Talk:Acid rock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Music/Music genres task force (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon Acid rock is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Rock music (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music 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.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Difference between Acid rock and Psychedelic rock[edit]

Will someone explain the difference between Acid rock and Psychedelic rock?

G'day, User:Iwakura42. I'd never heard the term psychedelic rock used formally to describe a genre before, but acid rock is both a subgenre of psychedelic music and its forefunner, as the article on psychedelic music already makes plain IMO. So the redirect I found here to acid (disambiguation) didn't IMO do the term any justice at all, although the redirect from psychedelic rock to psychedelic music is probably fair enough.
So you're right, it's confusing and inaccurate. You end up going in circles. That may be authentic in a sense considering the subject matter, but this sort of cyberpoetry is not what we seek to create as an encyclopedia! I'll fix it. Andrewa 21:30, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Psychedelic Rock IS a genre of music & is still on going. Acid Rock is significant to Psychedelic Rock only as it's forerunner like Proto-punk to punk.

...but Psychedelic music is a better label than psychedelic rock because many seminal psychedelic releases fall into different larger genres. Example would be The Chambers Bros. "Time Has Come Today" which is simultaneously psychedelia & soul.

further...I fell this whole article should be folded into the comprehensive list of psychedelic artists because "Acid Rock" was a term proscribed by the media & it didn't last very long once "The Psychedelic Sounds of..." the 13th Floor Elevators came out & the culture at large adopted 'Psychedelic'

pink floyd never used drugs, therefore thay can't be considred acid rock.

  • You've GOT to be kidding me. The Chief 08:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Syd Barret used drugs. Imadofus 23:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Coined by the media or not - "Acid Rock" is a term commonly used to describe a style of music. I think it belongs here as a Wikipedia article. Whether or not the artist utilized drugs in the writing and recording process is not necessarily a condition. Many recordings commonly associated with the tag "acid rock" may have nothing to do with drugs - however, listeners at large may perceive or associate an artist or song with LSD or drugs or the use there of - and thus the work may be associated with the genre. For example, "Journey To The Center Of The Mind" by the Amboy Dukes might be considered "acid rock" or "Psychedelic", however the lead guitarist Ted Nugent claims to have never done drugs. Still the track was chosen for Rhino's psychedelic anthology "Nuggets". Finally, I'd ultimately argue that "Acid Rock" is a subgenre of "Psychedelic rock" - the more avant-garde, strung out, jams: Pink Floyd's "Interstellar Overdrive" rather than "Arnold Layne", The Doors "The End" rather than "Break On Through", Jimi Hendrix’s "Third Stone From The Sun" rather than "Purple Haze". DannyRay 03:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • You should include that in the article or something Imadofus 03:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I wrote the german article about Psychedelic Rock, and still continue working on it. There is no difference between Psychedelic Rock and Acid Rock, neither musically nor cultural. Acid Rock is not the forerunner of Psychedelic Rock because The 13th Floor Elevators were described as a Psychedelic Rock Band years before Tom Wolfe (in his book from 1968!) popularized the term Acid Rock. Assigning Acid Rock to the Avantgarde tracks (not bands!?) is a personal point of view which is impossible to confirm with any serious sources. Search the web and you will find out that some people prefer the term Acid Rock while others use Psychedelic Rock for the same bands, tracks, music or whatever.-- (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Are you sure there is no difference between Acid and Psychedelic? If that is true, why are there two different articles?? I am having the same discussion in the french page, , if you don't speak french you can just read the lists of examples for acid rock. Colombiano54 (talk) 22:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  • IMHO acid rock is just psychedelic rock on hippie's slang. Bands mentioned in article (The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Pink Floyd, The Doors, Iron Butterfly, Big Brother & The Holding Company, Cream, Jefferson Airplane, Ultimate Spinach, New Riders of the Purple Sage, Blue Cheer, Quicksilver Messenger Service, The Great Society, Stone Garden and the Grateful Dead) are classic bands of psychedelic rock. Definition "Acid rock is a form of psychedelic rock, which is characterized by long instrumental solos, few (if any) lyrics and musical improvisation" is weird to start with because a lot of space rock bands (Hidria Spacefolk, Ozric Tentacles, Øresund Space Collective, Quantum Fantay etc) also play long, often instrumental, psychedelic jams/solos without being labelled with "acid rock". Perhaps only argument for separate genre is that some bands (Cream, Blue Cheer and The Jimi Hendrix Experience) are known for excessive use of wah-wah which produces distinct "acid"(LSD) sound though most psychedelic bands used that pedal as well. Anyway I'm voting for merge. PS sorry for my bad english. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)


