Talk:Glyn Johns

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Glyn Johns/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Does not mention the Who - Whos next

Last edited at 10:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 16:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Glynjohns michael putland getty images.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Let it Be

Did Johns engineer the sessions at Twickenham Studios? Or only at the Apple studio? Or did he only do the remix? He is credited on 'Let It be ... Naked' as Engineer - but for which sessions? 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:31D8:DD56:7C2A:E8FD (talk) 22:45, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

He was there right from the beginning at Twickenham all the way through Apple Studios and the rooftop concert. Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Johns expressed some 'embarrassment' being in the position that he had expected George Martin would be in. He mentioned that Martin took him to lunch to assure him that all was well which encouraged Johns. Was wondering if this detail needs to be added to the article. Any thoughts?THX1136 (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

In the Get Back documentary film we see Johns present at both the Twickenham and Apple sessions.Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:02, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Expansion of article--please excuse temporary messiness(!)

A few years ago I started to work on an expansion for this article, because I felt that Glyn Johns deserved a much more in-depth article. I just finished the main expansion of the text of this article to better reflect enormity of his legacy. In order to do it neatly, I cut and transferred large blocks of text from my Sandbox 1 into the article. It took a lot of complicated to work to sort it all out in my sandbox, so it would have been just way too difficult (and chaotic) to insert smaller statements into the main article in piecemeal fashion. Furthermore, I had to be able to pre-visualize what the article would look like in larger form--and the only way to do that is in the sandbox.

While working on the new text in my sandbox over the last few years, I have taken extra care to make sure, as best as possible, that each and every edit that other editors have made be incorporated into the text I was working/wording on, each step of the way (in some cases I may have moved prior statements into new places/sections or made sight modifications to wording). Every so often, I would incorporate the latest set of edits other editors had made and I'd make a marker-notation with the latest date (of updates). Today I went through all of the edits that had been made since my last update and incorporated them into the whole text. Here are the recent edit pages in my Sandbox 1 which display this particular batch of other editor's edits I've have incorporated:

::1) [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Garagepunk66/sandbox&action=history] :: 2) [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Garagepunk66/sandbox&action=history&offset=20230606011630%7C1158753646] :: 3)[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Garagepunk66/sandbox&action=history&offset=20230605200913%7C1158713843]

My original plan was to organize things chronologically--and that still holds true to some extent. However, after working on it for awhile, the text started looking like a big blob, so I realized that I would need to sub-divide certain sections into subsections centered around the names of certain performers that Johns worked with--I tried to keep it more or less as chronological as possible. The problem is that sometimes Glyn Johns would go back and work again later with certain artists--so perfect chronology is not really possible. The sub-section method turned out to be a good solution, because now the text looks attractive and comprehensible and really showcases how many incredible artists Johns has worked with over the years. Is there any producer or engineer in rock with a greater resumé?(!)

I have to admit, though that I need to tidy some things up... There are several glaring places that still need citations. In those places I inserted [citation needed] tags--and I also adorned them with ***centrioles*** to make those places easier for me to find. I can guarantee that the centrioles won't be there too much longer--I'll be working on that over the next few days. Rome wasn't built in a day. You are certainly welcome to add any citations needed.

I made changes/ improvements to existing citations as best I could. I added ref-names whenever I could, so that those citations can be replicated. I really liked the way one editor had put "rf" citations for info. from Johns' book. However, I already had so may references from Johns' book already done in "sfn" and "sfnm" Harvard-style citations, that I folded those rf's into the sfn and sfnm citations--they still have the exact same page #s that were in the old rf's. I've tried to corroborate John's recollections with third-party references as well, but there are still a few more of those to add. There are also some places where I need to go back and make other kinds of improvements. There are a few statements I could either trim-down or develop in more detail. Also, I tried to write in British English, but I am from the US, so you may see some places that need correcting. I'd also like to add some photos.

