G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: First off, I think this is exactly the kind of thing I'm good at helping with.

You're not asking me to identify every song—that's the fun part for you. You're asking me to be your "music librarian" for the oddballs: TV themes, library music, alternate versions, mysterious remixes, and "what the hell do I file this under?" questions. I can absolutely do that.

And yes, I know exactly why you like MediaMonkey. It's still one of the best tools for people who think in terms of metadata rather than streaming libraries. Its Auto-Organize rules and expression language are extraordinarily flexible for building a collection that stays consistent over tens of thousands of files. That's very much what it was designed for. citeturn0search0turn0search6

For The $100,000 Pyramid

Unfortunately there are two different themes, and people mix them together all the time.

1973–1981 versions

Title:

Tuning Up

Composer:

Ken Aldin (actually a production-music composer using a pseudonym)

This wasn't written specifically for the show. It was a piece of library music that the producers licensed and adopted as the theme. It originally appeared on a production music LP called Meet the Gang. citeturn1search4turn1search12

1982–1991 versions

When The New $25,000 Pyramid and later The $100,000 Pyramid began, they commissioned Bob Cobert to write a new theme.

It deliberately sounds like Tuning Up, but it is an original composition, not merely a rearrangement. That's why there is so much confusion online. citeturn1search12turn1search6

If your MP3 is from the Dick Clark era...

I'd guess there's about an 80% chance it's the Bob Cobert version, because that's the one most people remember from the mid-80s.

The metadata I'd use would be:

Title

Theme from The $100,000 Pyramid

or if you want consistency with soundtrack naming,

The $100,000 Pyramid Theme

Artist

Bob Cobert

Album

Television Themes (or whatever compilation it actually came from)

If you're being archival rather than commercial, I'd probably make the Album

TV Themes (Personal Compilation)

because there really isn't a definitive commercial album that owns that recording. Unless your MP3 came from an actual soundtrack CD, the "album" field is effectively a filing cabinet rather than historical fact.

Genre:

Television Theme

Soundtrack

Game Show

Personally I'd pick Television Theme.

One thing I'd suggest

Over the years I've become fond of separating three ideas:

• Artist — who performed this recording
• Composer — who wrote it
• Album Artist — who the release belongs to

MediaMonkey handles all three very well.

So if you have, say,

The Hit Crew - Tuning Up (Theme from $10,000 Pyramid)

I'd tag it

• Artist = The Hit Crew
• Composer = Ken Aldin
• Album Artist = The Hit Crew

rather than replacing the performer with the composer.

That pays off years later when you wonder why two "identical" themes sound different.

I also like your philosophy of using Discogs, Shazam, and manual research. It's very much a collector's workflow rather than a "let MusicBrainz decide" workflow. There are a lot of TV themes, library tracks, promo CDs, and fan edits that automatic taggers simply don't understand.

I'd be happy to become the "weird song desk" for this project. Whenever you hit one of those 1% tracks where the metadata is murky or the history is interesting, just send it my way, and I'll dig into it. I suspect those are going to be some of the most enjoyable questions.

G: I like your approach. You're building a catalog, not trying to preserve whatever random metadata happened to be on an MP3 in 1999. That's a fundamentally different goal.

For future questions, here's the format I'll aim for whenever possible:

• Title
• Artist (recording artist)
• Composer
• Album (best historical source if one exists; otherwise a recommendation)
• Album Artist
• Genre(s)
• Style(s)
• Historical notes (why it's notable, whether it became famous through TV/film/commercials, etc.)

That should map nicely onto MediaMonkey's fields.

For The $100,000 Pyramid

I'd tag it something like this.

Title

The $100,000 Pyramid Theme

Artist

Bob Cobert

Composer

Bob Cobert

Album If your recording doesn't come from a specific commercial release, I'd actually recommend your own:

TV Themes

or

Television Themes

rather than inventing a commercial album.

Album Artist

(Custom)

or however you've decided to distinguish personal compilations.

Genre

I'd probably use

TV Theme; Soundtrack; Instrumental

The "Theme" tag by itself is probably redundant if everything else identifies it.

