Talk:(No Pussyfooting)

Title

for information on the articles tile, exampine the Talk:No Pussyfooting. Andrzejbanas (talk) 07:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK/U.S. Compact Disc Release History

I distrust dates before October 25, 1990 (1990-10-25) from amazon.com. We may also be talking about two distinct pressings. Mine is:

Editions EG, marketed and distributed by Caroline Records of New York;
Made in the U.S.A.
The Definitive Edition, Re-Mastered by Robert Fripp and Tony Arnold, 1989, along the same lines as Fripp and Arnold's second wave King Crimson titles (I only have the three from Discipline era)
Catalog number is EEGCD 2, UPC 017046152228, matrix EEGCD 2 (V) mastered by NIMBUS
Has a single-sheet front insert (no pussyfooting indeed!)

If anyone has a UK copy, please pipe up. Fantailfan (talk) 20:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good input, thanks for correcting me. Too bad it doesn't really tell us when it's released though. I only have heard the vinyl version which a friend of mine has, so I can't check the UK. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Island Records

The article states that "Island Records actively opposed" this album - ... er, but they also pressed and released it! So what form did their "active opposition" take?--feline1 (talk) 11:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the BBC review, Island were against the album as they felt that Robert Fripp would push Eno into more noncommercial territory at the time. I guess something explaining that should be added... whups. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible reason for the inclusion of the reversed version?

According to this link: [1] John Peel once played it backwards on the radio, is that possibly the reason a reversed version appeared on the CD? Cryomaniac (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surely possible only in the days when BBC sessions were stored on tape. But this was never a "session" - it would only ever have been a vinyl album, even if only a promotional white label? Unless, of course, Peel got his hands on an acetate Island tape master from the studio? Surely Radio One studios in 1973 were not equipped with turntables that could be played in reverse? (Although, if you are clever you can use on overly long belt with a twist in it on a belt-drive turntable?! but even then it's very tricky). The matter is currently "discussed" on its own Facebook page! It gets a very matter of fact report on p.233 of "Margrave of the Marshes" the biography finished by his wife Sheila. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was played backwards, see https://www.dgmlive.com/news/Fripp&Eno%20Backwards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.91.155 (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

"Fripp's ability to input music with an electric guitar."-- In standard English, this would be "Fripp's ability to play electric guitar", no? Dadsnagem (talk) 02:50, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're quite right and have changed that text. Unless it's an acoustic guitar, every guitar playing is "input" into something, even if it's only an amplifier. I think Fripp modulated his playing to fit in with and enhance the output from Eno's "treatments" - but it was still guitar playing as everyone knows it. Frippertronics is still based on guitar playing. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Command Studios, cover photography

Here's a good source on Command Studios, although it appears to be self-published: [2]. And here's a link to an article about the cover and its creator Willie Christie: [3]. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:41, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:(No Pussyfooting)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

*

All the start class criteria

Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details
Y At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section)
Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs
Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians

Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

==Re-assessment== Start class:

Y A reasonably complete infobox
Y A lead section giving an overview of the album
Y A track listing
Y Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient)
Y Categorisation at least by artist and year

C class:

Y All the start class criteria
Y A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art
Y At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section)
Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs
Y A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians.

B class:

Y All the C class criteria
Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details
Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians
Y No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources.
Y No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS

Hi me. Good job on this article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 23:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 05:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)