Jump to content

Talk:Concept album

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 60.234.210.9 (talk) at 07:40, 9 June 2008 (→‎Savatage?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleConcept album is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 22, 2003Featured article candidatePromoted
April 9, 2004Featured article reviewDemoted
December 9, 2005Articles for deletionKept
December 3, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article
WikiProject iconAlbums Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

The Wall: 70s prog

Pink Floyd's The Wall was released in 1979 and was/is a highly influential. I propose it be moved to the 70s prog section and have its contents be expanded on. Monkeyfinger 23:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renominate this article for deletion

This article is a horrible mishmash of different fans of different bands writing about their favorite albums. The result is a horribly inconsistant article that is certainly not informative about the genre of concept albums. Unknown bands getting large write-ups on their unknown albums while major works of major artists are ignored is reason enough why this article should GO!98percenthuman

The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars

While reading this I noticed that it had quite a few ommissions, including some that have already been mentioned, such as The Wall. However, one major ommission is David Bowies concept album, The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars. This should have a spot in the 70's section.

Marilyn Manson

How can you have an article on concept albums and not mention Marilyn Manson? Not only do they produce concept albums, they produced a concept triptych. If no-one objects with good reason, I'll be adding it. TheEmpiricalGuy (talk) 12:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NIN

This claims that Year Zero is the first nine inch nails concept album. Any fan knows that The Downward Spiral, which was release over 10 years prior to Year Zero, was a concept album also.

The Wall?

Other rock opera concept albums are mentioned but for some reason nobody has mentioned Pink Floyd's The Wall. Strange, considering it is the third highest selling album ever. Should at least be fleetingly mentioned.

NPOV?

This article seems to be filled with speculation and conjecture, often with a very biased point of view. I certainly do not feel there's neutrality while reading this article. It could also use some cleanup, as much like many concept albums, it just doesn't gel very well.

Alan Parsons Project

I am surprised there is no reference to the Alan Parsons Project here on the concept albumn page, the works of whom are aways very conceptual, each albumn exploring a chosen theme. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Alan_Parsons_Project ANC001 added a paragraph on these, IMHO the best examples of theme concept albums there are (as oposed tot he equally important narative concept albums).

added a paragraph on these, IMHO the best examples of theme concept albums there are (as oposed tot he equally important narative concept albums).

Musical theatre

this article needs to be expanded to include the term's use in the world of musical theatre. Zephyrprince 05:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Radiohead

Radiohead's Kid A and Hail to the Thief are not ostensibly concept albums. Can anyone prove that they are? I believe that Radiohead may have intended for them to be at the outset, but abandoned the idea. I don't think they belong here. Matthew McVickar 20:08, Apr 11, 2004 (UTC)

Descriptions lacking

The descriptions for alot of these albums aren't very detailed. Ill fix some of them and nope the Wikipedians fix more. --Armus Aran Hail to the Thief is not a concept album.

Not concept albums?

I am not familiar with all the albums on this list, but quite a few of them are clearly NOT concept albums by any definition I can think of. This list appears to be completely out of hand. For example: "A Hard Day's Night"??? What exactly is the concept of that album? Just because its songs were featured on a movie, that does not make it a concept album. (On the other hand, the Alan Parsons Project albums clearly belong). soulpatch

Okay, not to be a jerk, but...if Plastic Surgery Disasters is a concept album "about modern society," the Dead Kennedys' entire catalog is one big concept album. That's what the band wrote about: "modern society." You will note the entire absence of any songs about, say, 14th-century agriculture in the DKs' oeuvre. Okay, I'm being snotty now (it's the punk-rock thing) - but when the notion of "concept album" is stretched so elastically that vague thematics can define one, it loses all meaning. How many musicians have recorded "concept albums" about "love and its effects," say? --2fs 03:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"A quick one while he's away"