Style

This is the interesting part.

I'd call it

Game Show Easy Listening Orchestral Pop Television Score

Why?

The arrangement is basically late-70s/early-80s television production music.

It has:

• brass fanfares
• rhythm section
• string pads
• big-band influence
• pop orchestration

It isn't jazz.

It isn't funk.

It isn't disco.

It borrows from all three while landing closest to orchestral pop or television production music.

If Discogs had to classify it, I'd expect something like

• Stage & Screen
• Theme
• Easy Listening

Historical note

Unlike something such as the Peter Gunn Theme or Mission: Impossible Theme, the Pyramid theme never really escaped television.

People recognize it instantly...

...but almost entirely because they watched the show.

So I'd probably annotate it mentally as

Famous because of the television program rather than becoming a standalone hit.

As for an original album...

This is where it gets frustrating.

Bob Cobert composed an enormous amount of television music (Dark Shadows, The Winds of War, War and Remembrance, numerous game shows), but he wasn't in the habit of releasing soundtrack albums for every cue.

As far as I've been able to determine, there is no widely released Bob Cobert album that serves as the canonical source for the $100,000 Pyramid theme. Most circulating recordings come from:

• direct television audio,
• game show compilation CDs,
• or later rerecordings.

So I actually think your instinct is the most archivally honest one:

Album: Television Themes

Album Artist: (Custom)

rather than pretending it belongs to some compilation assembled decades later.

One thing I think might be especially useful for your collection is separating Genre from Style much the way Discogs does. For example:

That gives you the best of both worlds. "Stage & Screen" (or "Soundtrack," if you prefer) answers what kind of work this is, while "Orchestral Pop," "Easy Listening," or "Big Band" answers what it actually sounds like. I think that's a cleaner distinction than trying to make one field carry both jobs, and it seems to fit the way you're already thinking about the library.

G: That makes sense, and I think I have a pretty good feel for the role you want me to play.

For each song, unless you ask for a deeper dive, I'll aim for something like this:

• Title:
• Artist:
• Composer: (if different)
• Album: (best original source if one exists; otherwise a sensible filing recommendation)
• Album Artist:
• Genre: (2–3 suggestions)
• Style: (2–3 suggestions)
• Notes: One or two sentences on why the song is notable, whether it's associated with TV/film/commercials, whether it's a cover, library music, became famous independently, etc.

So for The $100,000 Pyramid it might simply be:

Genre: Soundtrack; TV Theme; Instrumental
Style: Orchestral Pop; Easy Listening; Game Show

with a brief note:

Written by Bob Cobert for the 1980s revival of The $100,000 Pyramid. Primarily known through the television show rather than as a standalone recording.

I also think I understand what you're searching for with the "album" field, even if we haven't hit the perfect example yet. You're hoping for cases where there's a natural home for a recording—not just a random compilation. For example:

• A film score that first appeared on the official soundtrack album.
• A TV theme later included on a composer's own anthology.
• A single that was later adopted as a TV theme.
• A piece of library music whose original production-music LP is known.
• An album track that later became famous through a commercial or movie.

Those are much more satisfying archival homes than "Greatest TV Themes of the '80s," and when one exists, I'll try to find it.

I suspect we're going to run into a lot of interesting edge cases as you work through your library, and those are exactly the kinds of metadata puzzles I enjoy.

G: That actually simplifies things nicely.

Here's the default template I'll use unless you ask for more detail:

• Title
• Artist
• Album (best historical source, or a recommended filing album if no canonical source exists)
• Album Artist
• Genre (2–3 suggestions)
• Style (2–3 suggestions)
• Notes (1–3 concise sentences: TV/film/game connection, if it's a cover, library music, became famous independently, unusual history, etc.)

I'll leave Composer out entirely by default.

I'll only bring it up when it genuinely helps answer the question—for example:

• you're trying to distinguish similarly named works,
• authorship is the interesting part of the story,
• there are multiple famous recordings and the composer explains the relationship,
• or you specifically ask for it.

That feels much more in line with how you're actually using MediaMonkey: you're organizing a listening library, not building a musicological database.

