Jump to content

Talk:Trespass (album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Trespass (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 09:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


  • Not an issue for GA, but you're inconsistent with publisher locations; there's a location in footnote 50, but not in any of the sources cited in the list below. Also, that list is out of alphabetical order; the last item starts with Banks.
  • External links are OK, and Earwig finds no problems.

Generally this looks in excellent shape. The organization is good, and the sources look fine. I have some prose suggestions, but most of these are pretty minor points.

  • The line-up during this time was founding members, lead vocalist Peter Gabriel, suggest "The line-up during this time was the founding members: lead vocalist Peter Gabriel, ".
I've changed this around and split it into two sentences elsewhere, which I think flows a bit better generally. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The eldest and more experienced musician, Mayhew was from a different background: suggest "The oldest and most experienced".
Again, I've taken this, but reworded it and split to two sentences. It reads a little bit better now in my view. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Phillips recalled that recording was only "slightly more sophisticated" than From Genesis to Revelation, and recalled Anthony disliked having someone "drop in" their individual parts: repetition of "recalled".
Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • it offered little room to change its sound: what does "its" refer to here? Should it be "their", referring to "the already composed songs"?
Yes, I've reworded this so it's more obvious Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • along classical, pop and folk music: presumably should be "along with".
Indeed it does Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • which he thought made group achieve a more unique and innovative sound: should be "made the group", but how about "which he thought created [or led to] a more unique and innovative sound"?
I've gone with "Gabriel was particularly fond of the combined twelve-string guitars and thought they gave the group a more unique and innovative sound." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was older than the rest of the band and felt an outsider: ambiguous -- make it "felt himself to be an outsider" or "felt to them like an outsider", depending on which you mean.
Gone with "considered and outsider". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The cover showed mountains in the distance and two people looking out of a window at it, that represented the pastoral themes of some of the songs. Something wrong here -- "that" doesn't have a referent. I guess you have to go with the source, but mountains and looking out of a window doesn't seem pastoral to me. Can the connection be made more clearly?
I've rewritten this to "The cover showed two people looking out of a window at mountains" (where have I heard that before?) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:30, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thanks for doing the review. This is just a quick holding reply to say I'm working on two other GA reviews right now (as you can see from my contributions); they should hopefully be done and dusted within the next day or two and I can then crack on with this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:28, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No hurry; I'll keep an eye open for edits. It was a pleasure doing the review -- this was one of the first albums I bought as a teenager. When I was about 14 I thought "White Mountain" was the coolest song ever written. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've gone through the issues. I recall getting hold of a cassette copy of this when I was about 19, I'd already heard their later albums but this was the first one I could easily play along to. Even so, some of the composition in it, considering none of the core four were over 20 and they didn't have the secret weapon of Phil on drums at that point, is pretty impressive. It's fortunate that Tony Stratton Smith took a liking to them and got them in the studio, because they were ultra-obscure at that point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All the fixes look good, so promoting. And thanks for the Python link; hadn't thought about that sketch in thirty years. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:55, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Art rock per Bowler / Dray?

[edit]

Regarding the addition of art rock to the infobox genre parameter, can anybody confirm whether the Bowler and Dray book supports this? It's not mentioned anywhere else in the article, which makes me suspicious, and the IP is from Russia. Pinging Ritchie333 who first introduced the Bowler and Dray book as a source in January 2018. I see that nowhere in Ritchie333's expansion work was any mention of art rock. Binksternet (talk) 20:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I'm fine with this. It just looked like a legitimate source at first so I just wanted to double-check. dannymusiceditor oops 17:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bowler / Dray page x (last page of the introduction) calls Genesis "The last bastions of art-rock", but that's not in relation to any specific album. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Because of that correct page number and correct genre-of-the-band-per-author, I give the Russian editor more credit for having part of the idea supported. But like you imply, the album genre is not necessarily the same as the band genre. Binksternet (talk) 23:16, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Banks' recording equipment

[edit]

Can we speficy which instruments Tony Banks used during the recordings which the following article summarizes perfectly including the minor differences to the live setup?