Please give me any feedback about how to make it better.Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I've been correcting a few minor issues, hope you don't mind. The one that is left is for "Krehbiel 2016", which has no matching cite in the Bibliography section. Looking around to see if I could work out what this was for I came across Jeff Krehbiel blog post on rocknrollspotlight.com (now archived at Wayback Machine here). The dates and details referenced match up, but I haven't set up a cite for it as it's not a reliable source. Although Krehbiel appears to have blogged extensively about music, he doesn't appear to to pass the criteria for self published sources (see WP:SPS). The three references to him need to be replaced. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 11:23, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help! We could try to find a better source for that statement. Incidentally, which statement (and section) did that source correspond to? I'm sure that there is a better source to be found for it. Garagepunk66 (talk) 16:30, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

It's the three use of "Krehbiel 2016" currently refs #7, #11, and #19. The details are he left the choir at age 13, that he was influenced by Rock Island Line, and that his first session was for Lonnie Donegan. Another editor templated the effected refs in this edit. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:27, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Just letting everyone know that during the process of working on the expansion (in the last month) I changed my user name from Garagepunk66 to GloryRoad66. Different name, same editor. GloryRoad66 (talk) 05:10, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Glyn Johns/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Binksternet (talk · contribs) 01:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Starting review. I am usually very thorough, with an eye to possible Featured Article in the future. Binksternet (talk) 01:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   • I see a mix of non-Oxford and Oxford commas. Choose one of these styles and impose it throughout the article, excepting cases of ambiguity. Direct quotes retain their published style. Binksternet (talk) 03:40, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed (7/7/23) - They style is now consistent. In each instance in the main body of text where there are three or more items listed, we now have Oxford commas. GloryRoad66

1. • Problems with a mix of hyphens, en dashes and em dashes for sentence interruption, and a mix of spacings around them. Sentence breaks should either get the spaced en dash or the unspaced em dash. Choose one style and impose it throughout. Reference titles can keep the spaced en dash despite your prose style selection. Change wrongly used hyphens for the proper dash except in file names and URLs. In this case, direct quotes get adjusted to fit article style. See MOS:DASH. Some of the sentence breaks can be colons or semi-colons, or the sentence can be split into two.

 Fixed (7/7/23) The style for long dashes is now consistent. In the main body of text, all long dashes are now em dashes (with no space). The only exception is in the quotes, where I kept the dash format the same. GloryRoad66

1. • Please apply MOS:ELLIPSIS to the Townsend quote.

 Fixed (7/7/23) I fixed the ellipsis in the quote. I also removed the quotation marks, which to the best of my knowledge are not necessary in a block quote. GloryRoad66

1. b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   • Two instance of "years" in the same sentence of the second paragraph. Reword.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Glyn's deceased younger brother should not be described as "the late". Reword.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Too many instances of "also". See if any can be trimmed away without harm.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Change "for awhile" to either "awhile" by itself, or "for a while".

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • "He attributes the record... as an influence" should use an appropriate verb, for instance "lists" or "cites". "Attributes" means something else.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Let's say "Though Jimmy Page was credited as producer" rather than "Though production credit was given to Jimmy Page". The "given" part implies a powerful being above Page, but it was likely Page who insisted.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • The phrase " one-disc length" should be "one disc" by itself.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • The autobiography sentence should be shifted down into the Legacy section. A brief review of the book would be appropriate.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   • The website 45cat.com fails WP:USERG. All references to 45cat must be removed.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. • This source mentions Glyn Johns once in passing, and is of little value here.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66

1. c. (OR):

   • The note saying "Though not formally credited as producer or engineer on this album" appears to be invented by a long-gone Wikipedian.[1] Only the latter part is supported by cite.

 Fixed (7/7/23) GloryRoad66 - I had earlier taken statement by the prior editor and relegated it to efn notes, but I just removed the efn notes (Faces' A Nod... album) GloryRoad66

1. d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   • I don't think there is enough emphasis in the lead section on the hugely influential albums that Johns helmed. Some of these were listed by Consequence magazine in 2016, and a bunch were listed by The Independent 2014 source. Telling the reader that Johns "worked with" famous artists isn't enough.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • The reader should be able to see and click on links for the articles the Beatles' rooftop concert and The Beatles: Get Back.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Please wikilink "mono" as monaural.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Wikilink the first instance of Jimmy Page.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • The reader should be told whether Glyn Johns is related to Glynis Johns.

