# Talk:Music of Kingdom Hearts

If someone could do a copy edit on this article it would be a big help. More importantly, If someone who is proficient in Japanese do a fact check of some of the statements with citations from Japanese websites, that would be most graciously appreciated. My Japanese is limited and  after a couple of hours of going through sentences/words with online translators and my own knowledge of Japanese grammar, I'm not 100% confident in the content posted, specifically info about Yoko Shimomura's in the "Creation and influence" section. If these tasks can be done I think it might be ready for GA nomination soon. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

Thy will be done. Axem Titanium 19:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Meets all criteria fairly well. It could stand for some prose polishing, but otherwise great. — Deckiller 00:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that's my job! :) And I'm not done yet. Maybe you could take a look when I'm finished? Axem Titanium 01:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, didn't notice the section-stub under Reception. It's just GA; we all know it's up to standards even now. — Deckiller 01:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Just thought I'd throw out a few ideas on what could be done to maybe get this article to FA. What does everyone think about changing the headings of the Musical pieces to include the Japanese song title also? Like "Simple And Clean and Hikari" and "Sanctuary and Passion". Because right now, the content is more focused on the English themes, and I know they could be expanded with more info on the Japanese themes.
The "Creation and influence" section could also use some more content, particularly in regard to Yoko Shimomura's contributions. I remember reading something about her thoughts or the amount of work she did for the reworked tracks in Re:Chain of Memories. But at the time I only skimmed through it because I was looking for development info for one of the games and don't remember where I found it. If anyone comes across this or anything regarding her contributions it would greatly be appreciated.
Any thoughts or suggestions? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

I think it would be a great idea to also show information from a Japanese perspective in addition to an English one, be it North American or otherwise. I support including the Japanese song titles right along with the English ones, as long as a transliteration is also included. Taric25 (talk) 01:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, there's kind of a problem with that because "Hikari" is so far the only piece in the entire series to have a Japanese name.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Just throwing out a request to anyone who can find the information. If anyone can find some sales number on the soundtracks I think that would really help in getting this article to FA. Or if someone has some suggestions on places to look, that would be helpful as well. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC))

From WP:VG/A. I have one comment: the prose is awkward sometimes. Check User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a, and do some editing there. Something else that struck me was the first music sample, apparently a remix - is this appropriate here? Rated A-class, waiting for confirmation on that. User:Krator (t c) 11:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll agree with that. I'd also add that there are large empty spaces in the article around the track listings, I'd recommend trying to get rid of them if possible. Rating A-class. -- Sabre (talk) 14:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Should the article be moved to Discography of Kingdom Hearts to be consistent with the recent renaming of the FF music articles? Also should it be "of Kingdom Hearts" or "of the Kingdom Hearts series"? Kariteh (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I noticed this recent trend and wondered when it would get here. Personally, I think the article focuses more on the music as a whole. The "Creation", "Musical pieces", and "Reception" sections all take this approach. I've also been thinking of restructuring the "Release" section some to reduce the number of fair use images. This would remove more focus from the separate albums too. If there's a huge number of editors wanting to change the name, I'm willing to go with the flow. But I don't really see a reason to rename this specific article. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC))

For example, this says Yoko Shimomura respects "orchestral pieces such as" and then proceeds to list two non-orchestral pieces right after. "Such as" can't be used before two examples that aren't actual examples; the two are solo piano pieces.
The article also uses the word "song" when talking about non-song pieces (or movements, depending on whether all the collected music for the game is counted as some sort of multi-movement suite).  For example, the line "To keep aspects of it intact, Shimomura used a trial and error method to arrange the song." is not even discussing a song.  I think the only actual songs in either Kingdom Hearts game are by Utada Hikaru. I'm pretty sure Yoko Shimomura wrote no SONGS for either Kingdom Hearts game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.60.150 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 14 May 2009

With all due respect, I don't see how two descriptive errors equates to "riddled". Nor do I appreciate the tone of the post. If I misinterpret this, I apologize.
I must admit, however, that I am not even remotely musically inclined or knowledgeable, and am glad that such mistakes can now be corrected. Next time though, you could easily make these simple corrections yourself. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

