Currently you can only see what label a band is currently signed to.

What might be a good idea is having a timeline of what labels theyre signed to.

I'm personally imagining it the way it mentions previous names/incarnations of bands.
Like 2000 - 2006 Cryptic Warning
2006- Present Revocation
for example

This may be confusing as a band can be signed to one label in one country and one in another as well as distribution deals. Maybe the other countrys can be inbuilt to this?
But for a lot of bands (smaller and independent) they have one label if any.

It could be: Deicide
1990 - 2000 Roadrunner Records
2004 - 2010 Earache Records
2011 - Present Century Media Records
(Estimated the years)



It doesn't have to completely 100% i guess the same way that it is down to users to add different versions of releases to albums. This is never up to date and down to people to take initiave to add them. I.e. a japan release of an album with a bonus track.

What do you think?

it would be a lot more complicated than a japanese release. some "big bands" like Deicide have "linear" label careers, but several bands are signed to one label for their own country, they license the same albums to another for RotW, and still release splits for example on other labels...

I'm a neat freak so in principle I like the idea, but I don't think it would always be applicable. and that's without going into user misunderstandings, etc.

In that case then why not add a linear label timeline?
It would be the same as the current system of only adding one label despite the fact a band may have several labels.
Presumably (as it is now) the label chosen would be the label the band functions from its home country. I think most bands would not have a problem with this issue as it is just an extension of the current system.

It's probably something that may take a bit of time to develop and implement if it is even considered anyway.

Essentially all the information contained within this would be pulled from existing data - which labels released which albums when - but it often isn't unambiguous. For example, using another Satanic death metal band from Florida, the timeline for the first few Acheron albums goes:

1992: "Rites of the Black Mass" on Turbo Music
1992: "Rites of the Black Mass" on JL America
1992: "Alla Xul" on Gutted Records
1994: "Lex Talionis" on Lethal Records
1994: "Satanic Victory" on Lethal Records
1995: "Satanic Victory" on Metal Merchant Records
1996: "Anti-God, Anti-Christ" on Moribund Records
1996: "Anti-God, Anti-Christ" on Merciless Records
1997: "Lex Talionis" on Blackend
1998: "Rites of the Black Mass" on Metal Age Recordings
1999: "Anti-God, Anti-Christ" on Demise Records

Which of these ten labels was the band signed to? Which were licensed from the original label?

"Hail Victory" was recorded in 1992. The statement on the censored version "Satanic Victory" were written in 1993, but it was released in 1994, and the band disowned the Lethal Records version as a "rip-off version." It was released under the intended title in 1995. Did they leave Lethal Records in 1993, 94, or 95? In which of those years did they join with Metal Merchant Records, and considering it was just a one-off pressing of 1000 copies, were they really "signed to" that label? Same question with Gutted Records. Most of these albums were later re-released by other labels - was the band "signed to" every label who released an album? Every label who signed two? Who knows?

I don't think we could realistically and accurately acquire the information necessary to make a feature like this objectively correct/reliable. It would be a lot of work for little benefit. Just think of the Nunslaughter page...

maybe a button next to the current label that pops up a mini menu with all the previous labels the band released stuff on?

Fair enough but i think the feature would be suitable for a lot of bands who have a lot simpler label timelines. A lot of bands have a primary label and then additional distribution deals. The information doesn't have to be filled in if its a complicated issue like the band you mentioned. But it can be filled in for bands where the timeline is much more linear.
The releases on different labels feature already exists to take care of the issue you described.

I think a higher priority at this time is to have the option for multiple labels per band/release. After that, we'll see.

Not that it's up to me.

That would work.