This subject deserves a much better article. I'll try to improve it and expand as much as I can. Anyone with me? --~Magnolia Fen (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

"Acid rock is a form of psychedelic rock, which is characterized with long instrumental solos, few (if any) lyrics and musical improvisation."

This is the worst description of anything I've ever heard. Few lyrics? How many of the "Notable acid rock tracks and singles" have few lyrics? fuckin' A fix this shit!

The so-called "acid rocks tracks" listed at the bottom of the article are not acid rock at all... (The Beatles? 13th Floor Elevators? clearly, it was written by a newbie). Just listen to actual acid rock bands (live shows of the Grateful Dead, Quicksilver Messenger Service an so on) before you start bashing, because you obviously have no idea what acid rock is. --~Magnolia Fen (talk) 07:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Wheres the goddamn Acid punk[edit]

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ACID PUNK PAGE? It was useful! Now it redirects to this garbage! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, total vandalism that is. Even on the redirect page, the old content seems to be deleted from the history. *why do that?* (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Psychedelic Rock[edit]

Acid Rock isn't a real Genre, it's just a term that people would use for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerpyMcDerp (talkcontribs) 16:17, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I would be inclined to agree, but some reliable sources state that it is a sub-genre of psychedelic rock, and that is quite hard to argue against.--SabreBD (talk) 10:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I came of awareness late in the game say 1969 and 1970 and my memory of it differs in someways and is the same in someways from the reliable sources of today. Yes it was an adult coined catchall term and was a subgenre of psychedelic rock. While the "Trippy" elements were up front in most psychedelic rock the LOUD and "grating" elements that drove parents crazy were upfront in Acid Rock songs while "druggy" stuff was more in the background. Hendrix and Joplin were the two defining figures of acid rock. Joplins "screaming" vocals style made her acid rock. Psychedelic but not acid Donovan too mellow, Strawberry Alarm Clock vocals a little to trippy a little too many keyboards. Steppenwolf definitely Acid rock, "Ride Captain Ride" (guitar solo), "Spirit in the Sky" and vaguely the first "Venus" (she screamed) was the watered down pop hooked up version of the acid rock (nobody would say "acid pop" or "psychedelic pop") that was acceptable for Top 40 AM radio. Remember in pre multitasking 1970 what was loud and grating in middle America is tame by today's standards. Edkollin (talk) 21:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Black Sabbath & The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test[edit]

I haven't read the book but it strikes me odd that Black Sabbath is supposedly mentioned in it. The book was published in 1968 and Black Sabbath released their first single in 1970 (changed their name in 1969). So either Tom Wolfe had an epihany while enjoying some kool-aid, Black Sabbath figured a way to travel back in time or a different band with the same name was around while Wolfe wrote the book?!

I think Sabbath turn up more in apocalyptic visions than LSD prompted ones. A classic case of list creep. I have restored an older version of the sentence. Thanks for pointing it out.--SabreBD (talk) 08:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

"Form of psychedelic rock"[edit]

Almost every single time I read "psychedelic rock" in print, I see it followed by "also known as acid rock", or vice versa. Historically, it has certainly been used more as a synonym than it has been used to describe a substyle of psyche rock. And there is no need to write "harder, heavier, faster, stronger, intense, rawer, energetic..." over and over again. Look at the MOS for leads:

The first paragraph should define or identify the topic with a neutral point of view, but without being too specific. It should establish the context in which the topic is being considered by supplying the set of circumstances or facts that surround it. ... It should also establish the boundaries of the topic.

Try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead use the first sentence to introduce the topic, and then spread the relevant information out over the entire lead.

