Talk:Psychedelic folk/Archive 1

Archive 1

Where does this page belong, and what is Psych folk?

I collected all these comments under the one heading because they all seemed to be tied to the one question. -- TimNelson 09:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Differences/connections

What are the differences/connections between acid folk, freak folk and psych folk?

Freak folk is something different. See that page. -- TimNelson 09:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Acid folk

Acid folk redirects here, so I suppose it is more or less a synonym? The article doesn't explain this, though, which it should. // Habj 21:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Is the sub-genre "Psych folk" too narrow a title to include the music in this article?

Psych folk is a sub-genre of New Weird America which encompasses psych folk, freak folk, and other newer experimnetal genres.

Certainly there are various combinations of musical genres like folk, psychodelic, acid rock, rock etc. But on Google the primary place that term Psych folk seems to be used is this Wikipedia page and mirrors.

Along with your article Google lists a radio station that plays Prog Psych Folk but the site's subtitle describes that to mean Prog/Art Rock, Psychedelic, Folk Rock. It goes on to offer A Selection of Prog Folk Psych Space Rock!! while another site offers PSYCHEDELIC & ACID FOLK MUSIC . Perhaps there is a better name for the various types of musical combinations and styles this article is attempting to describe. Only one of the sites listed under External links in your article uses the term at all, referring to Psych folk as a more narrow sub-genre in the context of many other genres.

So it seems like you are including a wide array of current musical styles under the more narrow term, the sub-genre "Psych folk". Mattisse 11:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This should be subsumed under folk, with according subdivisions, or else parceled out. But freak folk is very, very different from psych folk, which seems to be a historical hippie thing. Aroundthewayboy 08:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Fortunately, Freak folk has been disambiguated. I note that the early stuff listed in this article is pretty much all electric folk, and some of the other stuff could be classes as folk punk or prog rock. This doesn't negate the existance of the genre, but it would be useful to talk about the interactions with these.

Why the emphasis on British artists ?

I accept that artists like ISB, Donovan etc fit into this category - but surely many of the US psychedelic bands also fall into this category, as having strong folk roots - Byrds, Airplane, Country Joe, Kaleidoscope, etc etc. There is a genre here, but it is very wide ranging. (Richie Unterberger's books are perhaps the best guides here - http://www.richieunterberger.com/ .) --Ghmyrtle 12:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

ISB was Scottish, not English.

No-one says they were English, but they were British Ghmyrtle 21:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Finnish scene

Kemialliset Ystävät are currently lumped in with the New Weird America artists. I think we need a separate paragraph for the Finnish scene. I will try to add it in the next few days, but if anyone wants to make a start, please do. Cnwb 22:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Deletions

I replaced Deek Hoi after reference to him was deleted. He has contributed scores for Irene Moon's Auk Theater (http://www.begoniasociety.com/auk_theatre.htm) and is an associate of the Charles Mansion collective (http://www.charlesmansion.org/). He also records and performs psychedelic folk music. Not sure why he was deleted. Thanks! Martillie 1:10, 17 May 2006

I created a separate freak folk entry

Because after a bit of research, it is how Devendra Banhart seems most comfortable describing his music.Aroundthewayboy 08:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Acid Folk

Seconding the (now old) suggestion that the connection (or difference) between psych folk and acid folk be made clearer. - BalthCat 21:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

List of artists

I think a division should be made on this list between the original 60s/70s bands and the those bands that belong to the current revival. Possibly also divide them up by location as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.197.5.20 (talk) 10:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Split

Not quite BOLD enough tonight... but I think the list is too big and needs to fork off. Most notable ones could remain in another context? - BalthCat (talk) 05:35, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Psych folk is a valid genre

A verifiable source for Psych folk would be the feature articles in Dirty Linen Magazine, one of the most respected Folk magazines in the world. They have had at least three feature articles in three different issues on new Psych folk bands written by writer Lahri Bond. Issue #131 from August/September 2007 issue is a good example. http://www.dirtylinen.com/linen/131/131psych.html is a link to an on-line over-view of the article. The other issues are #130 June/July 2007 and #136 June/July 2008. I think if you do enough research you will find that New Weird America is a new name for a genre and that Psychedelic Folk has been around much longer. Another great resource is the PVHF radio producer Gerald Van Waes from Antwerp, Belgium. The link to his website is http://psychevanhetfolk.homestead.com/ Gerlad Van Waes is an authority on Psych Folk, Acid Folk, and other similar genres. Easyryder 7:38, 19 September 2008

Suddenly people want the term “psychedelic” out of history. They prefer to call it strangefolk nowadays, not sure why. See http://www.rock6070.com/Articles/StrangeFolk.pdf The change is perhaps because “psychedelic” has possible references to drugs used in the 60s, which people don’t like to remember as a more global or generalized experiment, related to music. “psych” and “psychedelic” are gerally used by collectors worldwide. “Psychfolk” is used mostly as acoustic psych. Not allpeople take the folk reference in the term as being used as equally important. Geraldpsyche 26 September 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.194.173.82 (talk) 15:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I suggest that both New Weird America and Freak folk are merged to this article, as all cover much the same acts and the differences in terms can be handled here.--SabreBD (talk) 21:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I would agree just as long as the differences are stated. I know New Weird America should have more then enough sources and be different enough to have it's own section. Ridernyc (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

From the tiny little bit of research I've done New Weird America really belongs in the as apart of Folk since it's simply a continuation of the Old Weird America scene which was basically Folk music. Nothing inherently psych about it. Ridernyc (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

There was no "Old Weird America" scene. Greil Marcus invented the term to describe the America he heard being sung about in the music of the Anthology of American Folk Music. He was not describing a musical "scene" at all. He certainly was not describing the Folk Revival, which was not weird. New Weird America is a kind of catch-all term invented to describe the revival of interest in that old "folk" music (which was not called folk music at the time). I am not opposed to a merger, but I want us to be clear about our terms. One question that has to be answered before any merger is performed is, Are all of the bands associated with New Weird America "psychedelic," per se? The Mountain Goats, for example, do not seem very "psych" to me. As I say, let's be clear about our terms. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

1960s groups

• "San Francisco produced bands such as Kaleidoscope, It's a Beautiful Day, Peanut Butter Conspiracy and H. P. Lovecraft". — stretching the reference: Kaleidoscope, PBC, and HPL may have roots in folk or are folk-influenced, but they were folk rock at best, not folk. Plus two were Los Angeles-based and HPL is from Chicago (although they moved to SF); ref says "associated with the SF scene", not that it produced them.
• "From New York city's Greenwich Village came groups such as ... Cat Mother & the All Night Newsboys..." — as above, folk rock.
• "Many of these psychedelic folk groups followed the Byrds into folk rock from 1965, and are, as a result, more widely remembered, including the Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Captain Beefheart, and Quicksilver Messenger Service". — Again, implies that these were folk groups; while their roots may be there (Beefheart?), by the time their line-ups stabilized, started recording, and came to the public's attention, they were solidly in the rock camp. -Ojorojo (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Merger discussion and proposal (freak folk to psychedelic folk)

Proposed due to freak folk having a strong lack of standalone notability, and seemingly being the successor of psychedelic folk. Aleccat (talk) 17:44, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose Freak folk is notable enough for its own article. The link to psychedelic folk seems like OR.-Ilovetopaint (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
  • However, the freak folk article is two sentences long with a list of mostly unverified artists who perform the genre. This article makes freak folk even seem like a synonym/slight variation of psychedelic folk. This makes freak folk seem like psychedelic folk with electronic elements, which COULD be viewed as a slight variation on psychedelic folk's styling. This notes psychedelic folk's profound impact on the genre. This notes how acoustics are vital to the styling of the genre, which is quite similar to psychedelic folk. This SOMEWHAT hints at the psychedelic folk aesthetic being present within the freak folk genre, and also notes the acoustics, as well as the drums present in the genre, which parallel psychedelic folk yet again. In this article, this is not only noted, but is what the article uses to group the genres together, under the umbrella category of 'acoustic psychedelic'. (I apologize for the rebuttal rant, I just don't think one sentence detailing your stance on this is merely enough. I just wrote more than its article. [This is in good faith, BTW.]) Aleccat (talk) 06:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
    • "Seems like"... but what do they actually say? You proved my point that there isn't enough information to definitively reference it as a subtopic of psychedelic folk. What you're suggesting is akin to merging Folktronica with Electronica. A Google News search of freak folk shows that there is a wealth of resources to expand the article with (or at least to verify many of the artists).--Ilovetopaint (talk) 07:39, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
      • Then why isn't it being done? What do those sources exactly say? Aleccat (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
        • The reason it hasn't been done is because no one has bothered to do it, of course. I'd do it myself if I had the patience and expertise. At the very least, I've found sources that show the terms "psychedelic folk", "freak folk", and "New Weird America" are sometimes interchangeable. They mean different things to different people, with slightly different connotations associated to different artists.

Go to Google and query "site:allmusic.com/artist/ "freak folk"" - you should end up with 141 a dozen or so sources to add to the article. It would be awkward to locate such a long list at Psychedelic folk, especially since we already have List of psychedelic folk artists.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 01:50, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

• Here's one comprehensive source to expand the freak folk article with.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)