Talk:The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/Archive 1

Archive 1

Talk

Capitol Records is NOT the original label for this album. RedWolf 16:20, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Album title

The album cover just says "PINK FLOYD". Where does it say "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.188.172.165 (talk • contribs) 05:15, 16 July 2006.

On the back and on the Album spine. Dude this is common knowledge that the album is called this. This is rare, to leave the title off the cover, but the same thing happened with several other Floyd albums (Atom Heart Mother, for one), and not many other bands do it (though New Order did it with one of their albums) Doc Strange 15:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, I think the US listing should be removed and moved to an article on the album "Pink Floyd". Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 22:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Why? It's basically the same album and was only availible on vinyl until A Nice PairDoc Strange 19:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

No. Both "Piper" and "Saucerful" were always available as separate albums even after the release of "A Nice Pair", at least in the UK. NH 79.121.143.143 (talk) 03:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)13th Feb 08 Also: I've just checked my original UK Mono issue of "Piper" and that only has the title on the back, not on the front OR spine.NH79.121.143.143 (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Iron Maiden reference?

Does the lyric "the piper at the gates of dawn is calling you his way" from "The Wicker Man" by Iron Maiden refer to this album or something else entirely? Cryomaniac 22:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe they're refering to Wind in the Willows where the name of this album was taken from. Doc Strange 19:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

B class article

In order for this to become a B class article i think that the introduction needs to be shortened. Also much of the information in the introduction belongs in a trivia section. Perhaps the different album versions should be removed as well as i find these too long. We need to build up a recording history section and a background section. From reading this, there is no indication of where the band were at at this stage in their careers. - Ummagumma23 18:18 27 February 2007.

I apologise for the excessive number of edits made by me in the last 24 hours - Ummagumma23 18:35 10 April 2007 (UTC)

You do not need to apologize. But please do not remove any information, it took hard work for other editors. Also, it seems that there is a policy somewhere against trivia sections. Thank you.Doktor Who 17:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Where do you suggest that triva information goes then? I removed it from the introduction because it didnt think it was appropriate to have it there. Can i also suggest removing the (see Toc H) because i dont really see what that has to do with the song really - Ummagumma23 17:10 11 April 2007 (UTC).

• See Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles on how to deal with trivia. RedWolf 21:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Table

Could someone please make a table for the release history section, thank you - Ummagumma23 18:27 24 April 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:The Gnome.ogg

Image:The Gnome.ogg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 07:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Barrett as songwriter, psychedelia and space rock

I've just removed this whole section:

The songs on the album are split between freefrom space rock numbers and whimsy, childlike, psychedelic compositions. Many of the songs had been played regularly in the live arena, however it is argued that the album tracks lack the live versions kinetic and spacey feel. Much of the album belongs exclusively to Barrett, with few other contributors. In effect, Piper is Barretts album, but much of the material constructed by him would have a huge influence on the future direction of the band. The opening track "Astronomy Domine" immediatly evokes the feeling of being in space, with the voice of Peter Jenner speaking through a megaphone, sounding like an astronaut in the depths of space. More then any other track, the style and feel of "Astronomy" was later expanded and built upon by the post-Barrett Pink Floyd, and the songs influence can be felt on Ummagumma and even The Dark Side of the Moon. "Astronomy" refects Barretts complete rejection of standard pop music by creating an unusual chord progression. The spacey is encorporated into the psychedelic with "Lucifer Sam" the only song on the album to feature an actual chorus. The knowing but child-like qualities of the track are a quintessential Barrett trait and the melody encorporates something in between Batman and the OO7 theme tune. "Matilda Mother" is another psychedelic tune, which via the nostalgic lens of LSD harks back to childhood. The organ passages heighten the sense of childhood revisited, and are a regualrly occurance both on the album and the clutch of singles written by Barrett at this time. For "Flaming" Barrett reaches possibly his most psychedelic, with a variety of images which again evoke the feeling of childhood games. "Pow R. Toc H." signals the beginning of the bands flirtation with the avante garde. Somesthing that the band would progress with throughout the rest of the 1960s. Although credited to all four members, its clear the much of the song was composed by Roger Waters, and the strange sound effects produced by him and Barrett are similar to those heard on Careful with That Axe, Eugene in 1968, and even later in 1979 jungle like noises can be heard on live versions of Run Like Hell (see Is There Anybody Out There? The Wall Live 1980-81). Unlike subsequent Pink Floyd albums, Roger Waters contribution to Piper is minimal, with the song "Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk" being his sole writing credit. "Stethoscope" is particulalry Barrett-eske and lacks the cynical world weary view Waters would later employ. The lyrics are typically list-like, a feature of many of Waters later works such as; "If" and "Eclipse". "Interstellar Overdrive" was the title peice for the band, and it was played at almost all concert events. The spaciness delivered on "Domine" is expanded upon here, and "Interstelllar" begins the Pink Floyd tradtion of long compositions stretching normally over 10 minutes. This tradition would continue until 1979s The Wall. At the time the song was an altogether radical move due to its length, and ensured that the band remained outside the rock mainstream, and like "Pow R. Toc H." the track verges on the avante garde. "The Gnome" is the first pastoral track written by the band and would be the catalyst for Pink Floyds emergence as a pastoral band in the late 1960s and ealry 1970s. "The Gnome" further illustrates Barretts association with novels and literature as seen in the albums title. Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings is seen as being an influence, and "Chapter 24" borrows lyrics from the trendy sixties tome the I Ching (the book of changes). Althougth the bands reference to literature would become lessened over the coming years, literature would still be an influence on the writings of Roger Waters. For example "Let There Be More Light" and "Set the controls for the heart of the sun" were composed using lyrics from science fiction texts, and even his 1992 solo album Amused to Death was based on the book by Neil Postman - Amusing Ourselves to Death. "The Scarecrow" highlights a pastoral approach which the band would take in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The tracks lyrical imagery would later become key thematic concepts addressed in peices such as Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall, but it also sees Barrett moving towards personal introspection. The final track "Bike" restores the psychedelic approach, and the musique concrete techniques deployed at the end are both humorous and innovatice. The use of sound effects would continue to be a major part of the bands musical approach and direction.