This article is more like a discography than an album article- the "single cover for identification of the subject" argument doesn't work. Unless the covers themselves are important, they should not be included. As such, I have removed them. Discussion regarding the issue is obviously fine, but please do not simply revert me- the burden of proof lies with those wishing to include the content. J Milburn (talk) 18:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

How is this not like an album article? There is discussion of musical influences etc. and critical commentary/reception of all the albums. The only difference is that it is merged into one article, rather than spreading it out over multiple articles. I don't see why a legitimate article should be punished for merging content into one page. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Why do you believe that the covers are necessary? J Milburn (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Why are album covers necessary on any album article? Or game covers on a game article? It's the same reason. The only difference between this article and every article in Category:FA-Class Album articles is that this one covers more than one album. It's not a list. You can call it a discography, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have all the critical commentary and background creation information that would make it as good as any album FA article. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The same reasoning does not apply- album covers are used as they are the simplest illustration of the topic of the article. If the albums are not worthy of their own articles, they are not worthy of non-free images to illustrate them, unless the image itself is worth discussing. There is a certain level of "automatic" entitlement to an album cover in an album article (which some find a bad thing) but this does not extend to articles about multiple albums. Yes, there is commentary of the albums, just as there is commentary of albums in a decent article about an artist, but unless the covers are somehow significant, they need not be included. J Milburn (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, this is something I've thought about doing for a while now. I was going to remove the album images except for the "Kingdom Hearts Original Soundtrack Complete". Because that album is a compilation of most of the series' music, I believe it would be suitable in the article lead as its cover would satisfy the identification criteria. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC))
Potentially, but I don't think the cover itself is of particular importance, which it would be in an album article. As this article is about the music itself, rather than an album/the albums, perhaps the best lead "image" would be a sample of a track? Even better, a free image of a prominent composer or performer would be fantastic. J Milburn (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
There's this image of Utada who sang the two vocal theme songs. Though I still think the compilation album image has a legitimate fair use claim in this article. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC))
I think that sort of image would be best. I'm not quite sure what the cover of the compilation album would actually add, though I can understand your line of thought. J Milburn (talk) 20:07, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
What I can't understand is how a mesh of related albums that are not worthy of their own article, can be all added together to make a GA-class article? The sum of multiple unworthy pieces should not add up to a great thing. Either that or they are worthy of their own articles but were mashed together for the sake of having less trouble editing. NeoGenPT (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
That's the beauty of synergy, the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. Individually, most of the albums don't have enough sourcing to pass WP:N. The ones that do would have gaps and probably only make it to C- or B-class. One might be able to make it to GA, but it'd probably be delisted over time. Altogether though, the little bits round our the big chunks to create a detailed picture that in turn makes a very strong Good article. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC))
You might as well argue about every single list article out there and why they meet GA-class.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Can I ask why each sample is needed? Could they not be replaced with a single sample? If not, could the rationales please be updated to demonstrate exactly why each on of them is required, and what they are illustrating? J Milburn (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The three pieces selected to be sampled all have a substantial amount of related information including critical commentary, throughout the article. They represent the three most iconic pieces of the series. They're there to give the reader an idea of what the pieces sound like, as they read the discussion and commentary on those pieces. What exactly are you looking for in the rationales? Axem Titanium (talk) 19:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
An explanation of why those samples are needed, perhaps with pointers to where the style of the song/the style the song is being used to illustrate is discussed. What does each sample add to the article that needs to be added, and is not added by the other samples? J Milburn (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Can you point to some FU rationales that discuss particular style elements? I've never seen one like that. I always thought the commentary belonged in the article and not the file summary. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't often deal with music samples, so I'm afraid I can't offhand. Basically, a single piece could easily be justified with "this article is about the music, and this provides a demonstration of what the music is like" when there's a discussion of musical style (perhaps with some quotes from reviewers) in the article. I do not dispute that. However, such a response hardly works with three pieces- why not just use one? What does each add that the others do not? If you can't answer that, then two of the pieces should probably be removed. J Milburn (talk) 19:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The three samples were included because they are the most recognizable pieces of the series. The title piece, "Dearly Beloved" is typical of the rest of the music in the games, particularly the pace and instruments. "Simple And Clean (PLANITb Remix)" was distinct from the other pieces because it had vocals and was a techno song. "Passion ~after the battle~", like "Dearly Beloved" was a slower song, but had vocals. "Passion" also featured an effect that replayed some lyrics backwards during the song. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC))
Are all of these distinctions discusssed in the article? As in, is there a discussion of "Dearly Beloved" as the main piece and typical of the music in the game, a discussion of the different style of "Simple and Clean"? And could you please expand on the importance of "Passion"? J Milburn (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
To answer the first question, not entirely. I'd have to dig through the sources again to see if I can provide sources for them. In regard to the second, "Passion" is the only vocal sample that is in the original language. I'll get back to you after I do some research. I hope you can wait a while. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC))
I'm happy to wait- I do not think there's anything wrong with using three samples like this, I just hope that the article "supports" them, as it were, and feel they do need to have complete rationales (this is a high quality article, after all). J Milburn (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I've expanded on and copy edited the "Musical pieces" and "Reception" sections. Let me know if it adequately supports the three pieces. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC))
I've got to say, that's a big improvement. Thankyou for working to resolve these issues instead of blindly claiming that there was no issue. J Milburn (talk) 19:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Glad you approve. Thanks for the input. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC))

