Talk:Muse (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Muse (band) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 3, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
February 5, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Alternative music (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Progressive Rock (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject England (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Sound development through the years and Musical methods[edit]

This appears to have original research without sources or the sources don't accurately reflect the whole sentences. Someone should look into what is true and what is original. 169.229.76.151 (talk) 07:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


Progressive Metal[edit]

Can someone verify the reliability of the website claiming that Muse is progressive metal (ranker.com) for genres. The website is a social site and it does not appear that anyone with credentials or notability claimed that Muse is in fact progressive metal. In fact, when you click on the album, it copies its text from Wikipedia. Who says Muse is "progressive metal"? The users of the website? Is it mirroring other sites? Did someone input it? Where does its content come from?169.229.76.151 (talk) 04:51, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The real question here is "why ranker.com shouldn't be considered a reliable source" It's staff compiled and classified everything that Muse have officially released throughout their career, the discographies that they put up aren't related with the social side of the site, which also brings information about movies, Tv series, sports etc, it's akin to other huge sites such Aol (who brings news, and special reports, apart of the site's social service). It's true that when you click on an album, the information given is from wikipedia, however, we aren't using these information, we are using only the genres, wich couldn't be reflected from wikipedia because there are genres that have never been used here, (i.e. Hard rock, electronic rock, soft rock in Origin of Symmetry etc.) also, revising another singles, it's found that the genres given there usually are don't match with the genres used here, so it couldn't be possible that they drew specifically the genre related info from wikipedia.187.154.27.171 (talk) 04:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, there is something that you have to keep in mind: the one trying to change a consensus that was reached nearly eight months ago are you, this means that you shouldn't change any genre in the infobox untill a new consensus suporting your claims have been reached. 187.154.27.171 (talk) 04:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I looked up "muse, progressive metal" on google and could not find a single site in the top several searches calling Muse a progressive metal band except for sites that mirrored Wikipedia. Your source, ranker.com, also calls Muse "classical music". I have a hard time believing that. The source is not accurate at all. I am removing it as a source because the genres listed are not accurate. And "(i.e. Hard rock, electronic rock, soft rock in Origin of Symmetry etc.)". Hard rock is not soft rock, so I'm inclined to assume that the source cannot be accurate, nor is there a citation of anyone credible who labeled the genres. Furthermore, right above the facts, it says "Questions and answers providing facts about Muse. Information below is biographical. For more facts, info and a full bio of Muse click the "Read More" link to Wikipedia at the top of the page.". 169.229.76.151 (talk) 02:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Progressive Metal & Space rock[edit]

Much of Muse's music on the albums Origin of Symmetry and Absolution is obviously, if you listen to it, progressive metal. Having two out of 5 albums in a genre should qualify that genre to be added to the band's list of genres.

Also, I believe that it is important to note that Muse are "Space rock." A number of the songs have progressive science fiction lyrics and there aren't that many hugely popular space rock artists, so Muse has made an accomplishment.sbrianhicks (talk—Preceding undated comment added 01:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC).


I agree with this user. Instead of new prog, progressive metal should be put in place. And what about adding Hard Rock too. I think that the deletion of progressive rock is a very good idea as they are not a prog. rock band in any way.


I suggest, remove Heavy Metal and add Hard Rock. Their toughest material (maybe Stockholm Syndrome, Cave, Plug in Baby) does not qualify, IMHO. 92.80.106.78 (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree that space rock is an ideal category. Muse are also post grunge, as described on the article at the end of the paragraph, and backed up by the 'early influences' quote by the bassist that appears later on the muse band page. The lyrical content is notoriously post grunge, and should be included to avoid misleading readers. At present the article leaps in with 'progressive rock' as the first of many categories, but that should not be the priority given the stylistic separation from the progressive rock genre which occurs due to lyrical content (which is post grunge) and era of popularity (which is mid 90s - today). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ra7g09 (talkcontribs) 11:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Labeling Muse as "Progressive Metal" is not something I'd agree with, but more importantly, the source cited for that label (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2006/jun/30/popandrock.shopping3) does not actually have the words "progressive metal" anywhere in it. It makes a vague reference to "space metal," but without some sort of additional source confirming the universal correlation of "space metal" with "progressive metal" I don't think this is satisfying proof. 24.2.50.182 (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Neither album is progressive metal. It has progressive influences, so it would best be labeled new prog, like radiohead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.76.151 (talk) 07:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Indie[edit]

