Talk:Heart (band)

formed in Canada?

Wow, I thought we had finally come up with a way to settle the issue that Heart was NOT CANADIAN but first had success in Canada, and then someone comes along and says that they originally were "considered to be Canadian." Living in Canada for a few years does not make anyone Canadian! In spite of what the band said on TV one time they NEVER WERE CANADIAN. Or, rather, a better way to understand this is that they liked to think of themselves as Canadian when they thought it was good for their career, and then dumped their love for Canada as soon as they made it in the U.S. In light of that, why is it that a few badly mis-informed people from Vancouver still want to claim them as Canadian? I had to removed the "considered to be Canadian" phrase which are WEASEL WORDS at best and completely undocumented.

Regardless of whether they were "understood to be Canadian" by Vancouverites or Torontonians the fact is that the band misled their fans about their real nationality in order to boost their careers. The radio station director in Montreal who was the first to play their records also acknowledges that she was misled by Shelly Siegel and Mushroom. I think the real reason why they told Americans on an American TV show that they were Canadian is that they got too carried away by the whole charade, or maybe it was just the drugs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.191.203 (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

It's really rather hard to believe that Heart was formed in Canada when, in fact, most of the early members had previously worked together in the Seattle area before moving to Canada. I always thought they were formed in Seattle. Even though they have made off-handed comments about being formed in Canada I never took those comments seriously. The only one I know of for sure who did not work with them early on was Howard Leese, who is originally from southern California. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Red98113 (talk • contribs) 03:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I think we should put the whole "Canadian band" issue to rest by re-writing the article to say that Heart is an American band who first found success in Canada. Its more accurate and avoids the long story and confusion of exactly where they were formed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.170.98 (talk) 00:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The Fischer boys were in Canada to avoid the Vietnam draft and the sisters followed them up. That is the only reason they were hanging out in Canada during the early 70's, it is no secret. Mrhyak (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Heart's alleged Canadian Content status

I have seen early (1975) Canadian copies of Dreamboat Annie LP in which the label shows all 4 parts of the Canadian Content MAPL logo filled in. I will try to get some more pictures to back up this claim, but don't have them right now. This would mean that the recording claims to have:

(M) Music written entirely by a Canadian (A) The Artist of the record is a Canadian (P) The recording was Produced in Canada (L) The Lyrics were written entirely by a Canadian

Since all the members of Heart were in fact American citizens it is very hard to see how Mushroom records could have legitimately claimed that Dreamboat Annie fulfilled all 4 requirements. The only one of the 3 requirements that the band clearly did fulfill is the "P" requirement, since the album was produced and recorded in Vancouver B.C. To claim CanCon status the current rules require that the recording must fulfill at least 2 of the above requirements. (There are a few exceptions to the current rules which don't apply to this Heart recording.) CanCon requirements have been modified somewhat over the years, but as far as I know fulfilling only 1 requirement never allowed a recording to qualify for CanCon status.

So the question is, did Shelly Siegel and Mushroom Records deliberately mis-represent Heart's CanCon status on the record label in order to get their music on the radio? Perhaps this is the real source of all of the confusion over Heart's alleged status as a Canadian group. It also seems that early on the group tried to convince people that they were Canadian, when in fact they really were not and still are not. Was there some sort of conspiracy going on? Need to get to the bottom of this mystery! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.37.6.178 (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Bands influenced by Heart?

Quoting the legacy section: Among the groups who have recorded at their Bad Animals studio are R.E.M., Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden and Candlebox (all of whom have cited Heart as a major influence)

Although I don't claim to be an expert on said bands (although I'm a fan of all but candlebox) I don't recall any of these bands stating that they were influenced by heart (although I do remember that Alice In Chains played a tribute to heart, so there's a little evidence for AiC's inclusion), also it shows that there is a citation needed.

I believe that it should be removed, however, I believe it should at the very least be disscussed first.

Also, if anyone can find source(s) to back this statement, then I don't see any reason it shouldn't continue to be there.

ps: I do not dispute the claim that these bands recorded at Bad Animals studio, I don't know, but if it turns out the statement of Heart's influencing these bands is untrue than it's pretty irrelevant.

