--- In audities@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Littleton" wrote: > > I found their homepage http://www.twinklehead.no/ and it says the CD will > be > released march 2006, so maybe david has an advance. > > Though they are not the best quality, I found a couple of videos of > Twinklehead at this page: > > http://www.fvn.no/amcar/music.html > > Cheers, > Gary I'm not sure why the website says that, as I first heard Twinklehead in November courtesy of Auditeer Mark Hershberger, who had a copy of the CD. I guess he may have had an advance also, but I have a feeling that both of us have the actual release. This is one of the issues with ranking albums by year of release with which I often wrestle. When I used to do my lists in the '80s and '90s I used to be a real stickler for accuracy (i.e. I would go to great lengths to make sure I knew in which year an album was released; if I thought an album was released in 1989, but I found out it was actually released on December 31, 1988, I would redo my list). These days with so many "self-releases" and albums coming out on boutique labels (like Twinklehead's Rec 90), the concept of a "release" has changed and has become more varied. Now, a release date can be either: a. when a band or label basically feels like saying the CD is "released" b. when it is available for purchase on the band or label's website c. when they do a "record release" show d. when Not Lame, Jam, or Kool Kat receives it e. when it's on the internet for download and a few others I'm not thinking of right now. For this reason I believe there should be a bit of bend in the definition of release date, which is why, for example, that if a band "releases" an album in December but I don't find out about it until January, I count it as being released in the latter year. Of course, your mileage may vary. :-) -- Pop Rules!!!!! Take Care, David (who's beaming because the IPO page just got our 1,000th friend, which I know is nothing compared to a lot of bands/entities, but it feels good nonetheless).