat." is a guest appearance, while the other relation types mean a joint project that involves a co-production or co-writing. This means that you can be more creative with creating the artist part of a song or album. Think for example of:

- A and B feat C
- A and B feat C and D
- A vs B feat C

4. New type "remixed"

Artists can now be added as "remixed by". Often remixes will only appear in the map of the artist of the original song, since the remixed has the remix info in the song name. We want to keep that remix info in the song name, because remixes often have a name, so don't change the song name. But, to make the remix also appear nicely at the artist who remixed it, add it as "remixed by".

5. Order of additional artists

To create even more flexibility, the order of insertion of the additional artists is used in the presentation, before it was sorted by name. Of course, this applies on artists within the same related type, because the first sorting (as mentioned earlier) is done by relation type.


Ray
13 comments
MCSMeister
1
MCSMeister | 02:22
Fantastic job, Ray. Question - are other options going to be added to the additional artists for albums? I ask because some albums with more than one artist credited are not collaborations in the "and" sense (which is the only current option). Some are split albums, as in one half is by one band and one half is by another. In other words, instead of an entire album being credited to X & Y, the first half is songs by X and the latter half is songs by Y.
Ray
0
Ray | 13:45
I see two questions. First why only the "and" related type is available for albums. I have not seen other types yet on albums. If there are, let me know which ones I have to enable as well on albums.

Secondly, the half-band questions. Humm, interesting. I'm not sure yet how to deal with these situations, sounds new to me. There will always be "weird" situations that can't be handled by the system, no matter how advanced we makes the system. I'm always looking for the best of both worlds, make a system that's not too complicated, but on the other hand advanced enough to deal with 99% of the situations. Trying to get that other 1% on board will make the system at least twice as complex. I don't like complexity, so I prefer not to touch that 1%. And if you step on that other 1%, let's be creative with the tools we have.

That being said, if you think the half-band handling is worth to look at, no problem, let's take a look at it. What would be needed in terms of forms to be able to handle these half-bands?
Rubbo81
0
Rubbo81 | 14:28
But I think it will be easier in a case when an album is half of an artist and half of another one (never heard an album like this in my whole life) to create in the first artist the album with only the song of that artist and same for the second, instead of having a specific strange mechanism for this cases
Ray
0
Ray | 14:40
That sounds like a good workaround Pietro
MCSMeister
0
MCSMeister | 20:00
The "half-band" situations are hardly new or weird - they're called "split albums" and have been around for some time. Perhaps you've heard of them under this name. I can give you some examples if you'd like:

Deer Leap & The World Is A Beautiful Place & I Am No Longer Afraid To Die ‎– Are Here To Help You

Crucial Unit & Municipal Waste - Crucial Unit / Municipal Waste

In other words, the albums are credited as "and" technically, but not in the way that LSI puts it. LSI says the "and" credit applies when two artists are credited equally throughout an entire album, such as here, where every song is credited equally to both Chris Brown and Tyga. However, with split albums, it's split half and half - one artist does half of the album and another artist does the other half.

The workaround Pietro suggested I had already begun doing before this was introduced, but I feel like this should be implemented regardless now that we have the option to add additional artists to albums.
Ray
2
Ray | 12:49
Interesting This has to go to the to do list for a future update. It's a too complex update for the moment.
Datagutten
0
Datagutten | 09:55
I got another similar case:
Jaa9 and OnklP was members of Dirty Oppland.
They have released some albums together as "Jaa9 & Onklp", but have also released solo albums, OnklP has also released some albums with Onklp And De Fjerne Slekningene.

Each of these names are added as separate artists, but it would be great if all songs he has participated on could be shown when viewing one of the artists.
MCSMeister
1
MCSMeister | 17:32
Question in regards to this:

To create even more flexibility, the order of insertion of the additional artists is used in the presentation, before it was sorted by name. Of course, this applies on artists within the same related type, because the first sorting (as mentioned earlier) is done by relation type.


To change order of additional artists, do we press those little up or down arrows by their name in the song edit box? Because I tried to do that, and when I hit the save button it gave me an error: "This form cannot be saved, no changes were found." Is this a glitch or am I doing something wrong?
Ray
1
Ray | 10:54
Nice catch! That is ... correction ... "was" a glitch
MCSMeister
0
MCSMeister | 23:23
Ray, as this is coming up again, do you have any plans to add "split with" as an option for additional artists on albums (instead of just "and")? You said almost a year ago that it will be in a future update, so I'm curious what the status on it is.
Ray
0
Ray | 20:56
I don't have this one planned. With future-update-list I mean a list that holds idea's that have a bad score on the "urgency versus amount of work" - scale. Meaning, they are quite some work to implement, but don't have that impact on the site that belongs this amount of work.
MCSMeister
0
MCSMeister | 21:38
I'm not sure if I agree that the impact of this doesn't belong to the amount of work involved. I come across split albums a lot, and I've been keeping a long list of them that I can't create right now due to the "split with" artist option not existing yet. I think it's quite important, personally, as split albums are more common than some people think.

I know there's some alternatives to working on split albums, as discussed earlier in this thread, but it feels odd to have to "work around" this with alternate methods instead of having a definite option to use for these cases, if that makes sense.
Ray
1
Ray | 21:19
I didn't say it is not important. It's a lack-of-time matter. This is a pretty big project, so it has to wait unfortunately. There are more imporant projects on the list .
guest
guest
POP OUT SAVE saving ...
Read more: