I have the B-sides in part 2, though Japanese Dream is included in part 1.
Part 1 is the 'heavy' stuff, while the rest is relegated to part 2. Coincidence determined that each part has 12 tracks.
Part 3 is comprised of the remixes.
Part 1: Kiss Torture Dream WCIBY Snakepit Hey you AIW Hot Cockatoos Icing S&S Fight
In part 2 I inserted bsides after their single and TTS last. I didn't move any songs, if that makes sense.
Messing with track order, a bold choice. As an old rocker, I'm pretty staunchly in the camp of "listen to the entire album in the order arranged by the artist." My thinking is that, especially with a band that is doesn't pander to labels, audiences, or producers, TC/RS intended it as a whole work with flow. Mess with order and the universe may cave in.
Ha, agreed. I read somewhere, I believe about a TOOL record, that to some artists, changing the running order of an album is an insult to the artist, changing their art. It was presented to you in a certain order for a reason, so changing that is akin to changing a chord, note, lyric, arrangement in a song!
If you have a lead on Brisbane 21 August 1992 - CT version, for the love of Bob, let me know. Please!
Messing with track order, a bold choice. As an old rocker, I'm pretty staunchly in the camp of "listen to the entire album in the order arranged by the artist." My thinking is that, especially with a band that is doesn't pander to labels, audiences, or producers, TC/RS intended it as a whole work with flow. Mess with order and the universe may cave in.
Ha, agreed. I read somewhere, I believe about a TOOL record, that to some artists, changing the running order of an album is an insult to the artist, changing their art. It was presented to you in a certain order for a reason, so changing that is akin to changing a chord, note, lyric, arrangement in a song!
Also, while they are less frequent nowadays (they were more frequent in the 70s in particular), there are concept albums where the songs really flow into one another lyrically like chapters in a book, developing a narrative. The order of the songs is even more essential there.
Holding up a 70's prog-rock album as an example is hardly a standard, that era of music was firmly rejected by RS, it is the reason punk took off. Has RS ever cross-faded two songs?
Had RS sequenced the tracks to fade into one another there'd be a case for preserving the running order.
Given that the band submitted songs too it seems very unlikely that a concept or overriding theme was contemplated.
KM is not The Wall and I think your argument doesn't bear up to scrutiny.
Your other post regarding viewing art as the artist intended is less convincing. RS wrote pop songs - for daytime radio and teenagers.
Show me a Led Zeppelin single?
If you want your audience to listen to your records in a linear manner you'll have to remove track indexes and chapter marks for red book readers and cut your vinyl without gaps. That is a certainty. Though, I very much doubt you do. Further, if you sell your music online, are you selling individual tracks or forcing your audience to buy 1 50 minute sequence? I expect not.
Do you visit The Louvre when you want to see the Mona Lisa, or do you boot up your iPad? 🤫
It would be so perfect If you would just fall out the window
Holding up a 70's prog-rock album as an example is hardly a standard, that era of music was firmly rejected by RS, it is the reason punk took off. Has RS ever cross-faded two songs?
Had RS sequenced the tracks to fade into one another there'd be a case for preserving the running order.
Given that the band submitted songs too it seems very unlikely that a concept or overriding theme was contemplated.
KM is not The Wall and I think your argument doesn't bear up to scrutiny.
Your other post regarding viewing art as the artist intended is less convincing. RS wrote pop songs - for daytime radio and teenagers.
Show me a Led Zeppelin single?
If you want your audience to listen to your records in a linear manner you'll have to remove track indexes and chapter marks for red book readers and cut your vinyl without gaps. That is a certainty. Though, I very much doubt you do. Further, if you sell your music online, are you selling individual tracks or forcing your audience to buy 1 50 minute sequence? I expect not.
Do you visit The Louvre when you want to see the Mona Lisa, or do you boot up your iPad? 🤫
Just an example, the choice of opening and closing song is always critical in every Cure album.
Also, there are clear cases where you can see a thematic flow, as well as musical, between juxtaposed songs (e.g. Prayers For Rain > The Same Deep Water As You).
Anyway, you're free to slice and dice as you wish :-)
I think this thread explains the sort of thing that led to the invention of the program button on CD players & the playlist function(s) on media players.
RS is on record regarding The Kiss. No doubt. And Fight is a fine closing track. In-between them there's nothing to suggest structure beyond the necessary restriction imposed by the media and his desire to have ups and downs on each side of vinyl.
The exclusion of Hey You, which I would argue is the title track (though not the album's centerpiece), nixes the concept of uninterrupted sequence with a narrative.
It would be so perfect If you would just fall out the window
I think this thread explains the sort of thing that led to the invention of the program button on CD players & the playlist function(s) on media players.
Messing with track order, a bold choice. As an old rocker, I'm pretty staunchly in the camp of "listen to the entire album in the order arranged by the artist." My thinking is that, especially with a band that is doesn't pander to labels, audiences, or producers, TC/RS intended it as a whole work with flow. Mess with order and the universe may cave in.
Ha, agreed. I read somewhere, I believe about a TOOL record, that to some artists, changing the running order of an album is an insult to the artist, changing their art. It was presented to you in a certain order for a reason, so changing that is akin to changing a chord, note, lyric, arrangement in a song!
Yeah, the only times I feel like this wouldn't be true is with artists/acts who are completely manufactured and don't GAS.
Ha, agreed. I read somewhere, I believe about a TOOL record, that to some artists, changing the running order of an album is an insult to the artist, changing their art. It was presented to you in a certain order for a reason, so changing that is akin to changing a chord, note, lyric, arrangement in a song!
Also, while they are less frequent nowadays (they were more frequent in the 70s in particular), there are concept albums where the songs really flow into one another lyrically like chapters in a book, developing a narrative. The order of the songs is even more essential there.
My sister had this when she was a teenager. I still remember all of it and it's a hoot. When I think of concept albums, that's the first thing that always pops into my head (unfortunately).
I think this thread explains the sort of thing that led to the invention of the program button on CD players & the playlist function(s) on media players.
I always wished CD players had a function where you could exclude a number of tracks from the play order, rather than programming those tracks out -it was only ever one or two tracks for me so programming 8/10 tracks in seemed like a lot of work when a function should have been available to exclude / auto-skip tracks.
I was and still am, way ahead of my time, and an innovator…
If you have a lead on Brisbane 21 August 1992 - CT version, for the love of Bob, let me know. Please!
Yes they've cross faded songs, the magnificent Faith album does it through out.
Well spotted. Side Two is merged. Side One appears so though I propose that more accurate placement of chapter markers sorts that (for the Deluxe Edition). My notes on Side One show I did this previously.
It would be so perfect If you would just fall out the window