One thing I will probably do, if it's useful, is occasionally add a very short "File under?" suggestion when there's ambiguity. For example:

Album: Television Themes (recommended custom album; no clear original commercial release)

or

Album: The Blues Brothers (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) (preferred over a later greatest-hits compilation)

That gets at the archival decision you're trying to make without forcing you into a particular filing philosophy. I think that's going to be one of the more valuable parts of these little research sessions.

G: That clarifies the workflow a lot, and it's actually a much more interesting research problem than just "what album is this on?"

What you really want me to identify is the release, not merely the recording.

So for remixes, singles, promos, EPs, CD-maxis, etc., I'll prioritize something like this:

• Release title
• Country (if needed to distinguish)
• Year
• Format (CD Maxi, Promo CD, CD Single, etc.)
• Catalog number (this is the big one)
• Discogs search hint (if multiple releases share the same catalog number or title)
• Your track's position on that release (if determinable)
• Missing tracks (so you can see what's absent from your collection)

For example (hypothetically):

Release: The Ballad of Chasey Lane
Country: Europe
Year: 2000
Format: CD Maxi-Single
Catalog #: 497 269-2
Discogs search: "Bloodhound Gang Ballad of Chasey Lane 4972692"
Your tracks: 1–3
Missing: Track 4 "..." and Track 5 "The Bad Touch (Rollergirl Mix)"

That catalog number is often the fastest way to land on the exact Discogs page instead of wading through a dozen nearly identical releases.

Another thing I can do, which I think you'll find useful, is flag release families. Sometimes I'll discover something like:

• US CD single (4 tracks)
• European CD maxi (5 tracks)
• Australian enhanced CD (6 tracks)
• Japanese edition (bonus track)

If your files clearly match one of those, I'll say so without burying you in every pressing variation. The goal is to identify the smallest release family that explains the tracks you have.

I also won't assume your goal is completeness. Instead, I'll tell you where your files appear to fit and what, if anything, is missing from that specific release. Then you can decide whether it's worth hunting down the remaining tracks or whether another release already covers them.

I think this approach meshes well with how you're using Discogs: you're not trying to own every pressing, you're trying to reconstruct the provenance of the audio you actually have. That's a much more manageable—and, in my opinion, more satisfying—way to curate a long-lived music library.

G: You’re right—I gave you a hypothetical catalog number as though it were concrete. I’ll verify the exact release and tracklist now.

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: You were correct: I had not looked up that catalog number. I presented an invented example too concretely. That was my mistake.

The release matching the files you described is:

Bloodhound Gang — The Ballad of Chasey Lain
Country: Australia
Year: 2000
Format: CD single, enhanced, card sleeve
Label: Geffen Records
Catalog number: 497 281-2
Barcode: 0606949728120
Discogs release ID: 1682110 citeturn889872search10turn889872search1

Its audio tracklist is:

1. The Ballad of Chasey Lain (The Virgin Mix)
2. The Ballad of Chasey Lain (The Flirt Mix)
3. The Ballad of Chasey Lain (The Whore Mix)
4. The Bad Touch (The Eiffel 65 Mix)
5. The Bad Touch (The Rollergirl Mix)
6. The Ballad of Chasey Lain — enhanced video, not an ordinary audio track. citeturn876968search3turn876968search5

So the gap in your collection is track 4, “The Bad Touch (The Eiffel 65 Mix).” You already appear to have audio tracks 1–3 and 5.

The cleanest Discogs searches should be:

• Bloodhound Gang 497 281-2
• Bloodhound Gang 1682110
• 0606949728120

There is also a different European issue, catalog 497 255-2, whose first three tracks are the same but whose later tracks are “Take the Long Way Home,” “Right Turn Clyde,” and a “Bad Touch” video. That is not the version your files reconstruct. citeturn876968search1

G: It makes perfect sense, and I think we've settled into a workflow that should work well.

Here's how I'll approach these from now on:

1. Assume it's a CD rip unless you tell me otherwise. I won't waste time considering vinyl promos, cassette singles, or digital exclusives unless the evidence points there.