Alternative Idiot (talk) 23:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Alice in Chains has cited them as a major influence as does Chris Cornell (I'm pretty sure he made reference to this in their behind the music episode). I do remember Pearl Jam making reference to them as an influence as well. They did also influence some metal/rock acts in the eighties. 67.181.182.87 (talk) 23:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The article already provides a reference for Alice in Chains. viz: http://www.decadesrocklive.com/confidential/ Interview - Alice in Chains, Alice in Chains speaks about Heart’s influence, Decades Rock Confidential.

• Re: Chris Cornell: Which "they" are you referring to when you say "their" interview? (Presumably Soundgarden?)
• Have you any details of when/where Pearl Jam made the reference?
• Any ideas on which "metal/rock acts in the eighties" were influenced? Do you have any supporting references?

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Heart promotional photo (1973)

Hi folks, can someone name the people in this photo, in the same way as the 1970 photo. This would show the changing membership of the band in the early years. Thanks Edgepedia (talk) 11:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Been working on that but it is a slow process. For sure far left is Steve, In the middle is Ann and far right is Roger. The photographer tells me "As for the players on drums and keyboards, at the moment your guess is as good as mine. I spent a lot of time and made the most money out of bands that kept changing personnel. It was hard to keep up with who was moving where and now they all look like the same bearded hairy kids. The best that I can do is to try and find the original negs from that shoot and see if I can get a clear print of those two and send them to Roger or Ann for an ID." My feeling is the keyboard player may be John Hannah, who was a local Vancouver musician that played with them circa 1972/73. He is more known for playing with Bryan Adams in the 80's. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Sv1. I've been experimenting with how to present that information, and I haven't liked anything that I've come up with yet. What follows is the least bad of the options I thought of. Comments? Suggestions? Improvements? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[[Image:Heart1973 BC.png|thumb|190px|float|right|Heart promotional photo (1973)<br>Top (L-R): Steve Fossen,<br>''(unidentified, possibly John Hannah)'',<br>Anne Wilson,<br>''(unidentified)'',<br>Roger Fisher]]

(In case you were wondering, it's between <nowiki></nowiki> brackets to avoid problems with the "copyright police". Pdfpdf (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC))

After-thought:

Has anyone seen a picture of Mike Fisher? (Has anyone got a "free" one?)

I think I read somewhere that at one time he was a drummer. (However, I've also read other (conflicting) information about him.)

Is there any chance that the drummer might be Mike Fisher? (Probably unlikely - if he wasn't in the 1970 picture, why would he be in the 1973 picture?)

Just a thought. Comments/Opinions/Other thoughts? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

disjointed

Wow, this article is seriously disjointed and just down right rambles in places. I don't even know where to start on improving it. Also, I have to take issue with Heart being tagged as a Canadian band, they are Americans who simply lived in Canada at one time, their having lived here, and being once signed to a long defunct, small Canadian label, doesn't make them Canadian. Status4 (talk) 01:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The article does not say the founding members were Canadian, only that the band formed in Canada. The very first line in the article says "Heart is a rock band whose founding members came from Seattle, Washington, USA...". However due to the fact the core formed in Canada, played the local clubs, had their first release(s) in Canada and, when even the bands members said they were a "from Canada", it is not shocking they are considered a "Canadian band". Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Status4: I suggest you read the archives; I'm fairly confident that the answers to all of your questions (and much, much more) can be found in there. On second thoughts, Soundvisions1's response it a pretty accurate summary of at least 25% of the archives. Pdfpdf (talk) 10:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Biased quote?

"The media had a field day."

Well argued. "To my knowledge ... " - That raised a smile. "what comes to mind is a relatively trivial news story ... that gets an unusual amount of coverage" - Yes.

"Did this really get ... " - I can't say. From Australia it was easy to find a seemingly endless supply of different stories, and a seemingly infinite number of copies of them. But perhaps that's just the nature of google?

"Anyway, the point I'm trying to make ... " - and you made it quite well. Unlike the previous editors comments, I "get it".

So, if we remove "As can be seen from the volume of media response, the media had a field day.", what do we replace it with?

I guess the first issue to resolve is, "Is it a relatively trivial news story, that got an unusual amount of coverage?"

As I've said, I don't know. From my side of the planet, where the volume of "stuff" has been filtered, it seemed to (undeservedly) stick out. From your side of the planet in the midst of the production of the raw data, I gather that it (deservedly) got "lost in the noise"?