The tracklist need to be reformatted and Infoboxes are not needed if we add the information on the opening paragraph. 
he is the tracklist format 

 
if anyone wants to reformat the tracklist, please do so. but note that they cannot be collapsed unless they have refs having the tracklist on them due to WP:ACCESS. "note1", is only if you have kanji and cannot insert nihongo template.Bread Ninja (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just noticed this thread. :-\
I'm kind of indifferent the format changes, so long as we're consistent. I've considered removing the album infoboxes too, but didn't mainly because every other music article uses it. I certainly wouldn't oppose to their removal. Others may disagree though. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC))
I've made some of them into tracklist format but it will take me a while to put the others into tracklist. oh well. as for the infobox, they aren't necessary but if they want to keep them, then i guess it really wont matter.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

well just wondering why we have "passion ~after the battle~" when it would be more better to have a "sanctuary ~after the battle~" considering it's the international version. As for the track lists that have released in Europe and north America, i'm wondering for the tracks "hikari" and "passion" should be renamed to "simple and clean" and "sanctuary".Bread Ninja (talk) 16:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like most of these soundtracks were only released in Japan and thus would have the Japanese language versions of those tracks. I don't own these soundtracks so I couldn't verify for you, though. It appears that the US release of the KH1 OST has Simple and Clean, but it would probably just be confusing if we listed the US tracklist for just the KH1 OST but the Japanese tracklist for all the others. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Well we wouldn't edit all the soundtracks, just the ones released in english, the first one was released in US and in Europe, and that means simple and clean (simple and clean was used for international version, not just english territories). So simple and Clean would replace hikari, and in a note that hikari is the japanese version. as for kh2, i was certain that it released in english, but i was wrong. so that will not change.
as for the rest, they're fine since they didn't release in English territories or any other territory. But i still believe the music sample of "passion" should be replaced with "sanctuary" because it is used more than passion (since sanctuary is sued for international version)Bread Ninja (talk) 20:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I chose the samples to demonstrate the variety of the music.
Dearly Beloved: an instrumental piece
Simple And Clean remix: I chose the pop version because it was so different from the rest of the music. I chose the English version because this is the English Wikipedia and the game was released in English.
Passion original: I chose the slow version because it matched the tone of the rest of the music. I chose the Japanese version because the game and soundtrack originated in Japan.
Excluding the song's language of origin seemed unfair to me. So I felt that one Japanese and one English was a good balance, given the overall topic.
In regard to the first soundtrack, using the international names sounds like a good idea. I need to check the track listing when I get home, because I think some of the instrumental versions of Hikari were still called Hikari. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC))
I honestly don't see how it's unfair if it's in the musical piece section, not in the release section. I could see why you would put it in english because english Wikipedia, but there are more reasons. for example, samples like "simple and clean" and "Sactuary" are used all over, and more known in other countries. Soundtracks like "Passion" was only used in japan and the soundtrack hasn't been released outside.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I would say that "unfair" isn't the right word. In order to give proper weight to the original language, a Japanese language track should be included. It is also discussed critically, so it helps the reader hear what the original song sounds like. Axem Titanium (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
i don't know about that....why do they need to hear what the original sounds like? the reasoning is inconsistent. though sanctuary wasn't released in a kingdom hearts original soundtrack it was released in America separately in a Album of Utada Hikaru. Still considered part of kh music even if it wasn't released in a Kh soundtrack.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
I disagree that the logic is inconsistent. The music was presented in two different languages, and we have represented those two languages. We already have one international version, are two necessary at the expense of the topic's original language? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC))
then why show it with a different song? instead it would make more sense to do it with the same song. such as hikari. the way the description is, the logic does seemed inconsistent because the idea for each track was different. this would've worked better if both original and international versions of both songs was provided.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Different versions of the same song would have weaker fair use rationales. Because the melodies would be the same, the second version would offer much less in terms of new content. As a result, WP:NFCC 3A (Minimal usage) would not be meet.
I certainly see your point in how you describe inconsistency that way. But this was the best we could do within Wikipedia's guidelines. This is the same reason we don't have two different regional video game covers. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC))
Well sailor moon article has two different songs but keeps it minimal. I'm still not so sure, to me, it would be easier fi they were both all japanese or all english, but not a mix of both.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd make the same argument against the two version in Sailor Moon: the non-free melody is included in the article twice. In fact, I'd say the fair use claim is further diminished by the fact that the English lyrics of the audio sample are already in the prose.
I think that what's currently in the article is the best we can do while complying with non-free content criteria. The two themes give the most content possible: English language version, pop version, Japanese language version, and slow version. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:41, 31 August 2010 (UTC))
eh...could've been simpler. but it's fine for now.Bread Ninja (talk) 21:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
No argument there. Working with non-free media on Wikipedia keeps getting more difficult. It's almost enough to convince that we should deal with free media exclusively. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC))

