Talk:The Ballasted Orchestra/tracklisting debate

Such a description as "Some music was removed from the original double LP to make it fit on a single standard CD; specifically, the track "24 Inch Cymbal" was removed, as were two minutes and 52 seconds from the final track" is not unverifiable. No secondary reference to this fact is required, just as no reference needs to be given to indicate the source of the tracklisting — the source is the primary artifact itself. It is immediately verifiable through the direct experience of the vinyl and CD versions of the album.

I'm willing to delete the qualifier "to make it fit on a single standard CD", as that is conjecture, albeit a logical one: The double vinyl runs to 1:26:56, and as a standard CD can hold up to 1:20:00, something had to be cut.

The references to Web sites that list variations in the tracklisting are a bit misleading, as they prove nothing except that these Web sites have interpreted the tracklisting in one of the two ways discussed. For every site that lists "The Artificial Pine Arch Song" as one track, another will list it as two. And again, no references are needed here because the source is the primary artifacts (the LP and the CD) themselves. Also, in the CD insert, "Music for Twin Peaks" and "Episode 30" appear on separate lines, as does "The Artificial Pine" and "Arch Song", while on the LP each has its own complete line: "Music for Twin Peaks Episode 30" and "The Artificial Pine Arch Song". But we are not to believe then that "Music for Twin Peaks" and "Episode 30" are separate tracks, surely; rather, the textual space within which the track titles appear in the CD insert is such that there is a carriage return after both "Peaks" and "Pine".

All of that is mostly irrelevant, however, as on the LP side that contains "Music for Twin Peaks Episode 30" in its entirety, both Parts I and II, runs to 21:33 — the exact length of tracks 6 and 7 of the CD when added together. To persist in maintaining that track 6 is "Music for Twin Peaks Episode 30 Parts I and II" raises questions about what happened to the 13 minutes of the track that appeared on the vinyl and, conversely, how 11 minutes got added to the "The Artificial Pine"/"Arch Song", since on vinyl it runs to 20:52, but on CD would have be extended to 31:33.

Any further changes to the tracklisting must to my mind take account of all these material factors, without privileging the CD release and relying simply on the myriad variations on the tracklisting that appear in the CDDB, iTunes Music Store, Amazon, Allmusic, Discogs, etc.

I have removed all reference in the description to the "confusion," and from here on out will confine that discussion to this page.

Poussiere (talk) 17:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, whether or not the track "24 Inch Cymbal" and a further two minutes and fifty two seconds was removed from the final track - due to CD space size - is agreed by you or I is worthless. It does need to be referenced, regardless of how various CD selling or review sites might interpret it. Details, such as release dates, personnel, names etc can be easily verified. However, you need to remember that the vast majority of people who possess a copy of "The Ballasted Orchestra" have so in CD version, due to the downturn of vinyl availability, and will view the CD track listing as sacrosanct - the two reference sites I included displayed the difference between sites advertising the vinyl and CD versions with this in mind. Therefore submitting statements like yours may cause confusion without referential points, even if those referential points are subjective, for readers. I have absolutely no problem with your assertion that one individual track and a portion of another were edited from the final CD cut but do reference this fact. I suggest you look at the Help Page and follow the guidelines as laid down. I hope this is of assistance.

Theblako (talk) 12:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I found this on the Ballasted Orchestra page on Last.fm — "According to the band's official site, Music for Twin Peaks comprises tracks both 6 & 7, and The Artificial Pine Arch Song is one track (#8)." That comment was posted on February 10, 2008.

Regrettably, the official site has recently changed from a full site to a single page with a link to the official MySpace page (on which, incidentally, they include track 6 from The Ballasted Orchestra in their music player, and it is clearly labelled "Music For Twin Peaks Part1"), so an official discography is not available at the moment. If it were, it would make this discussion a lot easier. Track lengths and typography aside, I think this rather definitively settles the issue of the proper CD tracklisting. Please comment.

That only leaves the citation issue regarding the removal of material from the vinyl issue when the album was pressed on CD. I still maintain, however, that it is almost a farce of research and citation if, on the same page on which the track listing and running lengths of both vinyl and CD are given and it is obvious by comparison both that "24 Inch Cymbal" is missing from the CD and that "The Artificial Pine Arch Song" is shorter on the CD, we need a citation to restate the obvious.

Someone referenced this site in their edit notes — http://www.discogs.com/release/232320. I personally don't think it is reliable enough source to use as a reference, but we could add it until something better comes along.

Poussiere (talk) 14:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The Myspace site claims not to be maintained by Stars of the Lid, so the correct naming for 'Music for Twin Peaks....' cannot be verified. Additionally, Myspace pages are exempt from utilisation as references under the Wikipedia criteria regardless of whether they were created by the individuals themselves or by fans. However, given the fact that there appear to be as many referential sources claiming one track re: The Artificial Arch/Pine Song, two tracks re: Music for Twin Peaks, as there are who claim otherwise, listing the LP and CD tracks separate from each other and stating this in the text on 'The Ballasted Orchestra' page would probably suffice. I have inserted this into the Wikipedia entry and included 'discogs' as a referential point. Please comment.

Kind regards,

Theblako (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I was never suggesting the use of the MySpace page as a reference in the main article; I was simply using it as further evidence here on the Talk page, which seems reasonable to me (and despite the claim that it is not operated by the band, it is). Is your response to the claim that the offfical site's discography listed the Twin Peaks tracks as 6 and 7 and "The Artificial Pine Arch Song" as track 8 simply, "Oh well, it's not accessible now, so who knows what it said?" (That's what I would understand it to be.)

How do you account for the track length discrepancies that would arise from separating the tracks as you do, as described in my first post to the Talk page, particularly that Twin Peaks would shrink from 20 minutes to eight minutes? How do you justify claiming that Twin Peaks is only one track on the CD when the LP side that contains both parts of Twin Peaks runs to 21:33 and tracks 6 and 7 on the CD run to 21:33 as well? This is the talk page, so please address that without simply referencing an online tracklisting — what is the reasoning you yourself use to separate the tracks as you do? That seems appropriate for the Talk page.

There is just so much here that is easily deducible from the facts at hand that it would not amount to 'original research' or conjecture. This article should be the place where the confusion that prevails across the Web is settled, not proliferated.

Poussiere (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I justify the claim that Music For Twin Peaks is listed as one track on the CD by virtue of the CD cover, which the vast majority of people use as a reference point. I do not suggest it is fundamentally correct. As I said in a post above, whether or not you and I are right or wrong on the track listings, their individual times or whether they were originally labelled as two separate tracks is irrelevant; as too would be something as mundane as incorrect printing on the CD cover. The fact that the LP and CD differ is important and needs to be referenced, as per Wikipedia criteria. Finally, Wikipedia, like all encyclopedias, relies on research and verification. This is not foolproof and, as we have seen from the myriad of websites claiming differing track listings etc on "The Ballasted Orchestra", it is ridiculous to claim one could be more correct than the other. Therefore, it is necessary to provide the reader with citations whereby they can see justification for the article's text.

Theblako (talk) 18:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

BMI Repertoire listing Adam Wiltzie's "Artificial Pine Arch Song". Oddly, "Music for Twin Peaks" is not listed under him or Brian (E. or Edward) Mc Bride.This is the legal BMI registration and should close the book on the last track. I'm still looking for the Twin Peaks registration.

Poussiere (talk) 19:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

1.	Can you please explain how "Music For Twin Peaks is listed as one track on the CD by virtue of the CD cover" with direct reference to the CD insert itself without citing something online? The cover does not have a numbered or even a linear tracklist. The CD insert has four "chunks" of titles: "Central Texas" and "Sun Drugs" in the top left; "Down II", "Taphead", and "Fucked Up (3:57 AM)" in the bottom left; "Music for Twin Peaks / Episode 30 / Part I / Part II" in the top right; and "The Artificial Pine Arch Song" in the bottom right. These four chunks correspond to each of the four sides on the double LP, with the exception of "24 Inch Cymbal", which has been removed but would appear in the top left chunk. Beyond that, I don't see any variation between the LP and the CD tracklisting; I do see variations online, but those are irrelevant, no matter how many you want to cite as meaning something. They don't mean anything.

2.	Verifiability does not exclusively mean "stated somewhere on the Web," nor does the fact that content needs to be verifiable by anyone mean that it has to be so instantaneously. If anyone picks up a copy of the vinyl release, however rare it may be and however long it may take these days, and compares it to the CD release, these differences and correspondences can easily be verified. While listening to it may be an aesthetic experience, comparing the sounds you hear and the tracklists and running lengths is objective.

3.	Can you show me the Wikipedia policy by which the vinyl release loses its authority to be its own reference simply because the CD release is more prevalent? Can you show me the standard that necessitates references to support what is obvious by comparison, such as removed tracks and shortened tracks? Here is Aphex Twin's Selected Ambient Works Vol. II page and here is The Cure's Disintegration page, to show just two, both of which state variances in the tracklisting by medium without citing a reference because the reference source is the album in those media themselves.

Poussiere (talk) 10:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, where is a reference to "Taphead" being named after the "Talk Talk" song? That's more the kind of "uncommon knowledge" that can't be gleaned from the release itself that needs citations, as is the Twin Peaks reference.

Poussiere (talk) 10:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

If you care to read the Stars of the Lid page on Wikipedia, you will see it has been recorded that STOL list Talk Talk as an influence - with both groups naming a track "Taphead". Based on your own logic, it stands that the original "Taphead" served as a precusor to STOL's "Taphead". I suggest you listen to Talk Talk and decide for yourself whether or not the genre of music can be linked.

Both Brian McBride and Adam Wiltzie have long declared themselves fans of Twin Peaks and David Lynch. On "Tired Sounds of Stars of the Lid", there's the track "Mullholland". Furthermore, the track "Gasfarming" commences with a sample of "Big Ed Hurley", a character from Twin Peaks. Reinforced by the title of "Music for Twin Peaks", are you suggesting that this is coincidence? As you said it may be conjecture, albeit logical. However, it is not solely one snippet of assumption; if some musical group in some far flung part of the globe suddenly realise there is another combo with the same name, is it logical to assume they have copied the name? No. However, if it is discovered that the second band have the same or similarly LP/song titles, I think it's reasonably fair to allege that someone is influenced by the other and this can then be stated.

As you asserted at the start, and to which I say yet again I do not disagree, the track times, when added, suggest that on the vinyl edition, "Music for Twin Peaks..." was separated into two distinct tracks whereas "The Artificial Arch" and "Pine Song" were originally one. However, if you play the CD on a PC through Windows Media, you will clearly see that it displays eight tracks, including "Music for Twin Peaks #Episode 30 Pt. 1 & 2", "The Artificial Arch" and "Pine Song." It does not matter whether Windows Media is correct or not in it's reading of the CD. The point is that the CD differs to the LP and thus this needs to be recorded, particularly given the vast majority of people would consider the CD edition to be Sacrasanct.

Regarding the CD inset, unfortunately, I have no access to the CD cover until later this evening, and don't seem to have studied it as diligently as yourself, but I will comment when I view it.

Finally, so what if different editions of "Selected Ambient Works" and "Disintegration" have variances, which have not been referenced? Maybe you can tell me why no there is no need for referential points on those individual pages regarding this matter?

Theblako (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Maybe it boils down to this. You seem to have a belief in the infallibility of technology. Are you aware that the track title information is not stored on the disc itself? When you enter the CD into a disc drive in a computer, so long as that computer is connected to the Internet, it queries a database and retrieves the title information. Look here. That information has to initially be entered manually by the first person who chooses to do so and submit it to the database. It is user-generated and therefore not always accurate nor always reliable. In fact, like Wikipedia, with you can change and re-submit the tracklisting — so it is only as reliable as the last person to change it!

It is indeed my assertion that whoever added that information did so incorrectly, and it is this I am trying to point out on the article page.

When you do look at the CD insert, notice also that the leading between the lines "The Artificial Pine" and "The Arch Song" is visibly and to the naked eye not as great as that between, say, "Central Texas" and "Sun Drugs" or between "Down II" and "Taphead"; in typesetting, this commonly indicates a soft return and that the text reads continuously over the two lines.

What did you make of the BMI Repertoire listing, incidentally?

I am well aware that they cite Talk Talk as an influence and have several titles referencing David Lynch's work. But you clearly illustrate my intended point — that in those cases you accept speculation so long as it is logical without needing an external reference, but you refuse to acknowledge the logic in my argument without me citing some secondary source. To me, that "Music for Twin Peaks" is two tracks on the CD and "Artificial Pine Arch Song" is one track is as plainly obvious to me as it is to you that "Music for Twin Peaks" is a nod to David Lynch's series. So I admit I was being devilish when I suggested you add references to that.

Poussiere (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

You miss my point, I do not accept speculation, even if it is logical, unless there are several methods to source it. This is why I requested some reference on the deletion of the track "24 Inch Cymbal" - the only known source I could find was on the discogs site. And this is also why I made the analogy - band on different corners of the globe etc - regarding STOL's obvious fondness for all things "Twin Peaks"; there are numerous sources that can back up the case; as there are numerous sources for "Music for Twin Peaks...", "The Artificial Arch" and "Pine Song" being separate or the same tracks etc, which surely reinforces the case for dual references.

I am aware that the PC queries a database when a CD is ripped - many an Eno track/CD has remained nameless on Windows Media due to the scarcity of inputted global information. However, when I first ripped "The Ballasted Orchestra" onto a PC, it was a back up model, one that required dial up and thus never connected. Interestingly, I remember it showed eight tracks with, as far as I can recall, similar time sequences to what would be on display through a now connected PC - unfortunately the desire to cross reference track names with the piece currently playing was never quite that strong in those days so tragically I can not say which track was which. Now, as I have said, I do not doubt for one moment that the original vinyl edition has the exact track-listing you champion. However, providing my memory has not suffered from the lack of care I give it, and taking into account the non-link to the Internet when I first ripped "Ballasted", it would seem that somewhere within the inner cosmos of the CD someone has cocked up. I do accept that my copy - a CD purchased in Ireland and originating from an English pressing, may have some minor, and possibly conflicting, production defects which displays the track listings and times I view. Regardless, I still feel that the individual, differing vinyl and CD listings and times needs to be highlighted and referenced. Just because some other Wikipedia articles, who may have or had similar dilemmas, do not underline these differences does not set the criteria in stone. I would have also expected to see some reference to the difference between the vinyl LP and the commonly advertised CD made by a member of STOL somewhere along the way.

As a former editor/graphic artist, I am very aware of leading and tracking from the halcyon days when Pagemaker ruled the graphic waves so I will pay extra attention when viewing the CD inset later.

Theblako (talk) 15:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

"You miss my point, I do not accept speculation, even if it is logical, unless there are several methods to source it. This is why I requested some reference on the deletion of the track "24 Inch Cymbal" - the only known source I could find was on the discogs site."

This is because you are excluding and discounting the vinyl itself as a reliable source and I am not, which was my point in posting the links to the other pages. For instance, the Disintegration page notes that two tracks are on the CD and cassette but not the vinyl. There is no reference to support that, because it is understood that if you listen to each version and look at the artwork, this is obvious. I'm saying it's the same for The Ballasted Orchestra. Listen to the vinyl and then the CD, you'll notice there's a stretch of music absent on the CD; look at the CD art, and you see that the title "24 Inch Cymbal" is not there. There is no need for a secondary citation to support that.

What about the single BMI Repertoire registration for "Artificial Pine Arch Song"?

