Talk:First Rays of the New Rising Sun

"Although no one can ever fully ascertain what the finished product would have sounded like had Jimi lived (with a presumed late 1970/early 1971 release date), this reconstruction of First Rays of the New Rising Sun is probably as close as possible to what Jimi would have intended."

Huh!? This is a contradiction. No one can be certain if this is what the album would have sounded like if Jimi had lived, yet this reconstruction is probably what he would have intended. In addition to being contradictory, it also appears to be a biased judgement on the part of the author. Perhaps presenting some further facts to support this judgement would be in order.

jimi was writing music for side d but it was not recorded. One of the songs is the story of life. Which is the last song he wrote.

The chronology

I suggest that this Album be placed after :Blues in the chronology rather than before it, as it is known that the Release date is considered for the Chronology not the recording Date. If i hear no reply on the issue or if no one objects, i will fix that problem within two weeks. --Six 7 8 19:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That still needs to be fixed. Bubba73 (talk), 01:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:First Rays of the New Rising Sun cover art.jpg

Image:First Rays of the New Rising Sun cover art.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

needs a great deal of work to meet Wikipedia Standards

although I applaud the author's intent and many of the story lines and citations seem factual, this article suffers from several challenges:
a. it is highly speculative and laced with presumption ("This reconstruction of First Rays of the New Rising Sun, however, is not the best representation of what Jimi would have intended.")
b. it lacks any independent corroboration with no references for its claims (i.e."according to some sources")
c. overall is in need of serious footnoting (i.e. where is Hendrix's handwritten track list? "(according to Kramer)"??

I hope to come back and see that the author has re-worked it to meet the Wikipedia Standards (esp adding footnotes/references) as I, for one, would love to follow through and learn more.

Bebopnjazz
If common sense were truly common, every one would have it. (talk) 19:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and have started to edit this Wikipedia:BOLDly, mostly for a more neutral, encyclopedic tone. Comments and help appreciated. Msalt (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think that's a pretty stable (and fairly well improved) version. Any thoughts, Bebopnjazz? Msalt (talk) 01:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Msalt, don't get me wrong - I think this is a great read and very informative for the Hendrix fan who wants to know every detail. the only issue I see is that there are almost no references for an awful lot of direct assertions about things that seemingly ought to be easy enough to track down. I mean where did you get all this information in the first place? it is obviously more than hearsay so you must have some references. remember that a good reference does not have to link to something on the internet. as long as it refers to some published material that is traceable, it should pass muster with the WikiPowers that be. Good luck & happy hunting - I really enjoyed it and will look fwd to seeing where all this knowledge grows from. best, BeBopnJazz (talk) 00:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree -- basically I just reworded what I found here. My focus was on fixing the writing and organization, which needed some help. I didn't really look at the sources that closely -- and don't really have time to -- though I'm reasonably familiar with Hendrix's history and music, and it seems roughly accurate. Hopefully someone with time and sources can pursue the references. You'll notice that I added a section called "Possible Sources" with some that I found while editing here.Msalt (talk) 21:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Sources

Obviously this article needs better sourcing. Here are some references I've seen listed but don't have access to right now:
- "Black Gold the Lost Archives of Jimi Hendrix" by Steven Roby (book)
- the french magazine Folk & Rock (November 1994) (re: Hendrix's handwritten track list)
- http://www.progressiveworld.net/hendrix3.html
Msalt (talk) 20:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on First Rays of the New Rising Sun. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.popmatters.com/feature/121898-jimi-hendrix-reissues/

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

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remaster versions?

The original version of First Rays came out in 1997, and is one of many albums cited to fall victim to late 90s "loudness war" brickwall limiting and heavy compression mastering. Indeed, the easiest "tell" of the 1997's overly compressed mix is the audible distortion in the right channel of the opening chords of "Freedom". Over the years, quite a few Hendrix aficionados and audiophiles have lamented the original overly compressed First Rays mix, which became an undesirable aspect of record's legacy.

However, there was a 2010 release which was 'allegedly' remastered (particularly, the vinyl version) according to the content of this Wikipedia page. Yet I cannot find evidence that the 2009-2010 digital versions (CD and download versions available via Apple music, Amazon, etc.) are actually different. They certainly do not sound different to the 1997 mix. And herein lies the issue: the audio masters used for various releases and formats of First Rays cannot be definitively confirmed, because none of the various release notes specify who mastered what, and when. Marino here? Kramer there? Bernie Grundman somewhere? Someone else maybe?

Adding to the confusion, the 2024 vinyl is touted as having a new Bernie Grundman "all-analog production process" remastering. But alas, there does not seem to be a corresponding 2024 "all analog" CD / digital download version of this album. Are all digital versions stuck with the original 1997 mastering?

The original 1997 CD mix and 2024 vinyl mix are worlds apart. IF there is any way to shed light on differences between the various releases and formats, this would certainly benefit fans of Hendrix who want to know where they can find the better quality mixes / masters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.188.199 (talk) 04:43, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]