"Banks's earliest setup included a Hammond L-111 organ, a Hohner Pianet N and a Mellotron mkII, all of which (as well as grand piano) are first heard on the Trespass album (except the Hammond, which was replaced with a L-122 model, with a brighter sound than the L-111, used only in the early demo tracks)." http://www.radioswisspop.ch/en/music-database/musician/15431972c14861c60db1dd92bb09b6ff95bfd/biography — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.49.210 (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same Info on Spanish Wikipedia: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Banks#Trespass,_Nursery_Cryme,_Foxtrot_(1970_-_1973) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.49.210 (talk) 21:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first source is a mirror of Wikipedia; the second is another Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and in this specific instance it creates a problem where you actually want to find out what models were actually used, and keep tracing it back to guesswork originating on-wiki. And since guesswork can stay on Wikipedia for upwards of fifteen years now, it can create a serious problem.
Most studios around 1970 would have a Hammond permanently installed, which might have been a C-3 or an RT-3, which have a superset of features of an L. There is no difference between an L-111 and L-122 except for the cabinet style; if a Hammond sounded different, it's because they all did depending on the setup of the tonewheel generator - you could have got one L-122 sounding brighter than the other. The only definitive piece of information we have is the sleeve credits published by Charisma Records, which just say "organ". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:06, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree with your point regarding the use of Wikipedia as a source, but I don't understand why for the second time you don't accept/refer at all to the article I have linked to which perfectly sums up what specific equipment was used. It totally matches with the equipment that Genesis owned or lend at that time (besides Tridents grand piano). Bear in mind that Genesis was a first and foremost a live band at the point in time. They simply recorded their live material and therefore used the same instruments (again, besides Trident's grand piano and a Mellotron MK II they lend).
- The entry that a Hammand L series was used is an improvment to "organ". Trident studios didn't have a Hammond permanently installed, but a Bechstein grand piano (See article about Trident Studio, footnote 1) which was used. Again this is an improvement to the information that a "piano" was used.
- According to Wikipedia policies articles should be improved and bold statements made. And if there is a different opinion it should be discussed, not simply discarded. Especially not, if a more detalied source is provided. Simply reverting the article to a less informative state is neither an improvement nor a base for discussion. So how about finding a compromise and adding the link to the article I provided as a footnote to the line that you don't want to be changed and give readers a chance to decide for themselves (or discuss) if they want to read this information and accept the source or not? :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.49.210 (talk) 07:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can indeed be bold and improve stuff, but if somebody reverts with good reason, you need to discuss. Anyway, the radioswisspop.ch link is a copy of Tony Banks (musician), and an out of date one at that. However, we can use the original article to see what sources that cites. The Hammond use is cited to this article that states "(similar to the T‑102 Tony Banks used", and that's the only mention. It did previously state "Banks's earliest setup included a Hammond L-111 organ, a Hohner Pianet N and a Mellotron mkII, all of which (as well as grand piano) are first heard on the Trespass album (except the Hammond, which was replaced with a L-122 model, with a brighter sound than the L-111, used only in the early demo tracks)", but I removed it in October 2015 because it had been tagged as "citation needed" for nearly three years at that point.
The Trident Studios article says at the top: "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed." In other words, it is not trustworthy. The first footnote cites a book without a page number, which means it's not practical to fact check what is said there is true (who wants to go through several hundred pages to find something?)
So, in summary, you are trying to claim that something that has been factionally questionable on-wiki for over seven years is true. You need high-quality sources to back this up, which has to be either an official band biography or an interview with Tony Banks that is from a trustworthy enough source to be considered correct. Anything else is fan guesswork, and fans get stuff wrong. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:53, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tony Banks didn't initially use the T-102 model (but from 1974 to 1980). We can find the same information in this wikipedia-article: "Bought a L-122 when the band was formed,[26] which was replaced by a T-102.[27]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hammond_organ_players. Two sources are cited. One quotes him saying "I went into a shop with the cash and came out with a Hammond L122." The other one about the T-102 refers to the above mentioned article https://www.soundonsound.com/people/regenesis which is not fan guesswork, but the keyboarder from a quite known Genesis tribute band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGenesis_(band). Why is it ok to use the same source in the other wikipedia article, but not here? I any case it is obvious from all of these articles that he didn't only use an "organ", but a Hammond organ.
More information about the Trident Studio: http://www.tridentaudiopost.com/history/ It basically confirms that they were using a Bechstein grand piano and not only a "piano".
If you only use "an official band biography or an interview with Tony Banks" you can basically delete most of this article. (And of course the entry in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hammond_organ_players about Banks' use of the T-102). Could you make a counter proposal how we could include these complementing (and not contradicting) informations? For example packed in a footnote while adding "according to this source"? (Btw. I don't agree that the articles that have been provided are "questionable" according to the Wikipedia guidelines on "questionable sources".) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.9.49.210 (talk) 14:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The general consensus for album articles is we stick to what the sleeve notes say, otherwise you get endless feuds with people edit-warring over the credits. "My personnel list is better than your personnel list". No thanks. Keep it at what the sleeve note says. People keep arguing over minutiae without fixing the big issues.
This article is a good article and has been reviewed closely to make sure it is high quality. If you want something to improve, go to Banks' article and improve that. The problem is that we can't raise article quality retrospectively, and it is a longstanding issue that we need help from all editors. The best strategy is to look at the article quality on the talk page. If it is "Start class", it needs improving immediately. If it's "Good article", there are high standards. If it's "Featured article", there are very high standards and it needs careful editing otherwise your work is likely to be reverted. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:20, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I did the good article review, and would like to add that I agree with Ritchie333 -- without a high-quality source that specifically says what gear was used in the studio for Trespass, we should not change this article. If we have a good source for what Banks generally used, then that could go in the article on Banks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for explaining the standards. I understand your reservations and where this information could end up better. Is "Without Frontiers: The Life and Music of Peter Gabriel" a valid source? Re: Hammond: "The introduction to ‘White Mountain’ sounds not unlike something that would, just a matter of years later, be brought home by package tourists from a Balearic island, with a nod to ‘Those Were The Days’ by Mary Hopkin. The album’s title track of sorts, it swung over a two-note Hammond refrain by Banks before breaking down to the soon-to-be-trademark intermeshing double 12-string work." and "‘Visions Of Angels’, written largely by Phillips, was a leftover from From Genesis To Revelation. A delicate pop song with a plaintive piano riff and a heavily treated Gabriel vocal, it features some of Banks’ best Hammond work before culminating in an early use of the Mellotron for the group".

Cobham vs. Chobham

[edit]

Ritchie333, I see our article on Tony Gabriel says he was born in Chobham, not Cobham, so is it possible the IP is right and this article should say Chobham? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:12, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie333, just checking you saw this? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Who is Tony Gabriel? Anyway, it's taken a while to get to my book sources; anyhow the source does say "Chobham", I was getting Cobham confused with Dorking which is where the band rehearsed; also it's very common to get the two places mixed up, which happens all the time. Would have helped if the edit summary hadn't said "fixed typo", it's not a typo, it's a factual error spelled correctly! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's obviously Tony Banks merged with Peter Gabriel in the brain of someone not paying attention to what they're typing. Glad it's fixed now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Christie You mean, Peter Gabriel, not Tony Gabriel. 2601:282:F00:4230:F894:AD07:3019:8027 (talk) 08:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trespass_(album)&oldid=1211531297"