Given the clarity of your explanation, I am now ambivalent about the wording of the third sentence. However, I do feel the paragraph needs a third sentence; when I read the first two sentences without a third sentence, I'm left with the reaction: "Yeah, so what?" Hence, I feel a third sentence is needed to provide the "so what" answer. On reflection, I'm not so sure that "the media had a field day" does, or ever did do, that.

Your thoughts? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

It might not be the fall of the Soviet Union but I think it's relevant and safely un-trivial enough to be worth noting. At the risk of getting too far off on some tangent, these references from the article [1] [2] talk a little bit about licensing and such. Here [3] the Wilsons talk more specifically about not wanting the RNC to use the song at campaign events.

From that I think something might work that says that they didn't want the RNC to use the song as they disagree with the RNC's policies, the RNC paid the appropriate licensing fees that allow them to use the song as much as they want, and that Roger Fisher said he would donate the royalties he recieved as a result to Obama's campaign. Something along those lines. Renders the "field day" stuff irrelevent, gets rid of the apparent bias that the others saw, and finishes off the thought on an interesting enough note.

I seem to remember something similar to this with Bush in '04 regarding I believe a Springsteen song and I always wondered how that licensing stuff worked, and I learned more about it in the last ten minutes than I ever knew before. Anyway, how does that sound? Limpidgreen345 (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

"Anyway, how does that sound?" -In principle and in theory, it sounds great. In fact and in detail, there are a few things I don't understand.

"Anyway, how does that sound?" - Fantastic! Go for it!! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

If it takes squeezing a not-that-significant story for a few extra lines to turn it into a real paragraph, it probably isn't really worth it after all, and looking at the Barracuda page (couldn't have done that earlier...), there's plenty of info there about this. It's "relevant and safely un-trivial enough to be worth noting" on the song's page, and barely so at that. It's frankly not really relevant at all to an article about the group as a whole. We could link to it if it's really that necessary, but to me it gets less and less necessary with every additional second I expend thinking about it. Limpidgreen345 (talk) 16:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. However, the removal of it will probably meet with howls of protest if not done with more skill and diplomacy than I'm capable of. On-the-other-hand, you probably do have that capability, and if you need my backup, I would be happy to help. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The deed is done. If somebody somehow takes issue with it after reading our discussion I'll happily deal with the ensuing crap. I'm quite capable of being diplomatic but... if all else fails we could just whap the guy over the head with a shovel and pretend he never said anything. Until that happens I think this has been successfully resolved. Limpidgreen345 (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes. The direct approach with the proverbial "blunt object" - a time-honoured, successful and well proven technique.

As "they" say in this community, wp:be bold! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

(Oh dear. "They" also say: " ...but please be careful ". Please be careful not to damage yourself with that shovel.)

Bad marriage reference

In the 1991-1995 section it says "In 1995 Nancy decided to take a break from music to concentrate on raising a family with husband Cameron Crowe. Ann toured that year with a band that was alternately called The Ann Wilson Band or Ann Wilson & the Ricola Brothers. This lineup included Leese, Scott Olson (guitars), Jon Bayless (bass) and Scott Adams (sax)."

Ann is married to Cameron, not Nancy, but I don't know if the rest of that section is correct. Bjjohns (talk) 23:33, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you check your facts. Ann is not married. Nancy is married to Cameron Crow.

And yes, the rest of the paragraph is also correct. Pdfpdf (talk) 03:15, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

References

Is there any reason that this sentence, "Heart is a rock band whose founding members came from Seattle, Washington, USA in the early 1970s", needs NINE references? It's hardly controversial, and even if it were, nine references would be overkill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingrundzap (talk • contribs) 12:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved to bottom, as is usual for new sections

For further reading on this subject, see an archive of this talk page Talk:Heart_(band)/Archive_3#Country of Origin and some other thoughts. Edgepedia (talk) 18:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Is there any reason that this sentence ... needs NINE references? - Answer: Yes. (Though personally, I dispute that it needs nine references. As Edgepedia says, see the archive.)

It's hardly controversial - Oh dear! You have no idea! (As Edgepedia says, see the archive.)

and even if it were, nine references would be overkill. - No arguement from me on that comment!

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Michael Fisher

The reason why it is so hard to pin down Michael Fisher's role in the group's history is because all the members have deliberately tried to be as vague as possible. It is clear to me that they have something to hide. I strongly suspect that the truth has something to do with his draft evasion, but I think it could go far beyond that. I hope that the truth will eventually come out. It has been along time and amnesty was given to draft evaders. 216.160.96.193 (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting comments.

Had you written them 20 years ago, I'd probably agree. But now?

I notice that a couple of years ago, both Roger Fisher and Nancy Wilson were reported to be writing books. I haven't seen them. I wonder what their status is?

Personally, I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this one seems to provide lots of fertile ground!! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

And can you explain why Michael Fisher himself has never made public appearances and never gives interviews? That also sounds rather suspicious to me!

It both surprises and upsets me that Heart has never been the subject of a decent book. Another conspiracy, perhaps? Books by Roger Fisher and Nancy Wilson would be interesting, I'm sure. But a band history by a professional writer who can be objective would be much better.

The best author for this project is Charles R. Cross. He is professional writer of music biographies and a life long Seattle resident. Cross did a lot of original research for his Hendrix book. He found the REAL story about how Jimi Hendrix ended his military career. Even though the Wikipedia article about Hendrix denies this, Cross uncovered a lot of evidence to support his conclusions and thoroughly backed them up. If you don't believe me read Cross's book Room Full of Mirrors: A Biography of Jimi Hendrix. If the members of Heart ever refuse to cooperate with Cross it will REALLY prove they have something to hide. Cross digs deep for info, does a lot of original research and really gets to the bottom of things.--70.58.82.115 (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Another bit of wild speculation and conspiracy that could involve Michael Fisher is smuggling. "Pdfpfd" doesn't know that illegal trade across the US/Canada border has been a big problem in this area for many years. Drugs are big part of the smuggling and British Columbia no longer bothers to enforce most if its drug laws. See the Wikipedia article on BC Bud. Dope is sold openly on the street and smoked legally in cafes in Vancouver. The heroin problem in Vancouver is the worst in all of North America, rivaling Amsterdam. There are also a lot of other kinds of illegal trade including human trafficking. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if Michael Fisher was involved with something like this. Michael Fisher lived in the Gulf Islands of British Columbia during his time in Canada. This area is not only prime smuggling territory, it is also legendary as place for hippies, drop outs and freaks of all kinds. 70.58.82.115 (talk) 05:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm truly fascinated by your postings. I wish more people were involved in the discussion than just you and me.

Yes, you are quite right, I was completely ignorant of Vancouver's smuggling and drug sub-cultures. BC Bud & Cannabis in British Columbia made interesting reading, if only for the fact that neither had been "prod"ed or speedied because NN.

As "they" say: "You learn something new every day." Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Dig a little deeper and you will find a lot more interesting news articles about this subject. The story that upset me the most was a few years ago when I heard about Canadian soldiers using their own military vehicles to smuggle dope into the U.S!!! Unfortunately I was unable to find that story again with a recent Google search. Here is a story from the Canadian Broadcasting Company which claims that 83% of all the methamphetamine seized in Australia came from CANADA! Blame Canada indeed! LOL!!

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/06/24/f-unitednations-drug-report-canada-ecstasy.html

Thanks for reading my posts. Glad to know that at least someone is paying attention. Not sure what you meant by the end of your last sentence though. What is NN?--67.40.22.62 (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry - wikipedia jargon. WP:NN WP:SPEEDY WP:PROD

made interesting reading, if only for the fact that neither had been "prod"ed or speedied because NN.

In English: It made interesting reading in its own right, but also because no wikipedia editor has come along and said "this is rubbish", or "this is trivial and/or not worthy of encyclopaedic interest". Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

P.S. So all those stories that the Oz Police and Politicians spout about Oz outlaw motorcycle gangs mass-producing the "ice" in "backyard laboratories" may be, ahhhh, "misleading"? (I have to admit, I always wondered how you could mass produce anything in a back yard laboratory ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It's hard to understand how anyone could doubt that drugs are made in "backyard laboratories." It only takes a bit of knowledge and the right chemicals. LSD was always made that way going back to the early 1960's with Owsley Stanley, etc. Methamphetamine is made in home labs from chemicals commonly available in cold remedies sold without prescription. Terrorists do the same thing. The Millenium Bomber Ahmed Ressam cooked up explosive chemicals in Canada and was caught smuggling them into the U.S. The list goes on...--216.160.93.32 (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't doubt that they are made in "backyard laboratories". I just doubt that they are "mass-produced" there, particularly in light of your statistic that 83% of it coming from Canada. Pdfpdf (talk) 09:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, it's not MY statistic! However, I don't have to make this stuff up either. I thought it was interesting that the news department of the Canadian Broadcasting Company, which is funded with taxpayer dollars, was willing to report this story at all. The story certainly didn't put Canada in a good light and there was no one forcing them to do an investigation that makes other Canadians look bad. CBC News is not ratings driven and there is no reason why they would have an incentive to blow the story out of proportion.