A disambiguation page should not be created just because it is difficult to write an article on a topic that is broad, vague, abstract, or highly conceptual. ... Many definitions of triangle center are used in Euclidean geometry, which coincide only in the special case of equilateral triangles. The article lists a dozen of these, and also gives a validity criterion applicable to various definitions of "center".

This is a loosely defined style. You absolutely need to acknowledge this in the first sentence as concisely as possible, otherwise people (me included) are going to wonder what the hell "Good Vibrations" has to do with Black Sabbath. Furthermore, contradictions are presented by your edit

  1. If acid rock is loosely defined, and sources don't agree on whether it's a subgenre of psyche rock or rock in general, then it would be disingenuous to definitively state " a form of psychedelic rock" (WP:BALASPS) (WP:CHERRYPICKING).
  2. If acid rock is a synonym for psychedelic rock, it can't also be a subgenre of psychedelic rock. It's either all psyche rock or some psyche rock. It can't be both.

The only way you can consolidate this is by deriving the lowest common denominator between acid rock and psychedelic rock, which is that they're both rock music.

--Ilovetopaint (talk) 20:43, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I reverted this edit for the following reasons:

  1. As per WP:BEGIN, it is better not to get so specific about so-called "acid rock" in the first paragraph. It must only identify the scope and boundaries of the term. Additional paragraphs can elucidate on more specific, distinct characteristics. The fact that acid rock can be a "heavier, harder, tougher, stronger, faster, meatier, tastier" variant of psyche rock is not worth getting into any more than it is worth getting into other equally valid, specific descriptions like "garagey psychedelia". It already says "more musically intense", why the need for more adjectives?
  2. As a stylistic derivative, "psychedelic rock" can't be listed because, according to some people, "acid rock" is "psychedelic rock".
  3. You copy and pasted identical sentences from "Definitions" back where they were under "Development and characteristics" - this was totally unnecessary. Just list how "acid rock" relates to the musical traits and history of "psychedelic rock", "hard rock", etc. The reader should already be familiar with the definitions of "acid rock" by the time they get to musical specifics.
  4. Adding words like "often used", "specifically", and "however" that do not appear in the sources is WP:EDITORIALIZING. It's already apparent that "acid rock" is a broad concept. There is no reason to clarify to the reader when certain statements appear to contradict others (WP:SYNTH). Let them figure it out for themselves (WP:!TRUTHFINDERS).
  5. "The term 'acid rock'' is a statement that really doesn't need to be used so many times. It's obvious that "acid rock" refers to the term and acid rock is the subject.

When an author makes a statement that seems to be at odds with what numerous others have said, attribution is helpful in acknowledging that it is an outlier opinion. This article should NOT treat "acid rock" primarily as "a heavier subgenre of psyche rock". I understand that it is preferable to think of "acid rock" in that light, but that's not how most academia appear to use the term (WP:BALASPS). --Ilovetopaint (talk) 23:42, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Addendum: if there's a source that says something like "acid rock derived from psychedelic music", I don't believe it would be inappropriate to include it in the infobox.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 00:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Acid rock/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Llywrch (talk · contribs) 22:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Been interested in this genre for a long time, although I admittedly know a lot less about it than I should. I'll give this a try.

  • Quick comment as I was invited here to take part in the discussion about a possible merge with Psychedelic rock. While reading this article, I got so distracted by the number of tags, mostly appearing in the references. (From memory, there are 4 or 5 in the Definitions section alone.) This needs fixing, obviously – but I'm surprised someone nominates an article with "page needed", "by whom?", "verification needed", "repetition" tags, etc. (I mean, I thought the whole idea was, expand an article, ensure it's fully sourced, then it qualifies for a B rating, then perhaps it's worthy of GA nomination?) Anyway … JG66 (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Merge into psychedelic rock[edit]

