Talk:Van der Graaf Generator/Archive 1

Archive 1

Lydon

"Somewhat unique" is an oxymoron, and I believe John Lydon has also expressed a fondness for Magma, so probably best to remove this sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.12.6.230 (talk) 13:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It's not an oxymoron, it's litotes. :p--feline1 (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I put the reference in, because I've seen a couple of references state he likes VDGG over just a cursory description of the group. Conventional wisdom states punk was a reaction to prog, so having a leading punk like a prog band is notable. Lydon, himself, at this point, would tell everyone to mind their own business and stop taking his words out of context, probably staring at you while he did it.--Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Guitar

the article made the claim that when VdGG reformed for Godbluff, their sound had changed to feature Hammill playing loads of guitar. I've seen this repeated elsewhere on the net too. I've changed this as I really don't think it's particularly correct - Hammill already plays guitar on all the John Anthony-produced VdGG albums! (admittedly, mostly acoustic stuff) - there's tons on Aerosol Grey Machine; quite a bit on Least We Can Do (eg After the Flood's main hook); H to He has some (lots on Killer, for instance, a spacey bits of Pioneers over C); Pawn Hearts has the intro riff to Lemmings and some electric slide in the middle of Man-erg. ....contrast with Godbluff, which has hardly ANY guitar! (there's a few 'kerr-chang!'-style power chords at the end of Scorched Earth. I'd wager it's only really World Record and QZ/PD that sees prominent electric geetar use.... (Of course, there's gazillions of electric guitars on Hammill's solo albums, not least on the noiser tracks, which usually feature all of VdGG playing drums, bass, sax and organ anyways.... 'go figure' or sthg...)--feline1 14:26, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wasn't one of the big things about VDGG at the time that they didn't use synthesisers on any of their albums??? Or am I thinking of Queen????

I havn't played my VDGG albums for a looong time but I don't recall synthesisers on Pawn hearts, etc quercus robur (showing my age and dubious prog tendencies again...)

I'm afraid (very afraid) that you're thinking of Queen - their early albums have smarmy comments along the lines of "Nobody played synthesisers" on them (they later used them frequently). In the gatefold to Pawn Hearts, on the other hand, it says "Hugh Banton - ...Mellotron, ARP Synthesizer..." among other things. --Camembert (not really old enough for this, but with an old and dubious record collection)

I believe the Godbluff reference was referring more to electric guitar. Up to the point of Godbluff, there was only acoustic guitar (except for, of course, the presence of Robert Fripp on H to He and Pawn Hearts). The band information in the re-masters of "The least we can do is wave to each other" and for "He to He Who Am The Only One" says, for Peter Hammill - acoustic guitar and lead vocals. Robert Fripp guests on "Emperor In His War Room". But, on "Pawn Hearts", I believe it is Peter Hammill playing the guitar on "Lemmings (featuring Cog)". He certainly played electric guitar at the concert I attended last year on this track (and not an acoustic in site, I might add). The guitar on "A Plague Of Lighthouse Keepers", although barely audible, is Robert Fripp again. I do agree about Godbluff and Still Life though, far less guitar, but you must admit, they had a different sound to their earlier albums. --Geck0 06:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

To continue on from my previous point... On "The least we can do is wave to each other", the very prominent electric guitar playing on the track "Whatever Would Robert Have Said?" was played by bass player, Nic Potter. --Geck0 09:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

When I met Nic Potter in the mid-eighties, he told me that "Whatever Would Robert Have Said" was the very first time he had played guitar, having previously only played bass. Incidentally, according to "The Book", Potter went on to play bass on Chuck Berry's only number one, "My Ding A Ling"

Pawn Hearts

Article states that Pawn Hearts had only 3 tracks on it. this is incorrect. The original pressing also had Theme One as track 2, side 1. I should know - I had the vinyl and my band in HS did a cover of it. This should be corrected.

Well, you know where the "edit this page" link is, right? :) --Camembert

works for me. done.

all the best, Hwarwick

I believe Theme One is only on the US version of Pawn Hearts.

yes that's right, so I've changed the article back again. The album was originally conceived with the three main tracks on - Theme One was just a bonus track for the US release. So it doesn't count as a track on the album.