The ingredients for making Meth are readily available in large quantities in many places, but as the article indicates this is especially true in British Columbia. Backyard laboratory drugs can be EXTREMELY powerful. This is especially true of drugs like LSD where normally tens of thousands of doses are made at a time. The reason why Meth has gotten out of control is because the ingredients are cheap and easy to obtain. It is easy to make at home and Meth is also more powerful than many other drugs. --216.160.93.32 (talk) 06:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

(Furious backpeddling) My humble apologies! No, it is indeed not "YOUR" statistic. My humble apologies!

So now I'm confused. The alternatives seem to be:

• it was mass-produced by Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs in Australia;
• it came from Canada;
• Other.

Care to clarify? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

(BTW: Does this have anything to do with the article about Heart? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC))

Wow, lots of irrelevant stuff here. Maybe the reason Michael Fisher isn't discussed is because he just wasn't a very big part of the group in the first place? He may have played a little guitar for a few months, but receded to the background when it became clear that the other members were far more advanced musically. 216.65.144.24 (talk) 19:18, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

"Wow, lots of irrelevant stuff here."' - I agree.

"Maybe the reason ... " - No, I can't agree with that. The facts don't support it.

Mike Fisher was the reason Anne moved from Seattle to Vancouver, and hence the rest of the band members of the time. And eventually Nancy too. If the band hadn't moved from Seattle, is it likely that there would have been a Mike Flicker-like personality in Seattle setting up a new label who would have got behind them? Is it likely that there would have been a start-up like Mushroom-in-Vancouver? Would a Mushroom-in-Seattle have developed in the way that Mushroom-in-Vancouver did?

No. Mike and his move to Vancouver was VERY significant to the history of the band. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Just a thought - I think more people might be interested in the discussion if it actually had something to do about Heart. While interesting, it's way off point and completely speculative. Awa611 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's completely speculative. And that's because there's no data. However, I vehemently disagree that it's irrelevant!!

Yes, it's off topic. (Didn't you read my comment: "BTW: Does this have anything to do with the article about Heart?"?

But off-topic is not irrelevant. As I suggest above, if it weren't for Mike (and Vietnam and the draft), it's entirely possible that they would all have stayed in Seattle, would never have changed their name to "Heart" and would never have been known-of outside of Seattle. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

"Alive in Seattle" sales

The citation for this only links to a statement that platinum means 1,000,000 in sales. The statement that "Alive in Seattle" has gone platinum is not true. "Alive in America" has been certified Gold **as a video longform** by RIAA. This is important, because "gold" for a video longform format is 50,000 units, not 500,000 units as it is for albums. The sentence in the article should be updated to state that "Alive in Seattle" was certified Gold as a video longform format by the RIAA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabruns (talk • contribs) 19:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Heart 70s.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Heart 70s.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:47, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Two questions for "Edgepedia"

What part of Ann Wilson's statement "We're from Canada. We're from Vancouver, B.C." do you consider to be accurate and correct information?

What exactly is the meaning of "is"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.191.203 (talk) 08:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Moved to bottom - that's were new discussions go.

It doesn't have to be accurate and correct, that's what she says. Perhaps she's saying thats where the band was formed, currently based or that where they first found success? I'm not hearing her say she or any of the other members of the band are Canadian, which would be incorrect.

We have rules on Wikipedia about how we treat sources, and interpreting them is not allowed. It's best to present what the sources say in a neutral way and allow the reader to make their own mind up.

I don't understand the second question.Edgepedia (talk) 08:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

WWWHHHAAAATTT!!! You're not hearing Ann Wilson say that she or any of the other members of Heart are Canadian????? ARE YOU SERIOUS!!! That is EXACTLY WHAT SHE DID SAY!!!!

The point of the second question is that you are just playing silly games with what you consider to be "opinion" and what you do not consider to be opinion. I am trying to talk about FACTS, and you are ignoring them entirely!

There are many "sources" who have posted here that think Heart is/was Canadian. The most recent one was "Varlaam." I think you are just ignoring the obvious.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.191.203 (talk) 09:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)