"A quick one while he's away", while it was an early trial of the "rock opera" for the Who, is not an album, it is a collection of six songs that tell a single simple story, presented as a single album cut, not an album, even though it appeared on an album called A Quick One. It was the second Who album, had "Boris the Spider", "So Sad About Us" and other unrelated songs. Ortolan88

Removed. I suggest also removing all the Moody Blues albums except Days of Future Passed, but I'll wait for a second opinion rather than doing it myself. B.Bryant 18:14 Dec 30, 2002 (UTC)

I am glad to see that people are finally starting to prune some albums from this article. This is such a frustrating article because of all the questionable albums that were thrown into the list. soulpatch

I did some major pruning job. Because I don't know most the albums myself either, I have taken an outside source for judgement, being http://www.allmusic.com/. They have album descriptions for all major and many minor albums. When this description did not specify that it was a concept album (directly or indirectly) (or there was no description), I have removed it with the argument that it might still be one, but it certainly isn't famous as such. Andre Engels 16:15 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)
I can't say I agree with every single removal, but I do agree with the vast majority, and I greatly admire your courage and intelligence in doing the pruning job. If a few of these get back on the list in spite of allmusic.com missing them, with their advocates making the case for them in the annotation or here, then fine, but good riddance to most of the obscure, unimportant, non-concept albums you took out. Ortolan88

Just wanted to fix the domain in the previous message. Allmusic.org redirects to a domain auction site. The correct domain is Allmusic.com. Zarggg

Muswell Hillbillies, Einstein, Sgt. Pepper

Added (or put back in?) Muswell Hillbillies by The Kinks. This is definitely as much a concept album as OK Computer. If you have a problem, take it up with Me, but first read my description and the liner notes...

Also wonder whether Einstein on the Beach is really appropriate since it's technically an opera by most people's standards. I suppose I see a slight distinction from other Glass works, e.g. Koyaanisqatsi, Naqoyqatsi that did not make the list (the latter are movie soundtracks for one, although "movie" in the same sense that Einstein on the Beach is an "opera" in my opinion).

Also, the description of Sgt. Pepper at the top is a bit long for my taste considering the point of the whole paragraph is that this is not a real concept album and considering this is not an article about the Beatles...

--Chinasaur 10:09, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)

Furthermore, the Pepper LP is significant enough that it has its own article. No need for excess info here. Place it in the Pepper article. Kingturtle 03:06, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Shouldn't any album listed here at least offer a brief description of the album's supposed concept? What, for example, is the concept of Astral Weeks? I think one problem (someone alludes to it below) is that in the critical atmosphere of the late '60s/early '70s, the "concept album" label gave status to an album - and so critics, anointing an album as major or important, would see concepts where, perhaps, no concepts were readily legible or intended. (I've seen John Cale's Paris 1919 described as a concept album...about what, exactly?) --2fs 03:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

spoilers

it makes sense to me to have the spoiler warning on this article. Kingturtle 07:26, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So what do we do now? I think neither of us is interested in an edit war, but I also think giving arguments will not help, since we probably already know them... I give mine below, but I don't think it will help.
My argument is that a spoiler warning should indicate that reading the article might 'spoil' people's pleasance in reading a book by giving away what happens. To me this includes extensive reading, and the mentioning of major plot events. It does not include giving the basic setting of a book (thus my comment about the Odyssee - I would not expect a spoiler warning before "The Odyssee is about Odysseus, a Greek hero from Troy, who tries to get back home". A second reason is that a concept album is quite different from a book - few will listen to a concept album in a "what happens next?" state of mind. Andre Engels 09:13, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In general I think it's kind of silly for an encyclopedia to have spoiler warnings; if someone is looking something up in an encyclopedia, he should be aware that he might get more details than he is looking for. The difference is that this encyclopedia is on the web, and seems to turn up in Google searches more and more these days. So I think it makes sense to assume the spoiler warning is more of a courtesy for people who navigate to the page accidentally.