Muse are indie. They have that post-punk sound. 76.126.21.16 (talk) 00:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a source (such as an article in NME or some other music magazine) that describes them as such? Nev1 (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


Post punk and Indie are not the same 86.155.162.131 (talk) 22:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Genres[edit]

The current genres are Alternative rock and Progressive rock. They should stay. Symphonic rock and New prog are also main genres. More of their songs are New Prog and Symphonic rock than actually real Progressive rock. 83.253.167.142 (talk) 15:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I also added a full list of every genre they fuse together to make their sound, including classical, thrash metal (assassin and unnatural selection), hard rock, rock opera, alernative rock, electronica etc. but it got reverted cos of my source didnt back it up. shitty reverters. 60.51.57.196 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC).

Awful Images[edit]

I stumbled across this page and ws amused by the images. I am certain that this is not the intent. One has his tongue out. One looks like he is passing wind (or really stupid) and one looks like his hair is about to take off.

Good job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.53.55.192 (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Too much emphasis on live dates[edit]

There's too much blow-by-blow documentation of Muse's tour schedule. In comparison, next to nothing is said about band's recording sessions. Look at articles such as The Smashing Pumpkins, R.E.M., and Radiohead for inspiration on how to balance out the details of a band's history. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Festival Appearances?[edit]

List of Muse festival appearances [2][64]

  • Coachella Festival, Indio, CA, USA (April 2010) [3]
  • South by Southwest, Austin, TX, USA (March 2010) [4]
  • Big Day Out, Australia/ New Zealand (January 2010) [5]
  • V Festival, Staffordshire, UK (August 2008) [6]
  • Pinkpop festival, Landgraaf, Netherlands (May 2007)
  • Reading and Leeds Festivals, UK (August 2006)


Why on earth is there a fail list of festival appearances? Not only is it a pitifully small selection, but if one was to actually list all of their appearances over the past 12 years or so there would be a huge long list, which would be entirely unnecessary. I can't say I have come across any band articles which has such a list, which makes sense really.

I propose to delete this section. Just thought I'd mention it here as someone has obviously spent some time and gone to the effort of citing sources, and I didn't want to cause an edit war. Feudonym (talk) 13:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Completely unnecessary seeing as Muse have a massive list of festival appearances and wikipedia is not the place for them anyway. I will remove it. 147.197.190.100 (talk) 09:33, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Use of Muse Wiki as a Source[edit]

Some of you may have noticed but in the History section of Muse, it states the reasoning of why the band chose the name Muse. Before this edition, we had a source claiming the band chose the name Muse from Rocket Baby Dolls because someone claimed there were "Muses", in reference to the Greek gods of innovation and science, hanging over the town due to the upsurge in bands competing in the "Battle of the Bands" contest. Now we have a source claiming it was because Matt Bellamy's art teacher said the word, and the band chose it because it would look good on a poster. Now the one problem I have with this source is that it is from the Muse Wiki.

Wikipedia has been cited many times as an unreliable source to use when citing sources to back up information, due to the massive influx of people editing the pages, citing information from various sources and so on. I've looked around the Muse Wiki, and its a fan-based source, created by fans, for the fans. And to be honest, the quality of some of the information on there is below standard-English levels of explanation and documentation, nothing against the people who wrote it with good honest intentions of keeping a large record of Muse information which would otherwise clutter Wikipedia, but should we not find a source which actually quotes Matt Bellamy as saying this rather than a quote from another website - which can be edited by anyone?