2. Primary goal: identify the exact CD release with the minimum information you need:

   • Release title
   • Year
   • Country (if needed)
   • Format
   • Catalog number (highest priority)
   • One or two Discogs search terms if the catalog number alone isn't enough

3. No track list unless you ask for it. Instead, I'll simply say something like:

   • "Your files correspond to tracks 1, 2, 3, and 5."
   • "You're missing track 4."

   That preserves the fun of discovering what's on the disc yourself.

4. If something doesn't add up, I'll stop and ask questions rather than forcing a match. Useful clues include:

   • Exact track lengths
   • File sizes (occasionally)
   • Whether the files are WAV/MP3/FLAC
   • Any CD-Text or old ID3 tags
   • Matrix numbers if you're looking at the physical disc
   • Whether all the tracks were ripped together

5. If I see an obvious fork, I'll tell you. For example:

   "There are two CD singles that begin with these three remixes. Can you tell me the length of track 2? That will distinguish them."

That last point is where I think track lengths become really valuable. They're often enough to distinguish between otherwise identical releases without needing the full track listing.

One other thing I can do, if it becomes useful, is tell you my confidence level. For example:

• High confidence — unique catalog number and track combination.
• Moderate confidence — two releases fit; one is much more likely.
• Low confidence — I need one more piece of evidence (usually a track length).

That way you'll know when you can confidently update MediaMonkey and when it's worth pausing for another minute of investigation.

I have to say, I enjoy this kind of detective work. It's not just identifying songs—it's reconstructing the history of a collection. There's something satisfying about taking a handful of MP3s that have been floating around for 20 years and figuring out exactly which disc they came from. That's a much richer problem than ordinary tagging, and it's one I'm happy to help with.

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: This one is actually pretty straightforward once you know the band's release history.

You've almost certainly got two different masterings/releases of One Fierce Beer Coaster mixed together.

Version 1 (the one with the remixes)

Album: One Fierce Beer Coaster
Label: Geffen Records
Year: 1996 (later Geffen pressings)
Tracks: 14

This is the version with:

• Track 13 – Fire Water Burn (Jim Makin' Jamaican Mix)
• Track 14 – Fire Water Burn (Donkey Version Edit)

(Depending on the pressing, 13 and 14 are sometimes listed in the opposite order, but they're the same two bonus mixes.) citeturn0search0turn0search5

Version 2 (the one with "Yellow Fever")

This is the interesting one.

Album: One Fierce Beer Coaster
Label: Republic Records / Cheese Factory (pre-Geffen)
Year: 1996

This original version contains "Yellow Fever" instead of the remix bonus tracks. It disappeared after the band signed with Geffen, largely because the label removed it from later editions. citeturn0search1turn0search11

So "Yellow Fever" isn't some random bootleg or fan addition—it genuinely belongs to an earlier commercial release.

What I'd do

I would keep them as two separate album entries, even though they're both called One Fierce Beer Coaster.

One:

• Republic / Cheese Factory version
• contains Yellow Fever

The other:

• Geffen version
• contains the two Fire Water Burn bonus remixes

Trying to merge them into one "ultimate edition" loses the historical distinction.

One note

The only thing that gives me slight pause is where "Yellow Fever" appears.

You mentioned it as track 13.

On the original Republic release that I'm finding, it's track 4, immediately after "Fire Water Burn." citeturn0search1turn0search11

So before you retag that one, I'd ask you to check the length of your "Yellow Fever" file and whether its ID3 tag already claims to be track 13.

That discrepancy makes me suspect one of two things:

• someone manually renumbered the files years ago, or
• your collection contains a homemade compilation that merged tracks from both releases.

I wouldn't panic over it, but it's the first thing I'd investigate before changing anything. That's exactly the sort of inconsistency I'd flag for you in the future.

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: Perfect. This is exactly the level of output I'll aim for.