In that light, I think the overriding argument is to leave the warning in; it doesn't really detract seriously from the article and you never know who might stumble onto the page. Although it does bring up the interesting point: a spoiler warning should probably add something to the page <head><title> rather than just a message in the body...

Chinasaur 09:33, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

King Crimson catalogue

Can someone find verifiably accurate information about the article's assertion that not only do the first four albums by King Crimson form a quadrilogy, but each of them have an individual conceptual background? The only comprehensive published source on King Crimson to date, Sid Smith's In the Court of King Crimson (Helter Skelter, 2001), says nothing about either of those ideas being the case, and nor have I ever heard of them before reading what's written here. The first two albums are sometimes grouped together as a unit, often because they were recorded with the only two similar instances of the band's lineup in its early years, and Fripp himself has commented that Poseidon is, in some ways, what he wanted Crimson King to be, but all first four albums? I'm going to take this out if nobody can verify it. Drasil 03:26, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did some further research, and all I could find on this topic were two somewhat flimsily speculative web pages that mention this as a possibility, so I've taken it out. Besides the lack of evidence, given the group's history, this is very highly unlikely to be the case. Drasil 04:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

R&B Concept Album

Added mention of R. Kelly's Trapped...In the Closet Neomuslings 02:45, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sgt Pepper

Would someone like to explain how Sgt Pepper is a concept album? It was ORIGINALLY intended to be a serious of songs sung by 'different artists' - Sgt Pepper's LHCB, Billy Shears... However, the idea was given up. There is no concept. As this album is featured heavily in the article, with even a picture of it, I recommend a SERIOUS edit to sort this out. For a reference to this idea of Sgt Pepper being an 'aborted concept album', see "Revolution in the Head: The Beatles Records and the Sixties" by Ian Macdonald (I believe I read it there!)

A Day In The Life is certainly not about the day after a SP show, this should be removed.

(the above was unsigned comment by 217.155.38.116)

We are in the realm of literalism versus popular perceptions and misconceptions. In this case misconception AND mis-naming by critics and the public at the time of the actual release nearly 40 years ago. Whether rightly or wrongly - the album was very widely described as a "concept album" from the time of its release. The Beatles themselves did not outright comment on the terminology at the time. They were justifiably proud of the album's breakthrough artistic qualities - and did not publicly quibble with the "concept album" designation. (They did so in interviews in later years.) The unusual elements of the album (the Beatles presenting themselves for two songs as an alter ego band... the reprise of the opening song... the cross-faded songs etc) and the packaging - all of which WERE new to pop/rock albums - all contributed to the notion of this being something new and very different. And for lack of a better term - and to distinguish the album from ordinary collections of totally unrelated songs - "concept album" was the term used to describe it - and the designation stuck.
When other albums were released that proffered storylines (usually spelled out in the album packaging with text and/or lyrics) - such as the Pretty Things' "S.F. Sorrow," Nirvana's "The Story Of Simon Simopath", The Who's "Tommy" the Kinks' "Arthur" - these albums too were described as "concept albums" even though they were clearly a different 'animal' than a song-cycle such as "Sgt. Pepper."
To try and deal with this (since it is hard to undo nearly 40 years of popular perception) I recently made an addition to the article. The current second paragraph in which I explain how there were two definitions of "concept albums" that lived side-by-side in that era. That both types of album were held to be "concept albums." With that paragraph there to explain it - I think "Sgt. Pepper" needs to stay - but it definitely needs a re-write.
So for that matter does "Satanic Majesties" which was not described as a "concept album" at that time. The sole concept was the Stones doing their equivalent of "Sgt. Pepper" - just as their then-recent single "We Love You" was a conscious echo of "All You Need Is Love" !
Certainly in respect of albums in the post-1966 era - we need to acknowledge the two different types of album that were regarded as "concept albums"
Davidpatrick 05:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The concept is that the series of songs were to be sung by 'different artists'. Hyacinth 08:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we know! .... I think the new bit that has been added is an important clarification, but I think it goes on a bit. Something along the lines of "Sgt Pepper was initially intended to be a concept album, with 'different artists' performing each track, but the idea was abandoned after the the second song". Then there should be a link to the album, where it can be explained further.

