Talk:Dream pop/Archives/2015

Sources that prove that dreampop and shoegazing are the same musical style

The movement

...names like Blur and Lush, Swervedriver and Slowdive. Cloudy and elliptical, their music has been called, by turns, ...dream pop or shoegazer

— Newsweek 1992

Dreampop - also known as shoegazing music; this swirling, airy psychedelic-tinged pop style came out of London...

— The New Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll, 1995

The ruling Brit-pop aesthetic in 1991 was the dazed-and-confused androgyny of 'dreampop' bands (Lush, My Bloody Valentine, Slowdive), whose songs largely concerned the rapture of love or forlorn feelings of being adrift in a cruel world.

— The Sex Revolts: Gender, Rebellion, and Rock'n'roll, 1995

British neo-psychedelic bands known as 'shoegazers' or 'dreampop'.

— The Sex Revolts: Gender, Rebellion, and Rock'n'roll, 1995

The dream pop bands were lionized by the capricious British music press, which later took to dismissing them as "shoegazers" for their affectless stage presence.

— Alt. Culture: An A-to-z Guide to the '90s : Underground, 1995

One faction came to be known as dream-pop or "shoegazers" (for their habit of looking at the ground while playing the guitars on stage).

— Legends of Rock Guitar: The Essential Reference of Rock's Greatest Guitarists, 1997.

The dreampop founders

dream pop was pioneered by the London quartet My Bloody Valentine

— Alt Culture: An A-z Guide to 90's America, 1995

Noisier Brits like My Bloody Valentine may have defined the genre, but A.R. Kane can still claim "dream-pop" as its own.

— New York Magazine, 31. October 1994.

Shoegazing bands who have been described as dreampop

Dream pop's charm was that white rock geeks finally got cozy with digital technology. Putting a friendly face on the Jesus and Mary Chain's Beach Boys melodies with feedback, My Bloody Valentine, Lush and other Brit bands strung up Phil Spector-ish curtains of heavily processed and modulated noise...

— SPIN April 1993

(A source, that clearly describes dream pop as a British phenomenon.)

Like the finest British "dream pop," such as Pale Saints, Swallow, and My Bloody Valentine

— SPIN April 1993

Lush used to be known as a "dream pop" band

— Mademoiselle: The Magazine for the Smart Young Woman, 1996

When we last heard from them on 1994's Split, Lush was merrily playing its woozy, dream-pop trade.

— Option, 1996

Over its past releases, the Catherine Wheel has gone from dreampop to occasionally nightmarish aural soundscapes, full of dark and occasionally humorous imagery

— CMJ New Music Monthly, October 1996

Gauzy dream-pop with a solid structural center, Chapterhouse's songs are not the usual vague, floating clouds but exceptionally agreeable bolts of catchiness dressed for a long winter in comfortable layers of echoey guitar fuzz and wispy

— The Trouser Press Guide to '90s Rock, 1997

I never trusted Curve — their early '90s dreampop was a little too calculated, a little too radio-ready. But talk about calculated: after a lengthy hiatus, the U.K. rock duo is back as a hard-edged techno outfit.

— Option, 1998

Built from the remnants of early '90s dreampop band Slowdive, Mojave 3 still makes sparing use of its sonic past — strikingly pretty guitar melodies, a sublime sense of atmospherics — but with a much simpler and more straightforward aproach to its songwriting.

— CMJ New Music Monthly, February 1999

And there are many many more! --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Those are fine sources but they are all over 15 years old and have no bearing on how the genre term is used today. For the umpteenth time, you do not get to decide that there's some magical cutoff point and that these older usages are superior or invalidate modern ones.Greg Fasolino (talk) 16:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

This article has to describe the original dreampop movement. If you wanna add a section for the current use, go on. Feel free. But this article describes primarily a movement in British pop music that was popular between the late '80s and early '90s. This is well-sourced and cannot be changed. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 16:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

No, it doesn't have to do that. It cannot and should not eliminate or minimize the old usage, but it can describe both usages equally, as there is no reason in Wikipedia's rules to maintain that a smaller old usage must be the primary topic and a broader, more wide modern usage should not be of equal prominence. And BTW if anything, modern dream pop (as in bands in the genre that emerged in the last decade) is far more of an American musical genre than a British one. Beach House and all of the Captured Tracks bands are American. Greg Fasolino (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what they are. It started in the U.K. and was considered a British movement. Beach House and other bands are copycats, not original bands. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 17:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

...copycats of '60s psychedelic sound. I wouldn't even call it dreampop, because all of the mid-'80s feedback noise is missing. I mean, they sound more like the Mamas & the Papas and Procol Harum than British shoegazers from the early '90s. But that's a thing i cannot change. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 17:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

"Beach House and other bands are copycats, not original bands". This is the very definition of POV and has zero relevance to this discussion. Doesn't matter what you think of them, or what bands they remind you of. All that matters is that the sources consider them dream pop, and they do. Of course Beach House do not sound like '90s British shoegazers, that fact explains the difference between shoegaze and dream pop, as understood by current listeners and journalists. You just cannot accept that the modern usage is different than the older one you prefer, so why do you bother arguing? You're not going to force all of the modern sources to change or the genre usage to change because one guy doesn't like it.Greg Fasolino (talk) 21:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

No, it's not POV. They are not a part of the original dreampop movement. They are American latecomers. Dreampop was a British movement. You can't change that fact. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 10:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The key word there is "was". WAS. And the POV part was your use of the word "copycats"---that's your personal analysis and irrelevant.Greg Fasolino (talk) 11:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

