Talk:Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)

"Music box" or "bass tape"?

There is a discrepancy between this article and the article of the album on which this track can be found. The album page says that this track's bass line was discovered when a track from a musical box was played backwards, while this page attributes it to a reversed "bass tape" (which [correct me if i'm wrong] sounds a little ambiguous anyway)... 82.44.76.119 16:15, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

B-side?

what was the B-side? Kingturtle 16:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Another song with the same bassline?

Isn't there a song (a rap I think) that has the same bassline? But the lyrics were something totally different. I heard of it on the radio just recently but I don't know the title. That song should be mentioned in this article. --AverageAmerican 05:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

For the record, yes there is, the song "Get Freaky" by Pitbull uses the same bassline, but speed up. when i first herd this song, Tunatic accidentally identified "Sweet Dreams" as "Get Freaky" EvilHom3r (talk) 23:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

This or These?

The title says "Sweet Dreams (Are Made Of This)", but for the LONGEST time I've seen the title actually be named "Sweet Dreams Are Made of THESE"! I could've swore I've seen the latter title, and the former title being used is making me NUTS with confusion. The way Lennox sings this, it DOES sound like she sings "These" instead of "This". Marylin Manson's cover DEFINITELY is sung "these", so my question is, should this be pointed out in some way on this article? Darkpower 12:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I think she means to say "this", but pronounces it almost like "these" to make it a better rhyme (in a way). Its almost like assonance (repeated vowel sound) with "dreams" and "this", the "-is" is pronounced like "-ees" to go with "-eams" better. It also sounds better with "disagree", as it has a longer "e" sound. PhorkPhace 23:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

She clearly SAYS, "These," but all copies of the lyrics say, "this." Could be a typo. I think the reasonable assumption is that, in lieu of an official answer from Annie Lennox herself, is that, "this" is a typo that they never bothered to fix because it was well established and part of an album title. I don't think any reasonable person would disagree with that assumption, after listening to the song.2600:1700:91B0:E7F0:6103:D244:C7B5:E806 (talk) 18:20, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Every reliable source says "this", so Wikipedia says "this". As there are no sources discussing "these", Wikipedia has nothing to say about "these". - SummerPhD^v2.0 23:27, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Cover Versions

I don't know Wiki-customs (sorry if I do something wrong) but I have a Sweet Dreams 12-inch bootleg of De La Soul. (Jeru, Amsterdam) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.250.238.168 (talk) 12:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok we all know that Marilyn Manson did a cover of this, but what about the cover by Cradle of Filth featuring HIM, and the cover by Wykked Wytch? I will add this in to the best of my ability, feel free to change or remove it when i have done

There was also a cover of the song done by Stefy named "Chelsea" in the John Tucker Must Die soundtrack. This is more recent but definitely deserves mention. I'll try and add it in. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.66.213.235 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 6 August 2007

I see it has been added, but out of curiosity, why is it called "Chelsea" if it is a cover version? Is it instead a different song that uses a sample? - eo 23:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

echo minet also did a cover version, released on greensleeves #165 (12 inch) from 1984 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.209.252.243 (talk) 19:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Pink (singer) and Redman (rapper) released a mashup cover on the Get the Party Started single. Both the bassline and some of the lyrics are present. — Kawayama (talk) 22:57, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

"Alternative video"

That video on a train thing was not an alternative version of the videoclip but part of german music show "bananas" where popular artists would perform playback performance in cheap props.--77.13.218.155 (talk) 02:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Another sampling

I just wanted to point out that the artist/band 'Skyland' samples this song in 'A Sign'. I didn't know if it was appropriate to add this information to the article because I know nothing of the artist, no article on them exists. There are youtube videos of the song though, different versions exist ~ 2A02:1810:390F:BE00:1921:D8F:B814:C201 (talk) 03:28, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Pop Culture section?

Sweet Dreams has been used as an insert song and in promotional material for quite a few movies and TV shows (for example, Halt and Catch Fire and For All Mankind). It's almost a sort of shorthand for the technology-oriented aspect of the 80s, at least during the past few years. Should this be reflected in the article somehow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.69.228 (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, there definitely should be a pop culture section. Unfortunately as influential as this song is, I don't know of all the places it has been featured in. We can start the section though. --Osh33m (talk) 02:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

There probably shouldn't be a pop culture section - see WP:POPCULTURE. Popcornfud (talk) 10:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Also - if there is a reliable secondary source discussing how the song is used as "a sort of shorthand for the technology-oriented aspect of the 80s", that would definitely be good for the article... but we don't want to just add a list of times it's been used without anything to explain why that's interesting. Popcornfud (talk) 12:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

What's wrong with having a pop culture section? There are tons of song articles that feature them. --Osh33m (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

See WP:POPCULTURE. Popcornfud (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, but it looks like there are grounds to argue for good pop culture references and those not notable enough to be included in an article. I think it is safe to say this song has been influential enough that there can be several pop cultural references notable to be written on its page. I myself don't even know what they all are, so I added what the other editor wrote plus the only one I know of. --Osh33m (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@Popcornfud: You removed the pop culture section before reaching consensus. I don't agree with the removal. Can you please talk this out? I'm inclined to revert your edit. --Osh33m (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