NPOV

I removed the NPOV tag as there is no description of the problem on this talk page. Hyacinth 10:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not verified

I removed the not verified tag as there is no indication on this talk page of what needs to be verified. Hyacinth 10:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning to put a bit into this page along the lines of...

"The first concept album is widely regarded as either Sgt. Pepper or Sell Out which were released within months of each other in '67"

... as public opinion is pretty evenly spread between the two, but the section on Sgt. Pepper is so big and dense that I couldn't find a place to put it. I definately believe that Sell Out deserves at least an equal section, as it has a much more prominent concept than Sgt. Pepper. If anyone would care to take a look at the Sell Out page and incorporate it into this one, I'd be grateful. If not, I'll probably do it later. Thanks - MightyMoose22 04:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Major overhaul needed

The truth of the matter is that to place the start of the history of the concept album in the rock and roll era is completely bogus. From the comments listed above, I must conclude that what I have normally held to be established is true, that the vast majority of wikipedia users are both by age and education fairly unaware of the history of music prior to rock and roll, which is pretty much the case everywhere in the United States for anyone uder the age of fifty. If this trend continues, in a generation's time this article will be revised to place the start of the concept album with Run-DMC's Raising Hell, or the Beastie Boys' Licensed to Ill, future music aficionados knowing nothing prior to the beginning of hip-hop other than James Brown and funk groups from the 1970s.

Given that a recording of a classical piece or a show, say Beethoven's Fifth Symphony or My Fair Lady, should not qualify as a 'concept album' as these works were already planned for other media and the recordings came later (which would make Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Weber's Jesus Christ Superstar a concept album as the record is the original and the stage versions came afer), then a concept album should be defined as an original work made expressly for recordings, unified by a theme, mood, or concept chosen by the recording artist. Sgt. Pepper certainly qualifies as a concept album, even if the concept is fairly loose, and it certainly sold well, but to credit it with either originating or popularizing the concept concept is utter nonsense. The same goes true for any rock and roll concept LP of the sixties - the Beach Boys' Pet Sounds, the Mothers' Freak Out, or The Who Sell Out (by the way released in December of 1967 in the UK, and recorded after Sgt. Pepper had already been released in June of '67 - no way Townshend any more than the rest of the western world could've avoided the Sgt. Pepper influence) etc. Like Sgt. Pepper, they're all at the very least a decade too late for that.

The purpose of an encyclopedia article is not to be a fan page for assigning characteristics to cherished favorites that those favorites do not possess; it is to present as accurate a history and accounting as possible. I know that much more research needs to go into the history of recordings prior to the unveiling of the long-playing album by Columbia Records in 1948 - too much of that info is going down the rabbit hole, similar to how the history of silent film is getting harder to ascertain as documentation gets lost or destroyed. But, with that in mind, the earliest examples I have found for the concept album depend on interpretation of the definition. These starting points could be:

Lee Wiley, in 1939, for her album set of 78s of the songs of Ira and George Gershwin; she continued in the forties with others for Cole Porter and Harold Arlen; Frank Sinatra, in 1946, for his set of four 78s released as The Voice of Frank Sinatra

In the fifties, Ella Fitzgerald and her producer Norman Granz built Verve Records by taking Wiley's concept and updating it, releasing Fitzgerald's celebrated recording series of Songbooks with top-flight arrangers and recording technology. These albums were both artistic and commercial successes. Earlier in the decade, Sinatra had updated his own concept album approach with his series of masterful records done for Capitol. These albums, excepting the holiday and the instrumental one with Frank conducting, all peaked in the top five on the Billboard LP chart during that decade. To say that it waited for Sgt. Pepper to arrive in 1967 for the concept album to attract a wide commercial audience presents a distorted and incomplete picture in the regard to the actual history.

