Talk:Plastic Beach

WHAT????

I assume this is vandalism unless there is some rapper with the stage name "Englebert Humperdinck" or something. Anyway the reference won't load for me so I don't know. Can someone check/fix this?

Among these is a song Gorillaz wanted to record with Engelbert Humperdinck. "He was supposed to do it, but then he declined, which was a real shame," Albarn explained to New York magazine. "It's a very dramatic song, very moving. Arabic strings. It's imagining Earth losing its gravitational pull and starting to fall." Even without Humperdinck, the tune will eventually be released. "I'm going to finish that off," Albarn said. "It just needs the vocal. We've made contact with Indian singer Asha Bhosle and I think it's definitely going to happen. I'll maybe duet with her; the song has these answering phrases."[14]

--216.31.211.11 (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Rock the House

Is "Rock the House" in any album? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drawingpad (talk • contribs) 02:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

"Rock the House" is a song from the Gorillaz self-titled debut album Gorillaz. It was released as the third single from the album in October 2001. Metraff (talk) 18:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Alternative hip hop

In the album's Infobox, "hip hop" should be changed to "alternative hip hop", because this album is far from standard hip hop, and each song is a different genre. Mrwallace05 (talk) 13:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Due to no objections, I have added it. Mrwallace05 (talk) 12:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Did you forget we need to be citing relevant sources when it comes to interpretations of a creative work? (WP:SUBJECTIVE) No where in Plastic Beach#Music is "alternative hip hop" mentioned. If there's a writer or critic who shares your opinion, please cite them there. Dan56 (talk) 02:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: Mrwallace05 has been blocked as sock. 115.164.202.73 (talk) 08:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Genre

Article claims it is a pop and trip hop album. Are these genres referenced in other places during the article? Were they discussed on talk page or revision history? Please explain, I'll be glad to discuss. 2A02:C7D:B495:B100:BD56:591D:6A3:3ED6 (talk) 18:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

• Note: IP is User:Mrwallace05. 115.164.202.73 (talk) 08:21, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

socks

This article is the target of a longtime sock puppeteer Mrwallace05. S/he is obsessed with removing or downplaying "Hip hop/trip hop" as a genre and promoting pop, often removing hip hop/trip hop in favor of pop. S/he is currently editing here as RobFeatherszzz and has previously edited here under the now indefed socks Routron3000 and Repeattofade. There are likely others, including IPs. Feel free to revert any/all of her edits, without need for explanation, per WP:EVADE. 183.171.180.234 (talk) 18:12, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Genres: Should "trip hop" be removed?

An editor has recently proposed removing "trip hop" (their rationale indicated here). One source in this article verifies the genre. Details below in the discussion. Dan56 (talk) 17:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Votes

• No - Dan56 (talk) 17:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
• No i am pretty sure i own a compilation cd named this. not sure whose on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederika Eilers (talk • contribs) 01:44, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

Is there any concrete verification for having "electronic" in the infobox? The only two references to the genre in this article come in the form of "electronic funk" (New York Times) and "sort of an electronic take on baroque pop" (Pitchfork); "sort of" diminishes the strength of this as support for "electronic" and begs the question whether "baroque pop" should also be in the infobox. Recently an editor has proposed replacing "trip hop" with "electronic", but there is a source in the article calling this a "full-blown trip hop/hip hop album" (AbsolutePunk); "full-blown" is unequivocal when compared to the others for "electronic". Thoughts? Dan56 (talk) 17:07, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about reverting you instead of starting a discussion myself, but to me this is a fairly obvious case. The logic of Template:Infobox_musical_artist#genre in regards to the use of subgenres in infoboxes is sound and I don't see any reason for why it should be any different for albums. It is a warning against the flooding of infoboxes with subgenres; in this case, Krautrock, dubstep, electroclash (all electronic subgenres), and baroque pop (as you mention), could all be included, but the more logical approach is to list the general root genres and leave details for the test. Yes, one reviewer named this a "full-blown" trip hop album (if we can trust a source that is now dead!) but if trip hop is the fusion of hip hop and electronica, there is no need to include it alongside these broader parent genres.--MASHAUNIX 17:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't really see a problem here of too many sources calling this album too many different genres. There are no sources that call this album Krautrock, dubstep, or electroclash; those sources merely say the music "dips into" or has "elements of" those styles; the critics' language is important, and the infobox should reflect what the sources explicitly/unequivocally call this album. Taking it upon ourselves as editor to go beyond what the sources say by parsing and subjectively concluding what "root genres" to list is not good research. The logic behind the artist infobox guideline is based on the idea that an artist's discography can be made up of numerous albums/works, each of which may vary stylistically from one another; this is less of a problem with an album, a singular work. As for the dead link, I've replaced it with a working one. Dan56 (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finding an archived version! Looking at it now, it seems to me that the reviewer is calling this a "full-blown" hiphop/triphop album to emphasize his view that Gorillaz abandoned their previous influences (pop/rock?). Nevertheless, your argument that his wording is more unequivocal than that which regards the other genres I have mentioned is correct; baroque pop is perhaps the only subgenre which has similar support in terms of wording. However, I disagree with your view that deducing "root genres" from subgenres is a considerable violation of WP:STICKTOSOURCE, simply due to the fact that this process is not "subjective" – every trip hop album is, by definition, also an electronic album. Yes, artist's entire careers demand more generality because they are made up of various works, but just so is an album made up of a variety of songs. Gorillaz are a band whose compositional practice purposefully emphasizes hybridity; they are a prime example of a band that goes from one genre to another not just from album to album but from song to song. Some of the songs on Plastic Beach match the description of "trip hop" while others do not; the album is an erratic, shifting blend of widely differing styles. Therefore, one reviewer's word is simply not enough to use a specific subgenre to label the entire album, just as it wouldn't be for the entire band (though many have descibed them as essentially a "trip hop band"). I see this as an issue of WP:WEIGHT rather than the correct interpretation of the source.--MASHAUNIX 13:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

