EDIT: FYI- “After the Astronaut” was set to be the eighth studio album by the Butthole Surfers, and it was supposed to be released in 1998. After a release date was set, critics were sent advance copies of the album to listen to. Some thought it was horrible, which caused the album not to be released. Since advance copies were sent to critics and possibly others, the album has been leaked online. Most of the copies found online are said to be sourced from a cassette copy of the album. The bulk of the tracks on the album were re-worked and put on the band’s official eighth album, “Weird Revolution”.
Thank you both for the replies. I will try to address each point in as much detail as I can. First, let me provide you the listing of what I have.
01 - Weird Revolution - 3:40
02 - Intelligent Guy - 3:18
03 - Jet Fighter - 2:40
04 - Imbuya - 2:57
05 - Mexico - 2:44
06 - Venus - 3:59
07 - The Last Astronaut - 4:39
08 - Yentel - 3:24
09 - Junky Jenny in Gaytown - 3:36
10 - They Came In - 4:42
11 - I Don’t Have a Problem - 3:08
12 - Turkey & Dressing - 4:39
13 - Untitled - 6:39
14 - Untitled - 4:45
15 - Whowasinmyroomlastnight (Reznorremix) - 5:36
16 - Where Did Everybody Go - 3:58
17 - Pepper (remix) - 4:07
This is the 17 track bootleg copy of this release. Please note there is a 12 track official version, unreleased, but listed as promotion, so that seems logical. I do not see any issues with that version of the release. This one deals with the 17 track version (or maybe versions). This is clearly bootleg vs promotion.
If you compare what is in MB for the 17 track to what I have, you will see the content be quite same, but a few issues.
I believe this is the same release since the recordings contained are same and the fact that the one in MB has incorrect durations for some of the recordings, leading me to believe that the names, track numbers and durations are mismatched on the listing. In comparison, my version of this release does not have mismatched names and durations. The information used to determine recording name to duration match include primarily other releases the recordings are used on and Google search for the recording, most commonly the YouTube of the recording, so one can see the name, listen to the recording and see the duration, the best way to match it to what is in front of me.
I could very well do this, and would have no issue with that. My concern point here was I believe I would be creating a duplicate as it is my belief that the current one is incorrect in its listing. But that belief is in debate here, so this option is a possibility.
Agree. In this case, I think the promotional version, from the label, is the one with the actual release and date. That is the “official” one. It just never made it to a “real” release vs the promotions. The bootleg one, well, that date is always up for debate. I tend to follow the dates on the files in combination with the dates on the site(s) posting the bootleg. By default, since it is not “official”, there is no “official release date”. I personally am not so worried about the release date associated to the 17 track version, but the content it includes. I honestly had not looked at the release date as of yet, just the contents.
EDIT: I looked into my copy of the release, there is no data useful for indicating the date of release. So I would either trust the date(s) already there, or utilize research to find the date.
Thanks for the ‘look here’ example. I have seen those as well and see many opinions on them, including one where an editor explicitly voted no to a bootleg add because it was not “different enough” to an actual release. Directly responding to you though, I normally agree with what you state here, those are all different releases. In this case, my concern is there is no reference or source for the current listing, and not only that, but it appears to be incorrect, looking at the durations assigned to the recordings. I guess it could be some sort of remix bootleg or something, but again, it is just noted as a release with no additional info or references.
Note that as I just said that statement, I realize there is another thread talking about piracy in MB, and the desire to leave piracy out. I see I have just swung the sword on both sides of that argument. But here, at very least there should be some explanation to this, especially since the durations are not what are considered correct for the recordings… making them either wrong or the recordings are not original type recordings (eg. edits, remixes, etc).
So that is what I have to present here. I hope it helps as it sure made me think more on this. I have a hard time leaving data alone that I believe to be incorrect. I say this as a somewhat discouraged user of the database. So as an editor, I always try to keep my interests as a user in mind… obviously not just focusing on me, but you see what I mean. What I mean is when I scan my release in Picard and get mismatched recordings from acoustIDs, releases matching recordings incorrectly and with different durations, etc, I lose all trust in what I am being provided, and for me, I wish I could use the data here more than I currently do.