Wikipedia is fast becoming the first point of reference for many people, before they go to a print encyclopedia. The article as it stands is very disjointed, almost schizophrenic, not to mention factually inaccurate. It needs major overhaul.

The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.16.50.230 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 2006 March 1.

A set of 78s is not a concept album. A collection of songs that simply compliment each other is not a concept album. That's just an album. That's what an album is. I would agree, however, that the holiday themed releases should be at least mentioned.
Incidentally, this is why I (and many others) disagree with the classification of Sgt Pepper, or at least with the amount of credit it gets. It may have been conceived as a concept album, but it wasn't released as one.
And The Who started recording Sell Out in May '67, by the way. :) - MightyMoose22 21:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in response to the above response: 1) there is no reason that a set of 78s cannot be a concept album if the definition is a collection of recorded songs tied together by an organizing concept; since in the 1930s and 1940s singers and songwriters were separate entities, unlike today, a group of recordings organized around the songs of a single composer would certainly qualify, especially if no one had thought of doing so before 2) an album is not a collection of songs that complement each other; most of the time an album is simply a haphazard collection of songs, period 3) not to be too picky but in the interest of accuracy, according to the Complete Chronicle of The Who Anyway Anyhow Anywhere (2002) by the time Sgt. Pepper was released in the UK on June 1, the Who had recorded only songs that would end up as bonus tracks on the 1995 reissue of The Who Sell Out - while Townshend certainly harbored his own ideas about composition and recording and may have had notions for, if not entire songs, already worked out for the new LP prior to the arrival of Sgt. Pepper, the truth of the matter is that in 1967 the Beatles, along with Bob Dylan, (and to slightly lesser extents Brian Wilson and the Rolling Stones) were very much looked upon as guideposts by the rest of the day's rock community - Townshend would have been unable to completely negate the influence of Sgt. Pepper even if he wanted to, and it probably did have an impact on the shape of Sell Out (I have never seen a report where Townshend makes a statement to the effect that during the 1960s he did everything in his power to ignore The Beatles) and 4) all of this is really beside the point as, to reiterate, placing the start of the concept album during the rock and roll era of the 1960s does a disservice to the history of sound recording in the twentieth century and to how that story played out - writers, critics, and musicians of the 1950s were were referring to long-playing records by Sinatra, Peggy Lee, and others in terminology later generations would understand as describing a concept album long before John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Pete Townshend, Brian Wilson, or Frank Zappa ever entered a recording studio The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.16.50.230 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 2006 March 15.

Okay, 1) a - It's not an album. b - the "concept" is tenuous, at best.
2) Just because some people aren't very good at it doesn't mean those that are are something special. By that reasoning, I could claim that every half decent guitarist is a virtuoso, purely because most people can't play guitar.
3) I'm not debating influence. I'm just saying that although Sgt. Pepper came first, to quote myself, "It may have been conceived as a concept album, but it wasn't released as one." So when Sell Out was released, it was the first fully realised concept album. I'm not claiming Townshend invented the idea, just that Sgt. Pepper (as it was released) doesn't really count.
4) Yes, you said all that before.
Basically, by your definitions, every collection of songs that were either written by the same person (or people), or that merely sound good together would be counted as a concept album. I disagree. - MightyMoose22 05:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To quote something I wrote on this page a few months ago - "We are in the realm of literalism versus popular perceptions and misconceptions"

There are two entirely separate things going on here. Were there albums released prior to the mid-1960's that were collections of songs that had a cohesive theme (such as Ella Fitzgerald's albums of songwriters)? Absolutely. But they were almost certainly never described by the record trade, by members of the media or by the public as "concept albums". They were "collections" or perhaps "themed collections".