"Of course Beach House do not sound like '90s British shoegazers, that fact explains the difference between shoegaze and dream pop"

It doesn't explain anything, except that Beach House has been mislabelled. They are absolutely not representative. Compare it to Alison's Halo or Alcian Blue who are clearly shoegazing/dreampop (and, of course, copycats of the British sound). Beach House sounds more like Byrds or Beach Boys with hints of Mazzy Star. Everybody can hear it. Dreampop has been described as a genre, influenced by noise pop. Beach House isn't noise at all. It's a '60s psychedelic revival band and possibly a part of this peculiar hipster movement. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 10:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

As others here pointed out, this is all your own "research" and opinion. This article is not "A Music Class with RivetHeadCulture" and you're not a journalist as far as I can tell so until you get your ideas published nobody cares about your theories on this or what you think bands sound like. "Beach House has been mislabelled" ---that's not your place to decide. The sources determine what is "correct" labeling, and if you think the modern sources are "wrong", it's irrelevant. We report on what the sources say, not whether a particular Wiki editor thinks the sources are "mislabeling" genres. The others here pointed this out to you.Greg Fasolino (talk) 11:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I already know this. Thanks for reminding me... I told you: Add a new section for the current use. I really don't care about Beach House... They're just one non-representative band among others. But if you add them, you could possibly tell the readers why their music style doesn't fit in the genre description. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 12:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

If you already knew this, then why continue to argue that your dislike/critique of modern usage is somehow relevant? As for the article, I will indeed be revamping it but it's going to take a lot of time so that will have to wait for the moment. "tell the readers why their music style doesn't fit in the genre description"---not sure what you mean. We don't tell readers anything, we note what the sources say; it's not our place to tell them what to think. And in the modern usage, Beach House practically defines the style, rather than not fitting, as reflected in the current sources.Greg Fasolino (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, i added my 2 Cents. And so did you several times. So what?

"not sure what you mean"

The readers aren't stupid. They will realize that Beach House is completely different from regular dreampop/shoegazing music, and different from regular "nu-gazers", too. Without any explanation of the problem the article would be pretty useless. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 19:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

American sources never really did get shoegazing right, and many of those you cited above are erroneous in their understanding of the facts. It's noticeable that none of them are from 1990/1991 when shoegazing as a 'scene' (not that there really was one) was getting so much coverage in the British music press. As an example, the first band to be described as 'shoegazers', originating the term, were Moose, and they could hardly have been "lionized by the capricious British music press" and later dismissed as shoegazers when the term was used in a review of their first gig. Having said that, they mostly qualify as 'reliable sources' so just like those published today we should represent what they say in our articles even if we personally believe they're full of crap. --Michig (talk) 20:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

The original term is dreampop. It predates the term shoegazing. The only difference is: the U.S. used the term dreampop, thanks to Reynolds who moved to New York. The Brits used the term shoegazing. That's the entire story.

Btw: Show me a source from 1990 that mentions "shoegazing". --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Melody Maker, Sounds, NME - sadly I chucked them all out, but that's when it was first used, initially because of the bands' stage performances rather than the music. --Michig (talk) 21:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

A louder, more aggressive strain of dream pop came to be known as shoegazing

There is absolutely no source for that (and I'm sure a source doesn't exist). It's POV at its finest. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 12:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

"These bands kept the atmospheric qualities of dream pop, but added the intensity of post-punk-influenced bands such as Sonic Youth and The Jesus and Mary Chain."

My belly hurts if i see this article... The shoegazing section is simply ahistorical. Listen to A. R. Kane's late-'80s dream pop sound (songs like "Haunting", "Up", "W.O.G.S." etc.). It's shoegazing par excellence. The distinction is completely fictitious. The influences are the same, the sound is the same. --RivetHeadCulture (talk) 16:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Show Gaze was never dream pop. People associate it now because of the cocteau twins. It never was dream pop it was post punk.Starbwoy (talk) 00:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Dream pop started earlier than mid 80's

Dream pop existed as a term since the mid 80's even before 1985. I used to hear the term. Its retroactive labeling. Some of the of the billion terms that people now attach to music were talked about but were not necessarily written down. When Wikipedia came on the scene then idiots came out of the woodwork to try and codify every and any term associated with music, and they always get it wrong. the term was first applied to more poppier sound but now to stuff like Cocteau Twins

How the eff can AR Kane be attributed to starting Dream pop? At times you can literally hear how they ripped the Cocteau twins sound. shoe gaze was she gaze and not dream pop. It took elements of Cocteau twin, post punk of the time and liberal stealing from Spacemen 3, no not Jesus and mary chain as much, or what most people think.

the poppier and love sick side of OMD can also be dream dream pop. Dream pop was first associated with electronic music and synths, not guitars. Cocteau twin were later lumped in because of their heavy use of atmospheric backing tracks, electronics. Before this the term mean somthing much poppier

Orchestral Manoeuvres In The Dark - Souvenir (the classic sound of dream pop) Orchestral Manoeuvres In The Dark - So In Love. Would of been the original sound of dream pop if you asked someone what dream pop sounded like at the time. Cocteau twin were not originally associated with the dream term. Cocteau twins would of been called post punk, along with stuff like clan of Xymox, and everything on 4AD People, use some common sense...in the Title is the word POP, cocteau twins and most of the post punk sound of the time was not POP.

The term sees to have changed several times. Starbwoy (talk) 00:31, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on what has been published on a topic. It's not based on personal opinions. If you find that published reviews do not support the current version of the article then link to the reviews, or quote from them so we can see the problem. Binksternet (talk) 05:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)