Reunion gig

Tickets are now on sale for a reunion gig, scheduled for 7th May 2005 in London's Royal Festival Hall - classic Banton/Jackson/Evan/Hammill line-up. Worryingly, they're apparently already recorded a double album of new material! Be very afraid...

Theme One

Am I remembering correctly that a track called "Theme One" by VdGG was used by Tommy Vance as a jingle on the Friday Rock Show on BBC Radio 1 years ago? Or is my crumbling memory entering its final decline? --Phil | Talk 17:22, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)

I thought it was Alan Freeman on his saturday afternoon rock show in the 70s? But it was definately one of those 70s shows quercus robur 17:59, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It was Vance's show, yes. It wasn't the show's theme tune, though - he used to talk over it between playing records. As stated above, the track appeared on the US edition of Pawn Hearts, and was also a single. --Richardrj 12:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Van der Graaf Generator (band) → Van der Graaf Generator … Rationale: The (band) part is unnecessary - Van der Graaf Generator is simply a redirect to Van der Graaf Generator (band) anyway, as it stands. Note: There is another usage, the physics machine Van de Graaff generator, but since this has a different spelling, a simple dab link at the top of each page is enough. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Van der Graaf Generator (band). — SteveRwanda 16:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Survey

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. Andrewa 03:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support - per nom. SteveRwanda 16:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• Seems harmless enough. I can't get excited about it either way, but if there's no opposition to the request we should do it. Andrewa 03:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Done. Andrewa 03:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Jackson on 'Vital'

I won't revert your edit again, but you are wrong about Jackson's status in the band for Vital. I realise he wasn't a member for The Quiet Zone/The Pleasure Dome, but the back cover of Vital, shown here, lists him as a full member, noting by way of an asterisk that he can only be heard on side 2 onwards. For the purposes of the timeline, it would be most accurate to give his dates as a member as 1970-76 and 1978. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

If I am wrong, I'll change it back. Even though Phil Smart/Jim Christopulos' "Van der Graaf Generator - The Book" say he quit in 1977 (January, as opposed to Hugh Banton, who quit end 1976) and did not join in 1978...Mark in wiki 14:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. I'm not disputing that he quit in '77, but it's the way he is listed on the back cover of Vital that makes me think that he should be regarded as a member of the band at the time of those gigs. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It may take us some time, but the end result is worth while! :-) --Mark in wiki 15:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Requested move (again)

OK, so I'm really confused. We had this a few months ago (see above) and now it seems to have come up again. User:WhaleWey has moved Van der Graaf Generator to Van der Graaf Generator (band), to disambiguate with the piece of apparatus. I don't agree with this, since many more people are interested in the band than in the apparatus. I'm not going to change anything, because there seem to be loads of redirects that I can't get my head around, so perhaps someone else can sort out the mess. All I know is that if you type "van der graaf generator" into the search box and hit Go, you should be taken to the band page, which is not happening at the moment. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 07:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Besides, there is (note the capitalization and spelling) Van der Graaf Generator, which is the band, and Van de Graaff generator, which supposedly is the apparatus. So long as in the top of each of the two articles there's a link to take you to the other one (apparatus - band), in my opinion there should not be the addition "(band)". Mark in wiki 12:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Van der Graaf Generator should be the article about the band, and Van de Graaff Generator about the machine. Full stop. The way it is now that the band name redirects to the machine article is totally wrong. --Peter Eisenburger 19:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I quite agree, Peter. The band's name is a different spelling to the apparatus, so the tag "(band}" in this case, is not required. I have seen the apparatus spelt the same as the band, but that's incorrect, as we know. Therefore I agree with the move. --Geck0 09:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

So now there still is this addition '(band)'? I am sorry to say so, but I think it is quite ridiculous...! There should, IMO, not be a page called 'Van der Graaf Generator (band)' in wiki, only a page 'Van der Graaf Generator' (yes, and a page 'Van de Graaff generator', but that's something different altogether).Mark in wiki 07:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The move needs to be done by an admin, because it involves a move to a page that already exists (the redirect page). In order for an admin to make the move, it needs to be listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves. It was listed there as an uncontroversial proposal, but a couple of editors commented on it, thus making it 'de facto' possibly controversial. It has now been removed from the page - see this edit. I agree with you that the word 'band' should not be in the title, so I will try and restart the process on the requested moves page. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I will move the page in a few days when I find some time - if noone else does. I have to carefully read the policies for moving. --Peter Eisenburger 10:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much Peter. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 12:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The move didn't work. Either I made a mistake or the move is blocked. I asked for help on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.--Peter Eisenburger 09:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Everything's right now. Thank you, Consumed Crustacean.