because it reads like an essay and seems to be comprised mostly of original research. Andy Mabbett 19:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes i wrote it and it was almost completly original. I knew it would get deleted, but i really want something like that to be encorporated into the article. Thanks for pasting it on to the talk page anyway - Ummagumma23 10:09 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Interstellar Overdrive.ogg

Image:Interstellar Overdrive.ogg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Piper40.jpg

Image:Piper40.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 this Wikipedia article 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 ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Opinions please

An editor has removed 2 pieces of info which I have reverted, twice. I don't agree with their removal, and am trying to prevent an edit war. I stated my reasons on the editor's talk page, but he has not replied. Please check these changes and comment on whether you think they should stay or go:

1. Changed genre in info box from "psychedelic music, space rock" to just "psychedelic music"

• Edit summary on removal: one genre is fine
• Edit summary on revert: it's appropriate and not unusual to use 2
• Edit summary on removal #2: really not necessary
• Posted on user's talk page: I have never seen a guideline that says an album should ideally have only one genre, but maybe that's not your reason for making the change. "Space rock" was undoubtably added in reference to "Interstellar Overdrive". I do recall an interview where someone (Waters?) dismissed the idea that IO is a pioneering example of space rock, or is space rock at all. Maybe that's why you removed it? I suspect members of PF and other bands often have opinions about their own work which vary greatly from their fans, and this is a good example. I don't see how a case can be made for saying IO is NOT a classic example of space rock. Also, the track is so different from most others on the album, and I think this justifies listing more than one genre.

2. Removed link to allgigs website review

• Edit summary on removal: none
• Edit summary on revert: why remove the review? it's not a dead link
• Edit summary on removal #2: not a notable reviewer
• Posted on user's talk page: I am concerned about how Pink Floyd, a British band, has so many Americanized references on WP. ... On the Piper page, there were 6 reviews, of which 4 were American websites, 1 was a British magazine without website link (presumably printed review, non-website), and 1 British website, which is the one you removed. Your edit summary says "not a notable reviewer", so maybe it's the reviewer rather than the website you object to. I would question whether this reviewer might be better known in the UK than the other American reviews are. (I'm not located in the UK, so I don't know the answer, but it seems a reasonable guess that he might be.) I read the review, and I don't see anything that makes it, or the reviewer, or the website less professional than the others. So I don't see the problem, and I think it's good that we have at least one linkable review from the UK in this article.

I also commented on the user's talk page: When I see info removed, I consider the efforts of the person who put it in originally, as well as the concerns of the person who removed it.

Please wait for a response to this before reverting again. Thanks! --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 08:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You don't need to list a number of genres in the infobox; be concise if possible. There's no need to list space rock (which is ill-defined and according to All Music Guide is a genre of alternative rock that emerged in the 1980s). List psychedelic rock or just rock. As for the review, that's not a notable review site. What they think of the album is largely irrelevant. Given the importance of this album, reviews from more notable sources should be tracked down (particularly contemporary British reviews by NME and Melody Maker; most of the reviews listed in the infobox were made years after the fact). WesleyDodds (talk) 18:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I disagree on the removal of Space Rock. It is not an ill defined genre and All Music is not a reliable genre resource. Space Rock emerged in the psychedelic scene from several English artists, notably Hawkwind. Piper is referenced by many critics and fans as space rock, and whether or not Roger Waters disagrees is irrelevant (though certainly a point for commentary on the article). - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:22, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Norman Smith line

