Talk:Edgar Froese

Untitled

Please stop deleting the addition of "New Age Musician" unless you can say that Edgar or Tangerine Dream are not universally known as New Age. Dunk meister 05:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not "universally known" as new age artist, see different talk pages (TD and klaus schulze one for instance). Some of the additions of biographies to the new age articles are fine, however additions like this are you over-simplified, overstated and in a non-encyclopaedic style... Refer to trustworthy sources like allmusic.com and their biographies before adding phrase that don't fit with the textflow, delete information and look overdone. This encyclopedia tries to show some subtle differences, differentiations etc.. not call every artist you can find new age.

Edgar and most of the musicians in TD hated the use of 'NEW AGE' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.24.112 (talk) 10:28, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Albums

Why do some of the album titles link to uploaded pictures of their cover art? Rezzu (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's against WP standards. Images should be inserted into articles, not linked from them, and a click on the image should take you to a Wikipedia page with licensing info, not just the bare JPEG. Someone should create stub articles for the albums, where these pictures would belong. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 00:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC) (edited)[reply]

Recent edits

I'm hoping not to get into an edit war! The paragraph listing the remakes of Tangerine Dream albums has been removed twice and put back twice (the latter time by me). The most recent restore was done because because (a) in paragraph form, this information isn't really duplicating a discography-like listing of Tangerine Dream's discog, it's more of a footnote noting the situation; (b) even if it were a duplication of information, it's still appropriate that these albums be mentioned in both discogs, as would be the case of a collaboration between two artists; (c) the new info added after the latest removal appears to be more of the same kind of information, so all of this should really be put together to give a complete picture. Hope you agree, but if not, let's discuss here before reverting or altering again. Thanks.

I'm not opposed to mentioning them, but being remixed does not turn them from TD albums into Froese solo albums. It's kind of overstating what they are. .--Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 02:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going by what the TD discog page says: "In the 2000s, Edgar Froese has re-interpreted and re-recorded three Virgin Years album in modern instrumentation"; this sounds like more than a remix. I haven't heard the albums, so I can't say whether this description is accurate. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also hope you agree with my rationale of placing remakes chronologically within the main discography to preserve the order of release, instead of appending them to the originals.

Not particularly an issue for me, you you think it's better that way, fine for me. OTOH I think (well, okay, Voices in the Net says so) Ages and EIMP didn't come out until 2005 too. The former came out sometime before the rest of the bunch, which were released simultaneously IIRC. .--Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 02:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these albums have been seen with different dates in various discogs, and it's likely they were released later than originally announced, so I'm agreeable to changing them to 2005. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Electronic Dreams is definitely a 1980 release, not 1976. Brain Records released a whole slew of compilation albums in 1980, of which this is one, but did not put any indication of release date on any of them, only (c) and (P) dates of the tracks, indicating their origianl release years. Some discographers have presumed the latest date mentioned is the release date of the compilation, so there is some misinformation going around. I put "circa. 1980" on the off-chance it came out in 79 or 81, but 80 is 80% likely, and any date outside this range is impossible. The catalogue numbering system, label design, and cover layout clearly identify the era. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 22:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The catalog numbering system is a good point… Discogs.com has 1979.--Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 02:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

discogs.com is a website for collectors to add information about albums they own, and as I said, there is no indication of release date on the cover. If the discogs.com contributor doesn't say where he got the info, I don't consider it reliable. I see you changed the date and moved it, but I'm going to change it back, as I think 1979 is unlikely. I was an avid collector of TD in the 1970s and 1980s, and did not see that album until around the time Virgin's comp came out in 1981, so late 1980 or early 1981 is most likely, and I'm still going with 1980 because of the many Brain comps released that year. In any event, I'm certain it didn't come out before Stuntman. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name pronunciation?

Frees? Froze? Freeze? Frose? Thanks! -- Richfife (talk) 17:49, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FRO-za. The introduction on Poland is correct, Encore is wrong. --— Gadget850 (Ed)^talk 05:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - Richfife (talk) 19:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't. It's pronounced "Fröse". The "ö" is somewhat close to the way you would pronounce the u in "curve".2001:638:602:1111:AD41:FCE5:D4E7:7281 (talk) 12:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

His name originates from the very name of the Baltic tribe Prussians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.172.27 (talk) 22:45, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Death

In Memoriam
Edgar Froese

So. Farewell then
Edgar Froese.
You have crossed your Rubicon.
With a Y.

Ericoides (talk) 12:04, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's merely changed his cosmic address. Which might, or might not, be some comfort.

2602:304:AE26:8A89:807D:6C0D:4BEE:87C0 (talk) 18:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edgar Froese. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110416080859/http://www.williamshatner.com:80/Article419.phtml to http://www.williamshatner.com/Article419.phtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A disgustingly constructed sentence

"Edgar Froese remarried to artist and musician Bianca Acquaye."
I think, it has two mistakes. First, it should be "remarried smb", not "remarried to smb". Second, if they hadn't been married, he couldn't have remarried her. Sure, he remarried, but not her. Am I right?--Adûnâi (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not very good was it, although I wasn't really disgusted. I've trimmed it slightly and added a source for the year. I think we'll have to wait and see if Bianca Acquaye gets an article, so I've also removed the redlink. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edgar Froese. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150405192929/http://www.schallwelle-preis.de/international to http://www.schallwelle-preis.de/international

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:40, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]