The one thing that is really confusing is that the article on the Muse Wiki makes no mention whatsoever of Matt's art teacher, but the fact that someone mentioned Muses were hanging over the town. (82.28.237.200 (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC))

MuseWiki's sources are from all over - the most reliable being the Muse biography "Out of this World - The Story of Muse". Since the origin of the name is actually explained in the book and I am in possession of a copy of it, I'll look into it as soon as possible. Sapphiruby (talk) 07:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

9 genres?[edit]

Is that really necessary? Some of them don't even apply to Muse. Alternative metal and pop rock? Lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.247.226 (talk) 05:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

It is misleading to mention so many genres and leave out the one that may be the most relevant, ie. post grunge. The stylistic link between muse and grunge is strong and much stronger than the stylistic link between muse and some of the other genres mentioned such as electronica. The article quoted from describes muse as post grunge, the bassist quote mentions grunge bands as key influences, there is overwhelming evidence. (Ra7g09 (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC))

Also, there was a comment 'recurring themes of revolution' that was correctly deleted since it is uncited personal analysis. The comment appeared to be backed up by a source but the source definitely didn't. The source backed up the genres which appeared earlier in the sentence. Ra7g09 (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

There's entirely too much argument and discussion about so-called "genres" here. Some people combine genres, other distinguish them. It's all opinion and original research, unless it's backed up by a quote from a member of the band. 24.27.31.170 (talk) 22:46, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Eric

huh?[edit]

it doesn't say on the website that muse are influenced by joy division, never read anything saying they were86.174.200.198 (talk) 15:34, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

The (REALLY) early years[edit]

The section starts with describing them forming at a Community College in the early 1990's, more specifically sectioning off the early years beginning with 1992. Does anyone realize Matthew Bellamy was 14 years old in 1992? 69.176.226.200 (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I think this is a UK/US language thing; in the UK college is the equivalent of high school. Teignmouth Community College provides education for 11–18 year olds. Nev1 (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Grammys[edit]

Shouldn't the page say "Muse are a Grammy award winning English alternative rock band...etc?.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.187.192.30 (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

No, that places undue weight upon the award in relation to basic facts about the band (who they are, where they come from). WesleyDodds (talk) 10:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
No, grammies don't matters. They are a shame. Shame on you IP, shame on you. 190.51.179.17 (talk) 19:25, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

English or british[edit]

Let's sort this out: They are Brazilians — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piscina 87 (talkcontribs) 20:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

UK arrogance[edit]

What is it about articles written about UK items that almost always omit a country name? It's a tad arrogant and presumptuous to assume that the entire world knows where "Devon" is. 208.65.64.18 (talk) 20:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

  • I think it's more a matter of convenience than arrogance; WP:PLACE, a guideline, advised that for places in the USA, "city, state" is an adequate description, even though readers may not know where Oregon or Vermont are, and we should not assume that they do. However, for those lacking this knowledge, we provide wikilinks to relevant articles. I don't see a problem here, because the alternative is to use a clumsy construct such as "Honiton, Devon, England, UK". Rodhullandemu 21:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Lyrical Themes?[edit]

Used to be mentioned in the article. Now I can't find them. Obvious references would be to conspiracy theories, Orwellian and dystopian themes, etc. Fatrb38 (talk) 04:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

improvements[edit]

i've improved the musical style section, the other was fairly poor in information, it keeps all the points that the older had and also covers all the other topics fairly weel, and includes all band's members views, it's well organized and a complex band like Muse deserves it. Well, "featured article class" here we go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carnotaurus044 (talkcontribs) 05:04, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Genre discussion[edit]

This section porpouse is to discuss the genres that will apear on Muse's infobox, so let's be mature and discuss the genres that must be added and wich don't. below a list of the genres that must be added wich their respective reazons (genres sorted cronologically):