As stated here and here, a three-disc compilation soundtrack containing music from 358/2 Days, Birth by Sleep, and Re:coded has been confirmed. When shall we add this to the article?
Also, in retrospect, should we separate the video game music soundtracks and "Piano Collections" into two separate sections? User:Immblueversion (talk) 02:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I suppose we could add it in now. It wont do that much harm. ANd i gues we could separate it as "Soundtracks" and "Compilation".Bread Ninja (talk) 03:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, we still don't know the new soundtrack's title. As for the Piano Collections, maybe we could just put the two separate titles into a smaller subsection. User:Immblueversion (talk) 05:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
No hurry to add it. We can wait until there is more information to make a proper section. But if there is a reliable source for it, then there's probably no harm to move forward.
I would forgo splitting the sections because all it will do is lengthen the table of contents. The content wouldn't be rearranged and it would break the chronology of any future soundtracks that were released. If the number grows too large, then it might do well to split, but I don't think we're there yet. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC))
There is now an official website and an entry on Amazon.co.jp. According to Amazon and, possibly more reliably, the lefthand "Topics" sidebar on the official Square Enix Music site, the soundtrack is called "Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep & 358/2 Days Original Soundtrack." Considering that music from Re:coded will also be included, the exclusion of its name in the title does come across as odd. Either way, it will be released on February 2, 2011. User:Immblueversion (talk) 16:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
It's probably because reLcoded has no new tracks. anyways, i dont think we should consider birth by sleep & 358/2 days original soundtrack a compilation if its being released as an ost. It's very different from kingdom hearts ost complete because those tracks were already released. unlike birth by sleep and 358/2 days.Bread Ninja (talk) 22:45, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering what's going on with disc 3, track 7 of the Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep & 358/2 Days OST. It is currently listed as "Xemnus" and has a comment saying, "This has NOT been confirmed as a misspelling of the character name 'Xemnas.'" But the tracklist here lists it as "Xemnas." Does anyone know what the source of the title "Xemnus" is, and how can a correct title be confirmed? 130.85.217.213 (talk) 21:25, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
It's xemnas, the official site says so.Bread Ninja (talk) 22:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The exact translation of "Scherzo Di Notte" from italian is "Trick on the night" or "Trick during night".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.8.31.112 (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC) 

In the section about the Dream Drop Distance soundtrack, it says it would be the first one Takeharu Ishimoto and Tsuyoshi Sekito composed music for. That's not true. They already composed for Birth By Sleep, and it can be heard clearly when listening to this game's soundtrack. 2003:E2:63C1:A4DE:9DEE:BCBB:A7D7:ABFC (talk) 14:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)