Handling of recordings from CD with faulty TOC

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fea424a46b8> #<Tag:0x00007fea424a45c8>

Hi,
I’ve got an interesting copy of

Disc 4 has a faulty TOC. After the end of track 8 (2:12) is no index for track 9 - track 8 was skipped in the table! The next index was for a preceding 3:08 song (= track 9). All following indexes skipped track 8 too, up to track 18 (now 17), after which track 8 was inserted. 19 and 20 are normal again.

But you can easily see what has happened, if you compare the DiscIDs:
Disc ID “MuvYJoX9HxIjeC5O8wAze_co5RQ-” - MusicBrainz (normal)
Disc ID “ZFhmexvXXC6ba33anSfHX.MhKtM-” - MusicBrainz (faulty)

But that’s of course no problem. But what to do with the recordings?

Are they separate MB recordings?
I think, it is impossible to keep them together. Technically because of different track lengths, and it would be a blow to my MusicBrainz ratings for tagging my files. Songs, rated (for playlists) on one album and not rated on another (excluded from playlists) is not possible, if they consist of the same recordings.

Must the new recording reflect, what is actually included?
A partial recording of work #9 and #10

I decided no. You can use the CD pretty normal, if you listen to it as a whole. And it would be hard to sort this out by a tagger script.
Thanks to their similar track length, the major part of the recordings is from the respective song.
I added a comment to all affected recordings - example:

Hope, that’s acceptable for all, but I’m open for suggestions!

3 Likes

The releases with the wrong track split should have their own wrongly cut recordings.
It should be made clear which editions (releases) are wrong or right and which recordings are wrong or right.

4 Likes

I will write an extended annotation!
But first I like to clarify the general question
… and thanks for your approval!

1 Like

Here is an example of release group where some releases – either 2×CD† or 3×CD* – have ZIGGY STARDUST track repeated on CD2, instead of two different versions.
The track durations are similar, which makes it even more difficult to spot.

Once EMI was informed of the mistake, they released an update CD* (containing only the missing recording) as well as new corrected editions of 2×CD and 3×CD versions.

You will see that the explanations in the Annotations are awfully confusing, apparently written by someone with a very poor English and with absolutely no capacity to explain things clearly. Me. :laughing:

I’m sure for your case, you will write some more concise and clearer stuff.

* The editions I have
† The editions I used to have

3 Likes

Please also put this information into the recording disambiguations to prevent wrong merges in the future. You can find an example of a wrongly indexed release here (CD 1, tracks 8 to 10):

Clearly the Japanese mastering engineers did not knew where one song ends and the next one starts on this early pressing of a gapless concept album :grin:

6 Likes

My English is probably no better… :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
But I will try to write something similar.
But there’s a problem. I do not know about which versions are effected. There are 3 glass master version on Discogs: 4, 5 and 6. I’ve got 5. What do I know from that? I should ask, probably… but I’m not sure if there will be any response.

2 Likes

Ah, okay. I will do that of course!

Done!

Seemingly there’s no need for Japanese engineers and gapless albums… :laughing:

2 Likes

Just document what you have. That’s a good start. That way when someone else comes along with the same TOC they have tracks to match to.

The trouble they had was going from vinyl to the Gapless CD. They didn’t know where to slice up the separate tracks. Where to put the film bits. As I had one of these old CDs I tried to list as much as I could work out about how they had sliced things.

I put lots of notes into the Annotation of the Recordings to make it easier for the next person trying to work out the oddities. Explaining why the track list doesn’t line up with the tracks we know.

With the Wall it isn’t really a manufacturing “fault”. It was more a lack of guidance for the engineers where to make the cuts. Later releases changed the layouts more than once to better align the tracklist.

Now you’ve added your edition in detail it is also somewhere for the AcoustIDs and everything else to line up.

5 Likes

I added a release annotation. If I find out more about other versions I will add a rg annotation as well. For the moment I’ve added a disambiguation comment to the release.

I see what you mean, or… I can hear. Empty Spaces could well be an intro to Young Lust as One of my Turns has a similar intro. If you do not speak the language… :grinning:

1 Like

Because of the way the Japanese sliced up that first CD it sent me down a big rabbit hole of curiosity about how Concept Albums get sliced and diced. As you have noticed, the Japanese error is easy to understand once you listen to it. Makes my old CD even more interesting. Would never have noticed if it wasn’t for MB.

And now you’ll always look at this Genesis Archive in a totally different way. It is now much more than “just another compilation”. It has taken on a unique life of its own. :smiley:

2 Likes