Question: Binksternet, I went and added the statement that he is not related in the both the lead and Family sections.(7/8/23 UTC) However, I cannot find any reliable source that mentions that he is not. Nonetheless, he does not make any claim in his book that he is, nor have I found a source saying he is. So I'd imagine that he is not related (perhaps his parents named him with the movie star in mind--that sounds like a thing a British mum might have done in 1942). Still, the statement in the Family section is not cited (I just can't find a source at this time). Would it be better to just take the Glynis Johns statements back out? GloryRoad66

I think we can say that Glynis is "apparently unrelated" since nothing to the contrary has been published. Binksternet (talk) 02:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. GloryRoad66 (talk) 03:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

1. • Let's elevate to article prose the note about Johns' opinion of Red Rose Speedway.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. b. (focused):

   • In the section "Approach to recording", Johns is presented as far too much of an expert. No need for the note {{see also|Recording studio|Microphone|Tape recorder|Mixing console}}. Many other engineers have successful careers differing greatly from the methods of Johns. The article wanders off topic to become an instruction manual for miking drums in the Johns style. Far too much emphasis is given to this aspect. Big pruning needed.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   • Too much puffery in the lead section, specifically "pre-eminent", "countless", "in the history of rock music" and "renowned". Anyone with a biography on Wikipedia is famous for something.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • Puffery continues into the article body: "wide range of the musical industry's most successful artists" and "notable British acts". Olympic Studios does not need to be called out as "renowned". This biography is not the place for that, unless Glyn Johns is named as responsible. Helios consoles were excellent in their day, but are they really "still renowned" four decades later?

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • The "bizarre phasing effects" should be explicitly named as originating from George Chkiantz, so that the reader doesn't assume Glyn Johns invented it. George Chkiantz should be elevated to article prose rather than stuffed away in a note.

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • I don't see why the reader needs to see the Glyn Jons blockquote about Small Faces. This isn't the Small Faces article.

 Fixed (removed) 7/7/23 GloryRoad66

1. • The phrase "by accident he developed" implies a fault. How about simply "he developed"?

 Fixed (7/8/23) GloryRoad66

1. • In general, the Johns autobiography is cited too many times, and the opinion of Johns is delivered too many times.

2. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

3. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   • The photo File:Ledzeppelin.jpg appears to have a copyright challenge at Wikimedia Commons.

 Fixed (removed) 7/7/23 To be on the safe side I remove the photo. But, if you want me to put it back in, let me know. GloryRoad66

1. b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

2. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

   • Review on hold for suggested improvements. Discussion encouraged. Binksternet (talk) 04:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

I'll go in there and comb trough it and make the necessary changes. It make take some time to address each one of them. I'll probably ask some questions along the way. GloryRoad66 (talk) 04:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey Binksternet, is it OK if I insert check marks and symbols (such as  Partly done, Fixed, Resolved, etc.) into the section above, to make it easier for me address each issue? But, then you could replace them with other symbols of need be? GloryRoad66 (talk) 05:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Feel free to manage this review in any way you see fit. Binksternet (talk) 05:25, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. GloryRoad66 (talk) 21:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

I've addressed most of the concerns above——I hope that have done them satisfactorily. I do have a question to ask about the issue with Glynis Johns (see above) that I'll need some advice about. Also, I need to address the concern about reducing the citations to Glyn Johns' autobiography——I'll be looking alternate sources (as best as they can be found——there may be some things about his childhood and early career that can only be found in his book). GloryRoad66 (talk) 06:11, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

The Glynis bit is solved, I think. The problem with too much reliance on Johns' autobiography is much reduced now that the drum miking section is gone, along with some other cuts. This is starting to look more like GA material. I'm gonna sleep on it and check it again tomorrow with a full mug of coffee. Binksternet (talk) 02:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me know if there is anything you need. GloryRoad66 (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

GA listed! Congratulations to GloryRoad66, and thanks to everyone who helped. Binksternet (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Binksternet, thank you for taking your time to the review and setting the bar high for excellence. I'd also like to give special thanks to ActivelyDisinterested for taking so much active interest in the article and helping with cleanup and technical issues while we were doing the expansion. My big thanks to everyone!!! GloryRoad66 (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations GloryRoad66. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 20:36, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet (talk) 02:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

[[File:|140px|Glyn Johns, 1978 ]]

Glyn Johns, 1978

• ... that Glyn Johns (pictured) was the recording engineer for Led Zeppelin's debut album, the Beatles' Get Back Sessions, and the Rolling Stones' album Let It Bleed?