Poussiere (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

And the "Disintegration" page does a wonderful job of explaining that there are two extra tracks on the CD and Cassette, but not the vinyl editions. I have no grievance with the text content on that page and believe that such phrasing is relevant and easy to understand. However, and while I am no expert on The Cure or their discography, I would be willing to bet that confusion over track listings - whether one track is really one track, or has been separated and now appear as two through error or some other factor - is something entirely absent from that particular LP. Likewise, I'd hazard a guess that there isn't two plus minutes of material missing from a track on "Disintegration" either. As I mentioned earlier, just because the contributions to the "Disintegration" or "Selected Works" pages do not appear to reference the missing or excluded tracks does not make those pages correct. Do you not agree that the overwhelming majority of people who own a copy of "The Ballasted Orchestra" do so in it's CD format? Hence logically, a substantial proportion of those are unlikely to be aware that A) one track is absent from the CD, due to space constrictions, B) "The Artificial Arch" and "Pine Song" may actually be one track and C) "Music for Twin Peaks..." may, in fact, be two distinct tracks. To suggest that this is not noteworthy is, I agree, ridiculous.  Therefore, to substantiate this, references are needed to allow the readers to see where this information derives from.

The single BMI Registration for "Artificial Pine Arch Song" is fine. As I have said I've never doubted that such a name exists, I just feel that to avoid confusion, it needs to be explained properly. I still ponder why a member from SOTL has not commented on the ongoing confusion.

Theblako (talk) 17:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I had a look at the CD inset for "Ballasted" and I do agree, it appears that the leading between the words, The Artificial Arch and Pine Song is slimmer than the others; the section with "Music for Twin Peaks...." is slightly more ambiguous, however. Nonetheless, I still feel it's necessary to highlight the disparity between what would seem the offical running list, track names and times, and the general view of listeners or readers. Simply judging what may be correct or not, based solely on the format one owns of "Ballasted", is unfair given the absence of "24 Inch Cymbal" and the missing two plus minutes of material and, as such, is not keeping in line with Wikipedia criteria.

Theblako (talk) 16:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

What about Web archives? This answers everything. Well, it doesn't say the last track has been shortened. We can still add to the article that the incorrect tracklisting has been spread through databases, vendors, etc.

"Official SOTL Web site" archive

"Official SOTL Web site" from Dec. 7, 1998

"Official SOTL Web site" from Jun. 13, 2001

Poussiere (talk) 16:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. That answers everything, and I feel that the second listed archive, "Official SOTL Web site" from Dec. 7, 1998 would be the most suitable. Perhaps a sentence stating "In order to fit onto a standard CD, one track, "24 Inch Cymbal" (reference) was removed, as was a portion of "The Artificial Arch Pine Song", from the vinyl edition" - and then inserting the information about vendors mis-reading tracks etc. I agree it appears citing that some of "Artificial" was removed will prove difficult. Therefore, listing the length of the LP in the Infobox should reinforce the statement. On the matter of "Music for Twin Peaks...", likewise, I am happy with the second reference being a source for the correct title/s. I would also suggest removing the words "Double LP" from the Track Listing section and instead putting in brackets (LP or vinyl edition only) after "24 Inch Cymbal".

17:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

At the risk of sounding as though I am contradicting my earlier reluctance to privilege the CD release, I'd like to use the tracklisting in accordance with the discography on the official site (which happens to still be there, even though you can't navigate to it from the home page). Below the tracklisting, I would just add a sentence saying, "A bonus track, "24 Inch Cymbal", appeared on the vinyl release between "Sun Drugs" and "Down II", and use the archived site from June 2001 as the reference for that. Another sentence could add, "Additionally, "The Artificial Pine Arch Song" runs to 20:52 on the vinyl," and reference this page that has an image of the vinyl on it. I think that is the simplest, clearest and most verifiable way to present all of that information accurately.

I'd use the CD length in the Infobox, since the language on the official sites is that "24 Inch Cymbal" is a bonus track on the LP, not a removal from it.

Also, we can use "March 10, 2007" as a more specific release date; it's both on the official discography and the Kranky page — but I'd warn you not to look at the tracklisting on the Kranky page at risk of your head exploding.

Poussiere (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Made some minor changes, but nothing to do with this business pending further discussion/consensus.

Poussiere (talk) 21:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

All sounds good to me. However, would it not make sense to state that "24 Inch Cymbal" while appearing as a bonus on the vinyl edition was removed for reasons of standard CD length?

Theblako (talk) 09:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)