[x] mixer as member

[bandtoband.com] http://bandtoband.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=747 recognizes DJs as band members when the DJ-members manipulate pre-recorded audible tracks. I know it's not the most popular decision here, but we do have a few examples in the database and I don't see us turning back:

[bandtoband.com] http://bandtoband.com/index.php?Page=Search&BandId=5650
[bandtoband.com] http://bandtoband.com/index.php?Page=Search&AlbumId=19537

But what happens if a bassist misses the recording session (and therefore his opportunity to play bass on the album), but mixes the album?

In the band? Yes.
Audible contribution? Yes (if mixing counts).

The guy on the far right is one such bassist:
[bandtoband.com] http://bandtoband.com/index.php?Page=Search&AlbumId=28899

I'd say he doesn't get membership status.

Bobby Steele was the bass player in Times Square but didn't play on their record - therefore he's not a member. The fact that he mixed it doesn't change that.

His mixing this record is not, in my opinion, the same as 2 Many DJs mixing one of their records - in which case mixing is always their role in the "band". It's the equivalent of, say, Andy Wallace mixing Nevermind or George Martin mixing Sgt Pepper - and we would never consider them to be band members.

It's complicated in this instance by the fact that Steele WAS actually in the band but I'd still discount him.

Essentially I think it comes down to a division between rock/pop music and dance music (or whatever other terms you want to use). In dance music the producer/mixer often tends to be part of the "band", in rock music they don't. This particular case is rock music, so Steele isn't a member. I realise that's an arbitrary and very subjective distinction though.

I should confess that I am in no way an authority on dance music, tending to shy away from any music that doesn't contain guitars...

I agree. That said, I remain convinced that most of these mixers are making non-music - therefore are non-musicians - let alone that I think their 'contribution' doesn't merit that status.

This doesn't sound like a situation where there should be membership.

Another example -
[bandtoband.com] http://bandtoband.com/index.php?Page=Search&BandId=5961

Justin doesn't play an instrument, however, he runs (ran) a mixing board onstage with the band. He is definitely a member.

Justin is credited with playing an instrument as well as mixing on all of Out Hud's 2005 releases. But on the other two OH things I have (Street Dad and the TMU Mix-Tape), he's only credited with mixing.

Without reaching a conclusion on how I feel about this, I will point out that no one ever claimed that George Martin was a member of the Beatles or that Andy Wallace was a member of Nirvana; just as simply playing on a recording doesn't make you a band member, simply mixing it wouldn't make you one either.

Right. Our the key to our definition of membership is that you must be considered a "member" of the band. There was no point where Justin was not member of Out Hud. He started the band.

That is different that Martin or Wallace, who were never considered members of the Beatles or Nirvana.

Right.

But just to be clear on this, Bobby WAS a member of Times Square at the time of the recording (and mixing). And he mixed the recording, which we have agreed constitutes an audible contribution.

Some of you seem to be saying that because Bobby's usual role in the band was as bassist, he can't be listed here because he appeared on the recording in another role. Would you say the same thing if he had played drums instead of bass? Or only clapped his hands?

I think we acknowledge a differential between audible contributions and playing contributions. In certain contexts we (not entirely happily for me) accept that a 'mixer' is so material to the band that they are effectively playing an instrument. If, for example, a bassist did not play on an album but the sound of him dropping a teacup was audible - that would not result in him being credited as a member I think. Once we agree that there are circumstances in which audible contributions are not going to result in a credit - it's just a matter of drawing the line - which will be subjective. I would say that mixing in a rock context does not equal playing. The wholesale rejigging of 'songs' in dance music, whatever my opinion of it, has a whole different weight in tems of the overall 'music' offered at the end of the process.

I agree with misterpomp, who articulates most of what I was struggling to convey in my previous post. To (over?)simplify matters, mixing a rock record is not akin to playing an instrument, mixing a dance record is (or at least can be).

Therefore, in this particular case, Bobby Steele playing bass, drums, triangle, kazoo or whatever would give him membership, but mixing doesn't.

What if the producer is the only member of the band?

For reasons known only to my subconscious, this song started running around in my head recently:

[en.wikipedia.org] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_on_45_Medley

Everyone who played or sang on the recording was a session player. The band's only real member was Jaap Eggermont (already in the db), the producer who put it together.

Is this a band with no members?

He does appear to have created a band 'Starsound' for certain of these releases.. possibly that's a line-up. If Egermont does nothing but produce then yes, for me, it's a non-enterable band (unfortunately)

Starsound was just a name used in certain non-NL locales, if I read it correctly:

[en.wikipedia.org] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_on_45

I think that we have to recognize that some albums just are not going to fit our rules. Just as plenty of bands do not make it in because they never release music, certain albums will not make it in for one reason or another.

I have not looked at the facts, but this could be a band with no members, which is a type of entry that is unlinkable in this database. At some point we might devise a way to include such albums in our database, but let's just focus on the millions of albums that fit the current rules first.