The term "concept album" was certainly not popularized until the mid-1960s (and may not even have been used prior to then). It was (depending on your point of view) a conceit or a legitimate term that flourished at the dawn of so-called progressive rock. This was at the point that (in the UK) what had been called "pop music" became "rock music" if it was more sophisticated and had aspirations beyond simply entertaining the listener. In the US - the similar change was made from referring to "rock 'n' roll" to "rock music."

From 1967 onwards there was a wealth of press coverage and consumer support for this distinction between what had been primarily entertainment to what was now considered, or at least claimed to be, an art-form.

Releasing something that was dubbed a "concept album" - be it an integrated narrative or a loose theme - was an artistic badge of honor that showed that the performer was a "serious" artist. Hence the plethora of them in the late 1960s and early-mid 1970s. The fact that among the good ones there were so many dreadful and pretentious ones hastened the demise of their popularity. The success of punk and new wave in 1977/8 was (in part) a reaction against the perceived pomposity of progressive rock. And the epitome of progressive rock was the "concept album" - often a 2 or 3 disc album.

For all the above reasons - I think that we should distinguish between the pre mid-1960s albums (which belong in a separate legitimate category or article as "Themed albums") and the specific genre of "concept albums" from when the term first came into being. There could, and should, be a brief preamble about how "themed albums" were the predecessor of this new genre. But unless someone has hard evidence of there being a genre prior to 1966/1967 that was ever called "concept albums" - I think this article should start in the mid-1960s. And everything before (or subsequently of a similar nature to THOSE types of albums) belongs in a separate article titled "Themed albums" Davidpatrick 04:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What he said. :) - MightyMoose22 05:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Johnny Cash on this page?

Johnny Cash's Ride This Train is one of the first concept albums according to the defintion presented on this page.

This annoyed me

"In the wake of the Sgt. Pepper triumph, concept albums became the rage among serious rock artists, with mixed results. The Rolling Stones attempted to duplicate Sgt. Pepper with more explicitly drug and occult-inspired overtones with Their Satanic Majesties Request, but it proved to be a commercial and artistic failure, one that the Stones quickly learned from and moved on. The album made no attempt to fashion a concept around the disparate songs on the album. The unifying nature of the album (such as it was) came primarily from the musical atmosphere, the subject matter of the lyrics, and the psychedelic cover art; the Stones themselves never identified the album as a concept album."

Why is this album even mentioned, it was not a concept album and the paragraph is just someones opinion.


King Diamond

I'm putting in a mention of hims since all of his albums are concept albums

Wanders like a teenager's hands

Not only is it pretty weird on content, its definition of a concept album as having one unifying theme gets stretched to ridiculous levels. I'll write a whole, stupid album about love, and call it a concept album. I rock. Jeez. 75.81.181.159 06:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PainOfSalvation-ThePerfectElementPart1.jpg

Image:PainOfSalvation-ThePerfectElementPart1.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 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 05:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With all of the bands listed, where's Armor for Sleep?

I agree that this page needs tons of editing and omitting, but i also think that if there is going to be a paragraph for every band that has released a concept album, that both of Armor for Sleep's albums should be included. At least include "What to do when you are dead." This album is what concept albums are all about. Bournejordanlevi 03:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There should not be a paragraph for every concept album. Plain and simple it can not be done. Ridernyc 18:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split article

This article is one giant mess, How to fix it simple. Make a much smaller article on the term concept album. Then split off all the albums into a list of concept albums. Much easier to edit and keep track of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridernyc (talkcontribs) 17:17, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

The more I look at the more I see that the vast majority of this article should just be removed and just add a list of concept albums to the end of the article. So many people are adding every description of everything that anyone might consider a concept alubm. Do we really need a paragraph talking about how Kid A and Ok Computer are not concept albums?

Goinng to start removing stuff and clening things up a bit.Ridernyc 18:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The focus of this article should not be individual albums. We are not here to write a long article on Sgt. Pepers, there is a page for that. Ridernyc 18:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More Cleanup and New Section

Removed even more things that seemed to dostract from the main article.

Added a new section about bands using the internet and multimedia. I think this is how things sould be only things that advanced the concept album or few minor historical notes should be added. We can't keep track of every album.Ridernyc 20:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kilroy2.jpg

Image:Kilroy2.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 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) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This image, from the Kilroy Was Here album, is used to give information about that album in the article concept albums. The image is also used to describe the album in Styx (band). The image qualifies as fair use per Wiki policy. --98percenthuman (talk) 20:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Mars Volta

Given that all three currently released albums fit the standards (Amputechture being more subtle, with unifying themes and not so much a deliberate story), shouldn't The Mars Volta get a mention? Frances the Mute is a very strong concept album, IMO. DragonGuyver (talk) 09:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magma

I would have thought that most of Magma'a albums, and certainly the first 3, qualify as concept albums.

Earl Marischal (talk) 19:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GAN

Try to use {{Cite news}} and {{Cite web}} for the citations. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GAN

The article passes all GA criteria except "accuracy". I am afraid that 4 days after BritandBeyonce advice, and no action yet, I have to fail it per WP:CITE. Using templates is required since the information they have are needed for a GA. (e.g. the web site that is used for citing the info might change AND THE URL NO LONGER WORKS). Λua∫Wise (talk) 16:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unified theme?

I don't get this. Most albums have a unified theme. I mean, you could say the Spice Girls' albums have "unified themes". For it to be a proper concept album, it needs a plot and one song following on from the next, lyrically speaking. Otherwise you could say that "Michael Bolton sings Christmas songs" is a concept album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfie Noakes (talkcontribs) 11:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ridernyc (talk) 08:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Very simple answer, a Christmas album would be a concept album the concept being Christmas. A plot would be a rock opera which is a type of concept album. Lack of a plot has nothing to do something being a concept album. Ridernyc (talk) 08:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er. no. One could say that Britney Spears' debut album was a concept album because the theme was a teenage girl's life. Or that Spice World is a concept album, as it has a "theme". The idea of a concept album has been stretched beyond breaking point. Sgt pepper is definitely NOT a concept album. neither are various other listings on this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.158.152.206 (talk) 09:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Clinton/ Parliament-Funkadelic Concept Albums

I am curious as to why no one has mentioned this. Legendary albums like "One Nation Under a Groove" and "Mothership Connection" are all-out concept albums. As a matter of fact, Every Parliament album ever made after the Mothership Connection is a concept album (though Clones of Dr. Funkenstein loses conceptual steam). Clinton had so many brain-children that he coudln't even pay brainchild support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.79.53 (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haggard (German symphonic metal band)

This band albums are concept album:

Awaking the Centuries (2000) The album is based on Michel De Nostredame (Nostradamus) and his experience during The Black Plague in the Medieval Europe.

Eppur Si Muove (2004) The album is based on the life of the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564 –1642), who, according to legend, muttered the phrase Eppur si muove, meaning "And yet it does move", after being forced to recant, in front of the Inquisition, his belief that the earth moved around the sun.

Tales of Ithiria (2008) A fictional, medieval-themed story. Lord kavi (talk) 10:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been unable to document the use of the term "Song cycle" in conection with the works listed in Song_cycle#Song_cycles_in_popular_music and have proposed merging the section with concept album, but unfortunatly do not have the expertise to incorporate it into this article. Would someone like to take a look and see what could usefully be added? Sparafucil (talk) 23:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Savatage?

Anyone want to put in a mention about them? They're probably more important to the history of concept albums than some of these bands who have only released that are listed here. Some of them seem to be sort of fanboyish advertising. "The Dear Hunter"? "Snowbread"? "Explosions in the sky" (lowercase sic)?

I can understand Dream Theater, Smashing Pumpkins, even Mars Volta being included, but a lot of the others seem to just be there because they're bands somebody likes.