The article asserts that acid rock has been defined either as synonymous with psychedelic rock, or as a more intense subgenre. Neither case requires a separate article. Personally, I find the separation extremely confusing; if there is no agreeable definition of the difference between the two, how can certain artists be labelled as one over the other, or certain later styles as influenced by one over the other? How is a reader to make sense of this?--MASHAUNIX 11:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose — "How is a reader to make sense of this?"
By reading the article. Acid rock is loosely defined - it says so right in the first sentence of the lead. The fact that sources cannot agree on whether acid rock is different from psychedelic rock is one of the best reasons why they warrant independent coverage. It's up to you to decide whether the Byrds and the Zombies played in the same genre as Iron Butterfly and Deep Purple.
The reason why sources often disagree is because — from its inception — psychedelic music has always been more of a marketing label than a real genre. In that respect, the relationship between Psychedelic rock and Acid rock is almost totally identical to Progressive rock and Art rock. It would be many years before historians and musicologists would look back on these terms and try to make sense of their applications.
Personally, I've found that acid rock is best reserved for bands like Jefferson Airplane and the Jimi Hendrix Experience, garage punk for Count Five ("Psychotic Reaction"), psychedelic rock for Pink Floyd and the Beatles (Piper, "Rain"), and psychedelic pop for the campy Beach Boys-soundalikes ("The Rain, the Park & Other Things"). Historically, this seems to be how those musical styles have been most consistently (and logically) defined. Andy Partridge's quote about psyche rock is very illuminating:
"They use exactly the same techniques—sped-up bits, slowed-down bits, too much echo, too much reverb, that bit goes backwards. When the generation that grew up on kids' novelty records began making records for themselves, it came out as psychedelia. That genre is just grown-up novelty songs! ... There was no transition to be made. You go from things like 'Flying Purple People Eater' to 'I Am the Walrus'. They go hand-in-hand."
--Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:55, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
How does the lack of a clear distinction warrant separate articles? The opposite is logical; since there is confusion, it would be better to deal with it in one place. From my reading of the sources, the terms have been used interchangeably, with psychedelic rock the prevalent expression and acid rock sometimes seen as its subset (so that songs and bands considered acid rock could always also be called psych rock but not vice-versa). If the two articles are kept separated, the distinction between them must be explained very clearly, especially in the lead sections. It should also be addressed in articles that refer to them. Overall, I feel like the separation creates unnecessary confusions and complications for both editors and readers.--MASHAUNIX 14:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
"The lack of a clear distinction" — in other words, nobody can say for sure that they're the same thing. So why would they be the same article? Wouldn't be a good idea to merge Art rock with Progressive rock. This article is almost 100% devoted to sources that use the term acid rock, the other is for sources that use psychedelic rock. We can see that there isn't a terrible amount of overlap. Acid rock is more often related to garage rock and heavy metal — genres not covered on Psychedelic rock. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 16:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I agree with Ilovetopaint. The fact that the two terms can overlap, and can be both be used to cover some of the same bands, is no reason not to have two separate articles, with links between them to give as much clarity to the reader as possible. My perception is that "acid rock" is a subset of "psychedelic rock". (Interesting quote - of course, the producer of "I Am The Walrus" started off producing children's novelty records.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:04, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Acid rock is a hard-edged version of psychedelia with many notable bands that can fall into its range like Iron Butterfly, Country Joe and the Fish, and Jefferson Airplane. Of course there will be overlap, but there is enough of a distinction between the two to warrant seperate articles.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
In reply to you as well as Ghmyrtle, that is not what the article asserts. It describes acid rock generally speaking as a synonym of psychedelic rock. If this stays, your arguments have no weight and the separation of the articles cannot be justified.--MASHAUNIX 16:47, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
That's not what I read. I see: ".... is sometimes deployed as a synonym of "psychedelic rock", but it may also refer to a more musically intense or hard subcategory or variation....." (my emphasis). Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Mashaunix did you also notice the whole section devoted to the distinction between acid rock and psychedelia? There are plenty of sources that focus exclusively on acid rock; it would be a mistake to merge a topic that, alone, encompasses numerous major artists.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose
Well, yes, the terms have been deployed interchangeably at times; overlap and confusion between labels tend to happen when one attempts to categorize music. However, there are more than enough sources that differentiate between "acid rock" and "psychedelic rock" or regard "acid rock" as a distinct subset, variation, or subgenre of the the more expansive and more general "psychedelic rock" label. I will agree that, in regards to the second sentence in the lead, perhaps the emphasis should first and foremost be placed on how acid rock has been regarded as a subgenre or variation of the psychedelic rock style, and then it should be mentioned that "acid rock" is sometimes also deployed as a synonym for "psychedelic rock." I suggest this change mostly just to avoid the type of confusion that Mashaunix is experiencing; rather than beginning the second sentence of the lead by talking about how "acid rock" is sometimes synonymous with "psychedelic rock", perhaps the article should start right away as mentioning how acid rock has instead been distinguished from psychedelic rock as a distinct style or subgenre. That way, the reader understands right off the bat that the article is not just a rehash of the "psychedelic rock" article, while mention is still made of the fact that the term "acid rock" is often loosely defined and isn't always used to refer to a specific subgenre or variation.
However, with that said ... all of that is just nitpicking. Regardless of how the second sentence is structured, anyone who actually reads the article beyond the first half of the second sentence will see exactly how "acid rock" has been used in a distinct manner from "psychedelic rock," often being used to refer specifically to a more intense, heavy, or harder subset or subgenre of psychedelic rock evolving from garage rock and, in some cases, evolving into heavy metal. Apart from a few warranted and rightful mentions of the fact that, yes, the term has sometimes been used interchangeably with "psychedelic rock," nearly the entire article discusses acid rock as a distinct movement or label, with an evolution closely tied to yet different from the more general "psychedelic rock" label. At the end of the day, the article speaks for itself. It is fairly clear by reading the article that, despite frequent overlap, acid rock has often been differentiated from general psychedelic rock, whether as a heavier or more intense subgenre/sub-style or as its own movement or label. Madreterra (talk) 01:52, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Strongly Opposed to Merge, but that isn't the only thing wrong here: Acid rock has always been a high profile-enough subgenre to merit its own article. But, one other issue: It is interesting the way we have this whole new thing here about "garage punk". While the term "garage punk" is indeed used by fans of garage rock to refer to 60s garage (and has always been used as an alternate term for it along with "60s punk"), it is not intended to be replacement for the term "garage rock"--garage rock is still the official name of the 60s genre. Whereas, when the term "garage punk" used as to designate an actual subgenre (distinct from the rest of garage rock) it refers to a later garage movement starting in the 1980s, which was influenced by 60s garage but combined with later influences such as 70s punk. The garage punk article has been radically re-defined and re-formulated in similar fashion (in direct opposition to how it has been for over ten years), and it ties in with new problems here. Then notice, here, lead sentence--and a whole section is now based on a nomenclatural misunderstanding of how the term "garage punk" is supposed to be used at Wikipedia. I don't mean badly in pointing this out, but we need to fix the problem. Garagepunk66 (talk) 04:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
I went in and made the necessary corrections to the problem mentioned above. When we speak of 60s garage at Wikipedia, we say "garage rock". Furthermore in the lead sentence, we need to say something about British influence, etc. Jimi Hendrix spent time in London, where he was influenced by the Who and others from the harder wing of British beat (as well as the burgeoning psychedelic rock there). Right now the lead statements make garage rock appear to be too much of a singular influence on acid rock. The 13th Floor Elevators' acid rock came directly out of garage, true, but that was not necessarily the case with all other artists. Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I see that my corrections just got undone, but that will only lead to confusion on the part of readers, even bewilderment. I'm not sure if most music editors are going to approve of the way the whole "garage punk" statements are framed right now. Actually to think that Hann at the Guardian is trying to define "garage punk" as a genre separate from 60s-derived garage rock is to misrepresent the intent of his writing. When he refers to "garage punk" as 60s genre, what he means is garage rock--he is using "garage punk" as an alternate term for the garage rock genre. Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