The section was against Wikipedia policy for reasons explained in the essay. Additionally, as I mentioned in the edit summary, it was poorly sourced. I don't find your counter-arguments convincing. If you want to add sourced information about how the song has been influential to the article, sure - that would be a good addition. Popcornfud (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Popcornfud: I told you I looked at WP:POPCULTURE and the policy doesn't state that pop culture sections should be strictly forbidden, but that there are examples when there should be and shouldn't be inclusion. The sources I included were literally just examples of this song used in popular culture which is what the section would be about. The section isn't called Influence or Legacy. Even if it were though, the YouTube video I sourced had over 12 million views so it's hard to argue against that being influential. --Osh33m (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Are you sure you've read the essay? It's nothing to do with pop culture sections being forbidden or not, the point is this pop culture section is bad. Exhaustive, indiscriminate lists are discouraged. Look at these questions posed by the essay:

• Has the subject (if a person or organization) acknowledged the existence of the reference?
• Have multiple reliable sources pointed out the reference?
• Did any real-world event occur because of the cultural element covered by the reference?
• Did the referencing material significantly depend on the specific subject? For example, if the reference is to a specific model of car, did the material use that model car for some reason, or was it just a case of "use a well-known name of a car"?

The answer to all of these questions, for our pop culture section, is "No".

the YouTube video I sourced had over 12 million views so it's hard to argue against that being influential.

That doesn't matter. It could have 12 billion views and we wouldn't able to claim it was "influential" until we had reliable sources explaining what it had influenced. Popcornfud (talk) 10:46, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

• I’ve seen lists of cover versions in other songs’ articles and I personally would really like to add the version in the movie Sucker Punch ;-)
• On a recent (July 2022) Belgian music festival, this was the most-played song. Maybe that is giving some fuel to above discussion? Article in Dutch:
https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20220729_93668817?froomlerequestid=02bd0927-b460-4aa2-bb18-87789acd87ef
Geke (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Affiche Annie Lennox.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

YT discussion

There is a Youtube video that covers the background of the song in fair detail. Is it cite-worthy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOWZJkQDoLw = Sweet Dreams: How Eurythmics Shocked America and Made MTV I New British Canon Kdammers (talk) 17:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I would not use that video as a source. It is typical of explainers in that it's not providing any new information or new analysis of existing information. Rather, it's only a compilation of what is essentially trivia about the song. To its credit, some quotes are provided with cited sources. You could use those if you can verify and cite the referenced sources, not the video. And of course, any other facts it presents could probably be Googled and you'd be able to find better sources for them.

Explainers aren't bad sources, per se. It's more just that they are so often put out by no-names of questionable reliability, primarily as commercial entertainment; and if they get something wrong, they don't care all that much, unlike, say, an academic journal or newspaper of record. —mjb (talk) 19:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

US release date

A U.S. release date of May 1983 was claimed, without sources. Apparently, this was based on the fact that the 45 debuted on the Billboard Hot 100's for May 14th. After researching further in the music magazine archives at worldradiohistory.com, I believe the retail single was probably released in the U.S. in the last week of April. Promos are probably from that same time, as well. The evidence is circumstantial:

1. The April 29th issue of Radio & Records magazine says at least 4 AOR stations had added a Eurythmics track to their playlists. This may be a result of the stations receiving copies, perhaps special promotional editions, in advance of the retail release date. The next issue of the magazine, dated Friday May 6th, mentions the song specifically, and by then it had been added to dozens of AOR & CHR playlists, suggesting that the retail single was out by the time this issue went to press, whenever that was. If, like Billboard, the charts were compiled 11 days prior to the date on the cover, that would mean it absolutely had to be an April release. Also, CHR charts are particularly compelling because those stations were more likely to only play what listeners could buy on retail 45s.
2. The US LP was reviewed in the May 7th issue of Cash Box magazine, and that review would have been written in April. Usually a lead single comes out at least a week ahead of the album. Nothing conclusive here, but the case for a late-April release of the single is slightly stronger for it.
3. The first mention of the song in Billboard magazine is in the May 14th issue. The retail 45 was in the Hot 100 starting then, at #90. Billboard chart & issue dates are actually the Saturday that the following week's issue goes to press; the May 14th issue was delivered to subscribers and newsstands during the week ending on the 14th. According to the "How We Track The Hits" supplement (from circa 1988, but probably applicable to 1983), the May 14th chart would have been compiled on Wednesday the 4th, based on dealer sales reports obtained by Monday the 2nd, plus radio airplay reports obtained on Tuesday the 3rd. Single releases came out on Mondays in that era, and dealer reports would not have included sales from Monday the 2nd. Airplay reports may have been for as late as Tuesday April 26th thru Monday May 2nd, which would mean the Hot 100 debut was based solely on airplay. If the single had come out on May 2, though, it would have had to get a great deal of airplay on that very day in order to get on the Hot 100 chart. So it seems much more likely that it was released Monday, April 25th.
4. The May 14th issue of Billboard also has the song mentioned many times in the Singles Radio Action (airplay) chart, which was based on station playlists covering the week ending Tuesday, May 3rd. Although some stations may have played it in advance of the release date, such widespread airplay would be uncommon if the retail single were not available; as I mentioned, CHR listeners generally wanted to be able to buy what they heard on the radio. So again, this points to a more likely release of April 25th rather than May 2nd.

All that said, without better sources, only these inferences, I'm hesitant to declare the U.S. release date to be anything in particular, just "circa late April 1983". —mjb (talk) 19:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)