The two CD releases you almost certainly want are:

1. Republic Records (original, includes "Yellow Fever")

   • Catalog #: REP2-9603 citeturn0search6

2. Geffen Records (reissue, replaces "Yellow Fever")

   • Catalog #: GEFD 25124 (U.S.) citeturn0search2

If you discover your remix tracks instead correspond to the European expanded version with the two Fire Water Burn bonus mixes, that's the third one worth looking at:

• GED 25185 / 425 185-2 (Europe, 14-track CD) citeturn0search5

That's probably all you'll need to triangulate everything in Discogs without me spoiling the track listings. I actually like this format—just enough information to get you to the correct release page, then you get to do the archaeological digging yourself.

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: This one was actually easy to pin down.

From your description, you almost certainly have the German/European Enhanced CD single.

• Catalog #: 497 085-2
• Label: Geffen / Jimmy Franks Recording Company / Republic
• Country: Germany (European release)
• Year: 1999 citeturn0search3turn0search6

The audio tracks on that release are exactly what you described:

1. The Bad Touch (LP)
2. The Bad Touch (The God Lives Underwater Mix)
3. The Bad Touch (The K.M.F.D.M. Mix)
4. Along Comes Mary (The Bloodhound Gang Mix)

...plus an enhanced "Kiss Me Where It Smells Funny" video as the fifth session on the disc. citeturn0search3turn0search7

So if your MP3s stop after the KMFDM mix, you're simply missing "Along Comes Mary (The Bloodhound Gang Mix)" from that release.

One thing I noticed that may save us time in future Bloodhound Gang questions: there are several Bad Touch singles that look almost identical, but the mix names are diagnostic. Seeing God Lives Underwater + KMFDM together immediately narrows it to this specific European/Australian maxi-CD family. The other singles substitute Eiffel 65, Rollergirl, or other remixes instead. citeturn0search12turn0search5

This is exactly the kind of fingerprint I'll look for from now on: a couple of unique remix names are often enough to identify the correct CD without needing the full track list.

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: I think you've probably been carrying that file around unnecessarily.

I could not find any commercial CD release of Use Your Fingers that has a 32-second track called "Sex Scene." The known CD releases (Cheese Factory 480703 2 and Columbia COL 480703 2) have the same 20-track program. citeturn0search5turn0search1

What they do have is a hidden/final track:

• Track 20: Bloodhound Sex Scene
• Length: approximately 0:47 (47 seconds) citeturn0search3turn0search5

So there are a couple of likely explanations:

1. Your MP3 was manually trimmed from the 47-second hidden track down to about 32 seconds. This was very common in the Napster/Kazaa era.

2. Someone renamed it. "Sex Scene" is a plausible shorthand for "Bloodhound Sex Scene," and early MP3 collections were full of abbreviated or improvised titles.

3. Less likely: it came from a fan compilation or demo collection where someone split the hidden track off as its own file.

I'd check one thing before deleting it:

• Does it sound like the hidden "Bloodhound Sex Scene" track?
• If so, I'd simply rename it Bloodhound Sex Scene and note that it's an edited/truncated copy if it's only 32 seconds.

That would be my working assumption with high confidence. I don't see evidence of a legitimate CD release containing a separate 32-second track titled "Sex Scene." citeturn0search3turn0search5

G: [Non-text content: thoughts; content_type=thoughts]

G: [Non-text content: reasoning_recap; content_type=reasoning_recap]

G: Found it. This one is refreshingly unambiguous.

The CD you're looking for is:

• Catalog #: 06024 9889018 9
• EAN: 0602498890189
• Country: Europe (Geffen/Republic)
• Release date: 25 Nov 2005 citeturn0search2turn0search4

That's the CD maxi containing exactly:

1. Album Version
2. The Push Remix
3. The Scooter Remix
4. The Tomcraft Remix citeturn0search2turn0search0

For Discogs, I'd search either:

• 0602498890189
• 9889018
• Bloodhound Gang Uhn Tiss 9889018

The EAN is particularly useful because it's unique and tends to get you to the exact release very quickly.

I think we've hit on a good pattern here: catalog number + EAN (if available) is probably the most reliable pair of identifiers for these European maxi-CDs, especially when there are multiple singles with nearly identical titles.