Forum » General Discussion

Ft., Feat. or Featuring

 
  • Ft., Feat. or Featuring

    I know a lot of last.fm users have metatag OCD, so I was wondering which you normally go with when it comes to "artist feating artist".

    I usually go with feat., unless the CD's ID3 info says otherwise.

  • http://musicbrainz.org/doc/FeaturingArtistStyle


    http://musicbrainz.org/doc/PicardQt


    As preferred by last.fm.


    ( Ft. is short for "foot/feet", btw. As in 12 inches. Not "featuring".)

    ...
    • Rimzan said...
    • User
    • 21 May 2008, 18:48
    feat. is probably most common

    • ghozza said...
    • User
    • 9 Jun 2008, 08:30
    just don't use anything because feat. is not part of the title ... just use

    artist - song title

    and not

    artist - song title (feat. blah)

    if everybody would use just the songtitles we would have a lot less mess

    just put feat. blah in another id3-field (ex. remarks)

    'There is no terror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it.' -Alfred Hitchcock-
    • rok93 said...
    • User
    • 9 Jun 2008, 10:44
    Commonly CD covers says Feat. and that's what i use.
    IMO featuring is part of title, and most of users agree with that.

    if everybody would use just the songtitles we would have a lot less mess
    if everybody would use correct tags etcetc. blaf ....

    • ghozza said...
    • User
    • 9 Jun 2008, 14:06
    i believe there should be a seperate id3-field called feauturing

    whatever your argument is, featuring is not part of the song title in its purest form

    'There is no terror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it.' -Alfred Hitchcock-
  • know this is an old thread, but hey, first time posting so... problem for me is that I listen to a lot of japanese stuff and those guys are neurotic (no offense to any japanese people) about giving credit to anyone who remotely contributed. Sure that's the way it should be, but they put "feat." in the *artist* field, making my library even more messy than if the feat was in the song title field.

    Best solution would be to make more use of the "album artist" field that was added at some point to itunes.

  • feechering!

  • Rimzan said:
    feat. is probably most common

    and the best way of doing it

  • stevicus said:
    Sure that's the way it should be, but they put "feat." in the *artist* field, making my library even more messy than if the feat was in the song title field.

    So just retag them properly with MusicBrainz.

    Best solution would be to make more use of the "album artist" field that was added at some point to itunes.
    No, that's a horrible solution and not at all what %album artist% is for. If you don't want it in %title%, just put it in %featured% or whatever.

    last.fm#DIV(class=messageSig)
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 13 Aug 2008, 03:33
    feat.

  • ghozza said:
    i believe there should be a seperate id3-field called feauturing
    whatever your argument is, featuring is not part of the song title in its purest form


    Unless there are multiple version of a song with different featured artists. Missy Eliott does this a lot. (hah, I rhymed.... camelot, spamalot,pramalot,... !)



    Only christians will go to hell.
  • I always use 'feat.'

  • [spam]

    [spam]

    Edited by hjbardenhagen on 26 Dec 2010, 17:32
  • FEAT

    I Always use feat, but the problem is sometimes with remix and feat and if the song features more than 1 person!

  • Feat. with capital F

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 15 Mar 2010, 17:25
    Bilbo: My dear Bagginses and Boffins, Tooks and Brandybucks, Grubbs, Chubbs, Hornblowers, Bolgers, Bracegirdles and Proudfoots!
    Everard Proudfoot: Proudfeet!


    ft. or Feat. Even if Ft. means feet as in the measurement, it's just an abbreviation. Abbreviation police are the worst kind of grammatical justice.



    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 15 Mar 2010, 17:27
    feat.

  • I use none. I like to be the wise guy that has to make things hard so I use:

    With Special Guest Appearance
    Accompanied By
    Extra Participation From

    Either one of those work for me

    Download My Music For FREE! Packed With Weird Pictures You May Or May Not Like!

    I'm Not Dead Yet
    http://www.divshare.com/download/10427876-554

    Beat Her Heart Out
    http://www.divshare.com/download/10476706-e60
  • I simply use ft. because it's neater. I stopped using parentheses around the featured artist because:

    'Lady GaGa - Telephone ft. Beyoncé [Kaskade Radio Edit]'

    looks neater than:

    'Lady GaGa - Telephone (feat. Beyoncé) [Kaskade Radio Edit]' as most of the people on here use.

    Oh and some people put their remixes in parentheses too which IMO is a big mistake:

    'Lady GaGa - Telephone (ft. Beyoncé) (Kaskade Radio Edit)' is just plain confusing especially if the remix features another artist too!!


    Parentheses are best used only for the song title:

    'Alexandra Burke - Bury Me (6 Feet Under)'
    or
    'Aretha Franklin - (You Make Me Feel Like) A Natural Woman'

    Imagine if this happened:

    'Alexandra Burke - Bury Me (6 Feet Under) (ft. Beyoncé) (Digital Dog Club Mix)' ...that's why I do what I do!

    • sgath92 said...
    • User
    • 26 Mar 2010, 18:04
    ghozza said:
    i believe there should be a seperate id3-field called feauturing

    whatever your argument is, featuring is not part of the song title in its purest form


    I agree with your perspective, someone needs to overhaul id3 tags so that there is a "featuring" field.

    For classical they also really need a "conductor" id3 tag field as well, IMHO.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 26 Mar 2010, 21:25
    feat. (An Artist here) in the title

  • Guess I'm the only one who actually spells out Featuring.

  • feat.

  • feat. Rarely do I ever see "featuring" completely spelled out.

Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.