I've removed this line:
"Interstellar Overdrive's kinetic and spacey production came from the insistence of the normally conservative Norman Smith, whose work on the record is often criticised because it is seen that he tried to make the album more pop orientated."
I can't find any source for this alleged regular criticism. Also, the line contradicts itself. He wanted "kinetic and spacey" production and "make the album more pop orientated" at the same time? It just doesn't add up.    SIS  11:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with your edit. The sentence had a "fact" tag on it from a year ago. If a request for citation is not acted upon within a reasonable time, the removal of the line should not be controversial. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 11:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Reception

Something should be added to this section, to make an attempt at balance. The reviews chosen were all highly positive, and it reads largely like a fan site. Surely we can find someone who criticised, or expressed distaste with this album.Mk5384 (talk) 18:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Recorded at the same time

I've removed the text stating that The Pretty Things were recording S. F. Sorrow in Abbey Road at the same time as Floyd were recording Piper at the Gates of Dawn. I'm sure that this can't be true...does anyone have a reliable source for this? S. F. Sorrow wasn't released until December 1968...almost 18 months after the Piper sessions had concluded. 18 months in the 1960's pop landscape was a lifetime, and I really can't believe that Parlophone would have allowed a C-List band (at least commercially speaking) like The Pretty Things to take 18 months or more over an album. Additionally, band members Wally Allen and John Povey (who were both on S. F. Sorrow) didn't join The Pretty Things until mid-1967, after the release of the band's Emotions album in April 1967. Furthermore, the S. F. Sorrow Wikipedia article states that sessions for that album began in November 1967 (which sounds a bit more like it) and then continued between early and mid-1968. I'm quite prepared to believe that The Pretty Things were in Abbey Road working on their "Defecting Grey" single or something similar at the same time as Floyd were recording Piper, but not S. F. Sorrow. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 15:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I've looked it up in the website of The Pretty Things, in the discography it tells that the "Defecting Grey" was recorded by the autumn of 1967 that was considered as the maquette of S.F. Sorrow (A l'automne 1967 sort un nouveau 45 tours "Defecting Grey" que Phil considère comme la maquette de ce qui va être "S.F.Sorrow"). ~ Elitropia (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess autumn 1967 would be about right for recording "Defecting Grey" because it was released in November 1967. If the band were in Abbey Road at the same time that Pink Floyd were recording Piper, maybe they were putting the finishing touches to the Emotions album, which came out in April 1967. Regardless, having searched online and looked in some of my books, I can't find a reliable source stating that S. F. Sorrow was being recorded in early 1967. It sounds to me like one of those rock 'n' roll myths that make a good story but don't stand up to close scrutiny. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 18:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Recent additions

The recent additions by TGilmour have been taken from my sandbox version of this article, which I should mention is in a very unfinished state. I'll leave them for now but I don't consider them anywhere near ready for inclusion in this article. Parrot of Doom 09:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Singles

How can the singles be listed as from this album when only one is on it?
Ulmanor (talk) 20:53, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:The Piper at the Gates of Dawn/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.

Article requirements: Y All the start class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Y Categorisation at least by artist and year Y A casual reader should learn something about the album. Andrzejbanas (talk) 08:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 08:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 15:57, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Use of the accent in the word debut.

I noticed some time ago that the word debut in this article is different from the ones in most other debut album articles; this one had an accent, so it read "début".

I do not agree with the such spelling, and as advised, I decided to take it here and reach a consensus. My opinion is that this article should have the standard spelling, that, as stated by the Oxford Dictionary and Cambridge Dictionary and used in both British and American spelling is "debut". I changed it and the user User:Binksternet disagreed with my change, and reverted it, so I try to reach a consensus here.

Users in favor of the change so far using the word "debut" -- WITHOUT the accent mark are:

User:Puertagustavo99

User:Joemeservy

User: 104.173.225.10 -- (1) based on maintaining consistency across English Wikipedia (2) an accent mark (according to the dictionary) is there to show you how to pronounce a word -- so it's not needed as many other French words are co-opted by English speakers like "entreprenuer" etc. (3) "debut" is a French word but The Piper at the Gates of Dawn is "by the English rock band Pink Floyd". The majority of English speakers in the U.K. know how to pronounce the word.