Discography

Of course Time Vaults is no compilation album at all, and neither is Now And Then, nor The Box, strictly taken. Were there any special reasons to see those as compilation albums? Mark in wiki 13:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hammill songwriter

Was alright for me. And now you have a break in tenses. --Peter Eisenburger 14:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Fine - I've reverted my edit. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Discography

Mark, why do you think, "The Box" is "no compilation"? I know this set very well since I own it. It matches exactly the Wikipedia definition of Compilation album. I'm not sure about the other albums whose place you changed, but for now I move "The Box" into the category it was before. A Happy New Year.--Peter Eisenburger (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It's fine by me. I think it is no compilation, because there are tracks on it that were never released before. I think the definition of wiki amounts to nothing (I mean: has no meaning, is no real definition). It says: "an album featuring tracks from one recording artist." According to that definition, every album is a compilation. Oh, and I changed the place of Time Vaults too. I think it's hilarious to see that as a compilation album, but all the same I don't really mind. Best wishes to you too! Mark in wiki (talk) 18:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Unofficial albums

I have removed the mentions of the "Now And Then" album, since it was unofficial, and the band VdGG never saw a dime from it, according to Peter Hammill in one of his newsletters. He urged people not to buy it. Besides, we don't list "Gentlemen Prefer Blues" from 1985, and "Now And Then" was a sort of a reissue of that album... On a side-note: Peter Hammill also urged people not to buy the DVD "Inside VdGG". Should that be listed anyway? What are the criteria really? Mark in wiki (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Surely there's someone around who has a nice picture of the band to upload to this page...? Mark in wiki (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

There must be lots of photos on Flickr. I can never get my head round the whole copyright/fair use thing, but I do know that under certain circumstances it's possible to use photos that have been uploaded to Flickr. Just a thought, --Richardrj ^{talk email} 14:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

It's great that someone has uploaded a photo which looks to be allowed by the rules, but it's missing someone fairly important, namely the leader of the group. We still need one that shows all the group members. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Advance knowledge of reunion appearances

I've taken the last remaining bit out because I really don't see that it has any place here. So "some" people knew about the Union Chapel? Big deal. What people, and does it really matter anyway? I think not. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Everyone on the pH7 mailing list (around 700 subscribers at the time) knew that the "classic" line-up was going to perform at least one song at the Union Chapel gig. Before the show started, it was all everyone was talking about in the bar... MarkRae (talk) 17:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah this is nonsense. I was on pH7 at the time and I can assure you that there were no emails at all prior to the gig stating that they were going to play together. I was in the front row for the gig and neither I nor anyone I knew had any idea that it was going to happen. I'm not denying that a few people knew about it due to personal connections with band members, but the entire list most certainly did not. And even if they had done, it wouldn't be worthy of note in this article. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 19:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Piero Messina

I reverted this edit which claimed that Piero Messina on The Long Hello I was PH under an alias. I've always understood that Messina was someone else and I'm pretty sure PH didn't take part in the making of the album. There needs to be a citation that Messina = Hammill. The Book would probably clear this up but I don't have access to my copy right now. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The Book does clear it up. Although some people still think they are one and the same person, Piero Messina is someone himself and is most definitely not Hammill. Mark in wiki (talk) 12:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I quote from page 189-190: "After the release, later in 1974, certain fans believed that 'Piero Messina' was one of Peter Hammill's aliases, and that he had secretly appeared on the album. Peter took great pains in interviews to refute this and give proper credit to the real Piero Messina." No more words needed about this subject, I believe. :-) Mark in wiki (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-direct

I don't know how to fix it but should not the thing for which this band is named be the default article and this one should be the one at the top of the article that i can click if i want it? (me no english good--sorry) 96.50.10.234 (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed before (see this very page). The spelling differs: there's Van der Graaf Generator for the band and Van de Graaff generator for the machine. Mark in wiki (talk) 08:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)