  • (Invited here by Mashaunix.) Shaun, I do see a reason for separate articles – not a very strong reason, but that could be because I found this article pretty confusing. The problem with most articles on musical genres, imo, is that the sources are so subjective, and grand statements can be made about the first, the most influential, the best example, etc. of each genre based on what happens to register on an author's personal radar. Then these claims gain traction and snowball (per Garagepunk66, who makes some good points above). In a lot of cases, it can depend on the nationality of the author also.
  • What I'm surprised about, once again, is the way all roads seem to lead to Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys. We get that folksy, "S'a funny thang" recollection from a former music industry exec regarding "Good Vibrations", and in the end note that follows: "Writer Vernon Joyson observed flirtations with acid rock in the Beach Boys' albums Pet Sounds (1966) and the unfinished Smile." Well, Robert Sheffield terms the Beatles' "She Said She Said" as acid rock (not a flirtation-with). And although Browne & Browne 2001 is used fairly extensively in this article, their point about Sgt. Pepper being "a major influence on American acid rock groups" is completely absent. And if we're going back into influences on these acid rock/San Francisco Sound bands, Rubber Soul, from 1965, should be mentioned, surely – per James Decker in The Cambridge Companion to the Beatles, pp. 88–89, for example. I'm not sure of the page number right now, but in John Kruth's book This Bird Has Flown, a San Fran musician recalls Rubber Soul being on rotation at parties, from one house to another, in Haight Ashbury; and I remember seeing an interview with Phil Lesh who talked about Garcia dragging him into a shop on the Haight as "Tomorrow Never Knows" was playing, and just being delighted at what they were hearing for the first time. I could go on ("It's All Too Much" come to mind) … but it's not like I'm wanting to inflate the Beatles' standing and influence, here or anywhere on Wikipedia (as if they need it). I'm just surprised at the sidestep around the Beatles' contribution to the genre, directly in the case of "She Said" and as a major inspiration with Rubber Soul, certainly Pepper. JG66 (talk) 09:56, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Just as an FYI, credit for >80% of the article goes to Madreterra, who did a great job expanding it from where it was two years ago. If you think the article is missing signficiant content pertaining to the Beatles, nobody is stopping you from adding it.
However, Kenneth Nagelberg's claim about Sgt. Pepper influencing American acid rock groups is a weird one, because right after saying that, he suggests that Pepper was what drove the Beach Boys to be experimental in the recording studio. Which is a bizarre, easily disprovable claim. It's even weirder that he cites Sunflower and Surf's Up as evidence - almost like he lives in an alternate timeline where Pet Sounds and Smiley Smile never happened. This is the only strange claim I can see on that page, so I'm not surprised that it was looked over, per WP:FRINGE. If he knew what he was talking about, he would have written that Revolver was the album that influenced American acid rock groups, not Pepper.
The difference between Nagelberg and the Phillip Rauls quote is that Rauls was actually there as an insider when this music was coming out and is simply recalling his experiences from that time (i.e. "back then, we thought the Beach Boys were acid rock; we also thought that acid rock was the same thing as progressive rock"), whereas Nagelberg is just postulating bad info.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 19:51, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't agree it's "bad info", and it certainly shouldn't be dismissed because the author fails to mention Revolver or because his reference to Sunflower or Surf's Up might seem puzzling. As the Sgt. Pepper article demonstrates, under Release and especially Legacy, that Beatles album resonated with pretty much every Westerner under the age of 30 and provided the soundtrack for the Summer of Love. (It marked the start of the Summer of Love, according to some.) Paul Kantner of Jefferson Airplane is quoted (in Robert Rodriguez's Revolver: How the Beatles Reimagined Rock 'n' Roll, p. 213) about the release of Pepper: "Something enveloped the whole world at that time, and it just exploded into a renaissance." I think it's no exaggeration to say that, certainly over 1964–67, there wasn't a rock/pop act who was not in some way influenced or inspired by the Beatles. So, to read in Browne & Browne 2001 that Sgt. Pepper was "a major influence on American acid rock groups" – that's more than plausible. It inspired a whole generation, musicians and otherwise. The statement belongs in this article, as does mention of "She Said", and perhaps also the inspiration provided by Rubber Soul. JG66 (talk) 12:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Acid rock is harder-edged while psychedelic rock can be lighter, with themes of love and peace. No need to merge, as literature for both abounds. Binksternet (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Sgt. Pepper[edit]

(Continued from above)

Of course everybody everywhere was influenced by Pepper. No question about that. But in the context of "American acid rock groups", Pepper's effect had more to do with culture and ideology than music - Nagelberg (not Browne) is specific on "recording studio techniques". That's a contribution better credited to Revolver and Pet Sounds, not Pepper.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 19:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC)