@@david-vk6gw Hegel is kinda known for being really hard to parse. Like my Philosophy teacher said when he was getting his degree on some work about Hegel people told him to look more at sources that are people interpreting Hegel's work more than actually looking at Hegel's work
Listen to songs in your digital library in alphabetical order, they go together strangely well & will remind you of music you forgot about. No algorithm can replace that magic.
I think it's to make sure the app, software or music player goes through that specific order, in case the tracks aren't properly tagged, so that the titles act as the numbers (pun ?). And i think the order is important, not only because tracking is paramount, but also because there is a narrative to the album.
Only because you're used to it. It would also fit well as the side 1 closer with the Numbers opening side 2... which is how I have personally arranged it. If anything it is actually badly placed because it means the abum is top-loaded with upbeat songs (ie the ONLY upbeat song is right at the start), whereas it works well as a burst of sunlight out of the darkness if you center it a bit more. There are a lot of different ways to think about tracking an album! It's an art, not a science. It really depends what effect you want to achieve. Are you going for flow above all? Or theme? Do you want the album to sit with the listener or do you want it to grab attention (in which you want to topload the bangers)? Depending on your choices you could have half a dozen different tracklistings that work - depending on what you want. Actually i've realized over the years Radiohead aren't very good at tracking ther albums (Thom's a bit better at it on his solo albums so I surmise it's a committee issue) so it doens't surprise me that they would throw up their hands and resort to alphabetical order :P