Users that are against the change so far in favor of using "début" -- WITH the accent mark are:

User:Binksternet

User:Yaush

References

Puertagustavo99 (talk) 03:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• The article was first written by a Swedish IP editor. The first version to use the word debut/début was this one from May 2003, edited by an American user, TUF-KAT, who used no accent. As far as I can tell, the accent was introduced by TGilmour in May 2011. TGilmour was very active on Pink Floyd topics as well as other music articles but was blocked for using multiple accounts. In November 2011 the accent was removed by a drive-by IP editor. After a lot of work by Yeepsi the article was promoted (by me) to GA in December 2012 with no accent. Then in February 2014 Radiopathy expressly added the accent. In December 2014, the accent was removed by an IP from Denmark. This was reverted within a few hours by me. So finally we get to February 2015 and the accent removal which started this discussion.
  Personally, I like the accent as it fits with the psychedelic 1960s aspect of the album. Binksternet (talk) 18:43, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Proto-punk

• Source:

  While some regard it as a poor man’s Tele, the Esquire actually has its own unique wiring. The lack of a neck pickup reduces magnetic pull on the strings. This gives the Esquire better harmonic overtones and helps create a more percussive attack, elements that can be heard in Barrett’s guitar work with Pink Floyd, which swings between between jangly and melodic to edgy, aggressive and near proto-punk.

This is talking about Barrett's guitar work, not Piper. If we can attribute this to Piper simply because Barrett plays guitar on it, then we can attribute this to every other song that applies to. Is "Jugband Blues" and "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun" proto-punk? For the sake of argument, let's pretend it is. What is the phrase "near proto-punk" actually signifying?

—Oxford Dictionary entry for "near":

[as submodifier] Almost. (‘a near perfect fit’)

—Oxford Dictionary entry for "almost":

Not quite; very nearly.

In other words, "very nearly, but not quite proto-punk".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

But the article considers it in itself "proto punk" just a little bit. Precisely that is why I put it only as a secondary genre, not as the primary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothicmusicality50 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

There is no distinction between "primary" or "secondary" genres on Wikipedia. It's either proto-punk or it isn't. And the source does not call the album "proto-punk".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 03:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Record Mirror quote

Right now, the quote ostensibly taken from the Record Mirror is challenged by a template that says "not in citation given." Actually, there is no citation, and there never has been. The quote in our article says the following:

the psychedelic image of the group really comes to life on this LP, which is a fine showcase for both their talent and the recording technique. Plenty of mindblowing sound.

That quote was first added in May 2007 by Ummagumma23. As far as I can tell, the earliest instance of the quote transcribed to an online source is at the Marmalade Skies website, on their August 1967 page, which mounted the quote in place by January 2007 as may be seen in this archived link. I assume that Ummagumma23 pulled the quote from that source, though there could be another. The Marmalade Skies website quote is a bit different:

The psychedelic image of the group really comes to life, record wise, on this LP which is a fine showcase for both their talent and the recording technique. Plenty of mind blowing sound, both blatant and subtle here, and the whole thing is extremely well performed.

The website Marmalade Skies is run by Jim McAlwane who posts lots of scans of the old published material, along with his transcribed text, which helps to prove he's pretty reliable in his transcriptions.

Here's the requested edit. I would like the current Record Mirror sentence, shown here in red, to be changed to that in green, followed by the included citation:

• Record Mirror commented that "the psychedelic image of the group really comes to life on this LP, which is a fine showcase for both their talent and the recording technique. Plenty of mindblowing sound."
• Record Mirror commented that "[t]he psychedelic image of the group really comes to life, record wise, on this LP which is a fine showcase for both their talent and the recording technique. Plenty of mind blowing sound, both blatant and subtle here, and the whole thing is extremely well performed."

References

Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 04:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Protection lifted, fixed it myself. Binksternet (talk) 13:35, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Fully protected page with no lock symbol

I have just noticed that this page is listed under the "fully protected" list of articles. As I came to this article to skim around, I noticed the absense of a lock symbol. I feel that this may cause confusion for editors, so I kindly ask that an administrator please fix the mistake. Thank you. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 04:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Protection has been lifted. Binksternet (talk) 13:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2017

Ron Dynamo (talk) 06:38, 4 August 2017 (UTC)The original UK LP (with a monaural mix) was released on 4 August 1967.

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. And please specify exactly what you want done (i.e., just swapping the 5 for the 4 or what). Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER

Formentera

I'm fairly sure it was Rick Wright who went with Syd Barrett to Formentera with Sam Hutt, not Roger Waters. 14.203.164.4 (talk) 09:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Astronomy Dominé spelling

The title of the first song, Astronomy Dominé, is spelled using the french accent aigu on the original disk cover and the CD re-release available now on Amazon. It's also how the name was pronounced by the band members. On the wiki page it's spelled without an accent, which changes the pronunciation - it should be fixed. Florin Andrei (talk) 03:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Wallabes

GVHGGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHGVHVHVHVGVHGVHVH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.137.185 (talk) 17:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)