tabanger's setlist.fm

Hi, tabanger. At the risk of regurgitating everything I argued in the forum post you included, here is how I feel about the issue:

While the guideline I cited does not directly mention remixes, it still falls under that category. It also applies to several other differences in how a song is played, such abriged/extended versions of songs, electric versions, piano versions, drum/percussion interpretations of songs, blues versions, etc. even though they're not directly mentioned. Anything falling under the category of "songs played in a different manner" applies, and remixes certainly fall in with that.

Remixes, alternate versions, etc. typically feature notable changes or alterations to the song's musical arrangement, instrumentation, and overall structure. As it concerns "Piggy (Nothing Can Stop Me Now)" and "Closer to God", both feature distinct changes to the arrangement, instrumentation, and, particularly in the case of the latter song, the song's overall structure. However, at the end of the day, despite these differences, they're still "Piggy" and "Closer" at their cores. They're still the same songs, they're just being performed with different arrangements and structures. It's technically no different than an acoustic variation.

Regarding songs being listed with a specifically different title, I would argue that acoustic versions of songs that are officially released by bands/artists typically feature the word "acoustic" in the title with parentheses. We wouldn't list a song as "Song Title (Acoustic)" on here, and in my opinion, a remix with an alternate title isn't any different. The same goes for other songs released with simple title changes such as "Song Title (Remix)" or "Song Title (Blues Version)".

At the end of the day though, even though this is how I feel and I believe it is the most appropriate/correct interpretation of the guidelines, I'm not against the two songs being listed how they were before because both you and @GB_Catalyst05 make good points. I certainly do agree that listing the remixes as I have here does make it extremely difficult to get their statistics, which I understand some users do take great exception to. I ultimately just want things to be consistent all across the board and for the guidelines to be observed. If you and any other users feel strongly enough about this issue, then I have no problem at all with you changing all of the setlists back to how they were.

This one i am talking about at the end of Tin There https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSAifTuOCHc

Listen to the end of Tin There.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpbbMBZ6OgM ..there is a sample and voices from another song..that Danish dude might be right with that song he included

Sorry man, I thought I had a good source on my hands... :( I'm really sorry about that. What can I do to fix it?

Unlocked

You've convinced me. Thanks for putting in the extra time to strengthen the argument for deleting it.
Cheers,
Ben

I am not deleting this show that you flagged at this point. While your argument makes some sense we have two Users who claim to have attended and no direct evidence the show didn't happen. It would not be unusual for a band in a big city to be a supporting act at an auditorium one night and then have a club gig the next night. And I would rather leave this questionable setlist that has attendees than delete it.

https://www.setlist.fm/setlist/nine-inch-nails/1990/lisner-auditorium-washington-dc-2bd7c056.html