  • Alternative rock: There is no need to discuss this one, right?
  • Space rock: Much of Muse's lyrics & electronic arrangements falls here, everybody who knew'em before The Resistance will asociate'em with it.
  • Progressive metal or Alternative metal: in the period from Origin of Symmetry to Black Holes & Revelations was a prominent genre, also this is the genre with wich Muse became known for in the past, several of their most recognized songs lands totally or partially at least in this genre, thus it deserves a place in the infobox, sources describing Muse's music as such:[1] [2][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
  • Progressive rock or New prog: although their music has always showed elements of it mixed with alternative rock, electronica, metal or latin music, it was not until the resistance when it became the dominant genre, the discuss here is that both New prog & Progressive rock practically means the same, so wich genre must go on?
  • Symphonic rock: another genre that came to prominence with the resistance, several songs on the album features ochestal arrangements included the three piece symphony, it probably must be there.
  • Rock opera the exogenesis symphony is a clear example of one, also muse always have been influenced by rock opera & classic opera, and their music has been described like this several times, sources describing Muse as this: [11] [12] [13] [14]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carnotaurus044 (talkcontribs) 01:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
This is all just your opinion until you find reliable sources for it all. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talkcontributions) 11:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Well, not sure about you, but i think that 10 references to Alt/Prog metal must be enough to add the genre to the infobox, Rock opera, with 4 references must be considered too.
Since when is "rock opera" a genre of music? Its an example of a kind of album, but not a genre in and of itself. Heiro 22:51, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The first source cited (entertainment.ie) uses the plural so clearly refers to it as a type of musical work and not a genre, but the others seem to be using it as a genre, perhaps as a synonym of symphonic rock. Peter E. James (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Yeah, the rock opera stuff it's kinda confusing since most sources recalls it as a genre, i give a look to the album examples included in the Rock opera article, but no one of them includes it as a genre at all, i think it won't make it to the infobox unless a source apears.Carnotaurus044 (talk) 04:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
The references don't describe Muse (or any of their music) as progressive metal or alternative metal, they just say that there are some elements of metal genres in their music.
  • I agree, some sources (actually 4 out of 10) says that they're influenced by metal, but the others describes their music as metal:
  • The Guardian: Black Holes and Revelations has Muse's usual industrial dollop of space-metal lunacy.
  • Entertainment ie: Bellamy's falsetto vocals and apocalyptic lyrics blend perfectly with the band's heavy metal riffs, crashing pianos and Bohemian Rhapsody-style harmonies.
  • Popmatters: Muse were more closely aligned with some of the most pathos-ridden grunge/metal outfits of the early 1990s.
  • The Guardian (again): "Unnatural Selection" is a thrash metal re-write of "Lay All Your Love on Me."
  • IGN: the rapid-fire metal riffs of "Assassin" pull together the best of Muse, with robust music and remarkable vocals.
  • NME: "Knights of Cydonia" have the exhilarating thrills of great metal epics like Led Zeppelin’s ‘Achilles Last Stand’ and Iron Maiden’s ‘Run To The Hills’.

I think this is enough to add it to the infobox, if you also consider that Muse's main genre is Alt.rock and that their music mixes elements of all the other genres, they've never been a full progressive rock band, neither a full space rock band or a symphonic rock band, but their songs have prominent influences of those genres, enough to be listed as a genre.Carnotaurus044 (talk) 04:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

"The band was described as a "trashy three-piece" by Matthew Bellamy on the BBC during 2002." That quote, if it is reliable, is the only sourced and reliable mention of genre by someone whose opinion matters. Yet, "trashy three-piece" is NOT a genre that wikipedia recognizes! What do we do now??? Holy cow, all you genre advocates need to stop. Just stop. It's music. I learned as a child that here are two kinds (not genres) of music. Do you know what they are? Good and bad. Muse, I think, is good, except for the falsetto vocals and electronic effects, which I would insist throws the entire band into the angst-ridden post-modern Smokey-Robinson bogusness genre, did I not like them. 24.27.31.170 (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Eric

Mainly, Muse are a progressive rock band. Yes; they do experiment on several songs with each individual release, but the vast majority of Muse's music is demonstrative of prog. rock. This is the closest and most accurate description of Muse's style and as such, I believe we should remove the symphonic rock, rock opera, and space rock tags - unless, someone can manifest a comprehensive list of all Muse songs essentially of the aforementioned genres. I think Muse's obvious musical ability and variety is causing their fans to come here and embellish the article. I am a fan myself, but I recognize that Wikipedia demands a certain preciseness in its editors' writing. - John M. DiNucci -- 17:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC−05:00)

I agree with the removal of these genres. They are very losely connected. Muse are largely a band that play alternative rock and co-opt in influences and instrumentation from other genres. Rock with space lyrics is not space rock. Have rock songs that utilise an orchestra isn't symphonic rock. Muse stick primarily to base, guitar, synths, piano and drums. On their upcoming album, they have a song that is heavily influences with dubstep, and no doubt they use similar tools as dupstep artists and producers for their music, but this does not define Muse as being a dupstep artist. Let the band be defined by broad genres labels and leave the more specific stuff for classifying individual songs. 147.197.230.176 (talk) 11:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

New prog vs. Progressive rock[edit]

New prog and progressive rock are like redundant terms, only one must be listed in the main infobox

Numerous references to progressive rock can be found, but very few for new prog (however some use the term "neo prog", for which the relevant Wikipedia article is likely to be new prog, definitions seem to vary).Peter E. James (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll go for new prog for various reazons:

  • 1.New prog is a term used to define modern bands that incorporates progressive rock influences in their alternative rock music, this fits better with Muse since they aren't a full Progressive rock band, they don't sound like Genesis, Rush, Gentle Giants or Pink Floyd at all, althoug their music have elements of such genre.
  • 2.New prog is the term that appears in all the others Muse articles.
  • 3.It's a shorter term, thus it's easier to make it fit in the infobox.

However, this isn't definitive and it's open to a discussion.Carnotaurus044 (talk) 00:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The New Album section[edit]

I've deleted the section entitled 'New Album' because we simply do not have enough information on said album to create a new section about it. Once the band have fully finished promoting The Resistance (which will be at the end of this month, August). I kept the description of said section, but worded it better. I'd also like to propose a lock, so that people can stop adding the New Album section, which I've deleted several times as well as other users having deleted it. They are still in The Resistance era, thus the New Album section should not be added. I suggest we add this section either in 2012 or when a bit more information has been released regarding this sixth album of theirs. Anyone? Cross Pollination (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I think that an aditional section for the "new album" must be created once that the band reveals the "new album's" name.Carnotaurus044 (talk) 21:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Minor Edit - 23:27, 31 March 2012[edit]

This was a minor edit in which "an progressive rock band" was changed to "a progressive rock band."

(moved)

Thomas Kirk needs more recognition in this article (imo)[edit]

Matt pointed out that Tom Kirk is pretty much "the 4th member of the band (except he can't play any instruments)" -- BRIT Awards 2013 interview here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_Qqgjc8aAA -- Mr. Kirk is the genius behind all the visual/video stuff in the last few amazing tours as well as the guy responsible for much of their publicity etc. (see http://www.musewiki.org/Thomas_Kirk ) just not sure how to appropriately mention him in the main band article. :-\ 142.229.91.133 (talk) 18:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Associated Acts: U2?[edit]

Can U2 and Muse be listed as associated acts? The Edge played with the band at Glastonbury 2010, and they formed a supergroup for one night at a bar in Brazil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.191.28.26 (talk) 00:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think a single night event should be considered an associated act. --Xcuref1endx (talk) 02:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox picture description[edit]

In the picture to the right of the article, in the infobox, it says "From left to right: Dominic Howard, Matthew Bellamy, Christopher Wolstenholme and touring member Morgan Nicholls." Morgan is third from the left while Chris is fourth. Shouldn't this be changed? Maybe to "and touring member Morgan in the background" or something. 178.191.187.70 (talk) 07:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

"are" vs. "is"[edit]

The opening sentence is "Muse are an English rock band from Teignmouth, Devon, which formed in 1994."

Should this not begin with "Muse is..."? Muse is a band, hence the singular noun. 173.181.83.109 (talk) 07:38, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Rocksmith[edit]

They have a track in Rocksmith of Unsustainable, as well. The number of references to them seems poorly documented. -174.62.68.53 (talk) 08:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)