>Most of the time (not always) it will be exactly the same as the
>contributor who's name is displayed. But it's not used for retrieving
>that record. It's easy to see this if you tag an album with two artists
>(or two album artists) on every track in the album. The
>album.contributor column will contain just one contributor id number -
>the one that's used for sorting. The string displayed for the album
>will contain both artist names, so it's being retrieved by using the
>contributor_album table.
Ah, sorry, I understand what you meant now.
You're at least partially right, my para was partially incorrect (incomplete in
some way); SBS uses contributor_album table for role=5 if there are some rows
that exist (otherwise contributor_album table for role=1), to determine what to
display for the artist label name(s) for an album.
But if an album has been deemed a compilation, and doesn't have an album artist
tag, the contributor_album table does not have any role=5 (only a set of
primary artists - the same as the track artists). SBS still shows the album
artist as "Various Artists", which I believe is from the album.contributor
value.
An example:
An album A that has:
track 1 by X
track 2 by Y
no album artist tags
The album will be a compilation, with album.contributor = 38 (which is the
"Various Artists" contributor record). The contributor_album table only has
artist id's relating to "X" and "Y". In album context, the artist is labelled
as being by "Various Artists".
The point I was getting at was that the compilation tag doesn't influence album
artist contributor roles; but does influence the album.contributor value used
for labelling in this case.
_______________________________________________
ripping mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/ripping