"His fingerprints are all over rock's back pages. It was Johns who engineered the sonic assault of Led Zeppelin's debut album, Johns who suggested that the roof of The Beatles' headquarters in Savile Row, London, should be the venue for what turned out to be their final live performance, and Johns who listened, spellbound, as he raised the faders on The Rolling Stones' Gimme Shelter during sessions for their classic 1969 album, Let It Bleed." Source: The National[2] November 26, 2014 5x expanded by GloryRoad66 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hotel Wolcott; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General eligibility:

• New enough:
• Long enough:
• Other problems:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
• Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
• Interesting:
• Other problems:

Image eligibility:

• Freely licensed:
• Used in article:
• Clear at 100px: - no

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: Great piece of work! Article was promoted to Good Article status on July 9, 2023, QPQ not provided, but it is exempted as it is the third nomination. Earwig score [good]. AGF Good to go without picture and minor corrections. Although the fact is mentioned in the lead section, it lacks inline citation in the article, Each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation. The hook length is 150 characters, frankly not very much hooky. @GloryRoad66:, please consider providing a catchy hook and inline citation for the same. Thanks! RV (talk) 07:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing, RV. The fact in the DYK statement is actually three facts mentioned in three different places in the article--I condensed them into one statement for the DYK. Do all three facts (about the Beatles' "Get Back" sessions, Led Zeppelin's first album and the Rolling Stones) have to be in the same sentence in the main body text of the article? Each of those sub-facts appear (cited/sourced w/ Harvard notes) in different places in the main body of text:

• Fact about Led Zeppelin first album mentioned in the Led Zeppelin section: "Johns engineered Led Zeppelin's debut album recorded in October 1968. Though Jimmy Page was credited as producer, Johns was involved in the production during the making of the album."[Citation #86 (as of 7/11/23) pp. 144, 171–172] Source (listed in Bibliography section at bottom): Spitz, Bob (2021). Led Zeppelin: The Biography. New York: Penguin Press. ISBN 978-0-399-56242-6.
• Fact about Beatles "Get Back" sessions in The Beatles section: "Glyn Johns worked as the chief recording engineer on the Beatles' "Get Back" sessions, which were both taped and filmed. The project resulted the Let It Be album"[Citation #88 (as of 7/11/23) pp. 164–165] Source (listed in Bibliography): Lewisohn, Mark (1988). The Beatles Recording Sessions (1st ed.). New York: Harmony Books. ISBN 0-517-58182-5
• Fact about the the Rolling Stones album Let It Bleed: "Johns stayed on as engineer, and with this team the group recorded Beggars Banquet (1968) and Let It Bleed. (1969)"[Citation #13 (as of 7/11/23] Source (listed in Websites section at bottom): Walsh, John (31 October 2014). "Glyn Johns Interview: My 50 Years of Producing Rock Classics". The Independent. Retrieved 20 July 2017

Thanks, GloryRoad66 (talk) 01:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@GloryRoad66: Hi! You are right. The fact in the hook should be in the same sentence as the main body text of the article, duly cited with a reliable source. Secondly, as per guide we should try to avoid hooks that take the form of "... that X is Y?" Regards RV (talk) 05:18, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @RAJIVVASUDEV:, I'll keep that in mind for future DYKs.

RAJIVVASUDEV, just to see: are you categorically rejecting the image for this, or are you fine with it? I intend to promote this to prep soon, and I'd prefer an image slot placement (the image is a little low-res, but imo fine for the thumbnail, and I would personally have approved it; from a prep-builder POV I prioritize both GAs and decent hooks, which this hits). I noticed you were equivocal about that, though, so I'd just like to get a signoff from you about whether an image is fine to avoid issues at WT:DYK. Vaticidalprophet 00:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Vaticidalprophet My concern was low resolution only. Please go ahed if you are okay with the same. Thanks RV (talk) 02:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)