These opinionated false equivalencies (artist discography to songs on an album, which in your opinion are only sometimes trip hop) are not reason enough to renounce (genre) specificity when it is available in the form of a verifiable, reliable source; a useful specificity, considering the definition you referred to before (trip hop = hip hop + electronica) is based on "a fusion of hip hop and electronica until neither genre is recognizable", right? Also, you said "electronica" before; now it's "electronic"? This is murky cherry-picking. I could just as well argue that "hip hop" is another style encompassed under "Electronic music". As for the weight argument, there aren't sources disputing "trip hop", conflicting with the idea that this is a "trip hop" album (other than you). What is the problem here with regards to the quality of the infobox/article? There are five genres. Is this too many in your mind? Dan56 (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

This is too much to give space to a specific subgenre for an album with an extremely diverse sound... I have added four sources to support electronic music (and electro) and to demonstrate the wide variety of genres (world, blues, disco, classical, soul) the album is seen as combining. Would you support the change in light of these?--MASHAUNIX 19:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Apart from the Guardian source, nothing you've cited describes the album as a whole; even the DIY quote is taken out of context, as the writer is discussing how the album is at the start, "Kicking off as a pop edged rap affair". And to combine parts of which you consider to fall exclusively under the "electronic music" umbrella and reach the conclusion that they are calling this album an electronic album is synthesis and, in my mind, irrelevant as rationale for removing "trip hop" from the infobox. And I still don't believe "hip hop" or "electronic" represent "trip hop", as you have argued. And I still don't understand your argument about subgenres; there is ample space given to the plethora of recording locations in the infobox that looks far more excessive than having five or six genres in the infobox. I'm not sure what to make of "electro-funk-hip pop", whether the writer suggests the music as a whole to be a synthesis, making it less useful. And the Kitty Empire/Guardian source seems to be describing the songs eletronic pop as a whole, before touching on the styles they--as eletronic pop songs--explore. So her conclusion is that this is an electronic pop album, not simply an eletronic album; she also says "you could still call some of this album hip-hop" ("some"!) My point is, your rationale for trying to remove this one particular subgenre is problematic, and I don't see it as sufficient. Dan56 (talk) 05:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

In light of one of your additions, I would support replacing "electronic" with "eletronic pop", considering the context of the writer's quote, in describing all the songs, not vague reference to a number of styles that songs may incorporate without being defined by them. Dan56 (talk) 05:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, I would support replacing the "studio" section of the infobox with a link to the "recording" section of the text and adding a discussion of which parts were recorded where to it, since listing six studios seems counterproductive. However, there is a fundamental difference between studios and genres; the one is fact, the other opinion. You seem to value the AbsolutePunk source because it gives a clear ("full-blown") genre for the entire album, and see the sources which describe the album of as a synthesis of various genres as "less useful". However, this is representative of the exact problem I have with this one source; it is the only one which ignores the extreme diversity of the album. Listing "trip hop" gives this source undue weight because it overlooks the emphasis that the majority of cited sources put on the eclectic hybridity of the album.

Therefore, it is natural that none of them will describe this as a "full-blown electronic album" because that is not what it is, and neither is that what I am arguing for. I rather hold that the numerous descriptions indicate the key approaches in which the album's multifaceted sound is rooted and which are thus overwhelmingly shown to be above and beyond "trip hop" or any other specific subgenre. While you are right that I misread the DIY article as it does seem to be referring to the first few tracks only (though somewhat ambiguously), I disagree on your interpretation of Kitty Empire. Her statement that the album rolls "from space-age electro to mournful soul and back again" is quite strong support for electro, whereas where she says that "its electronic pop songs are more sneaky than sure-fire" this may only be referring to certain songs, not all of them (again sort of ambiguous). Even if she was referring to all, then there is no need to list "electronic pop" next to "pop" and "electronic", both of which have independent support as essential approaches on the album.--MASHAUNIX 12:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't believe it ignores the "extreme diversity", as you claim, just that it is more bold in a narrower description of the music than some of the other sources; it should be noted that "trip hop", according to the writers who describe it, incorporates a diverse range of other styles within itself, so perhaps it is also "natural" that the AbsolutePunk critic chose to describe this album as such. As for Empire, the context of the paragraph from which "electronic pop songs" comes is a discussion of Plastic Beach in a general sense; perhaps in her mind "electro and soul" are touched on within what she sees as "electronic pop songs". Dan56 (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Your last sentence is precisely the kind of editorial assumption you are arguing against... Yes, trip hop is a hybrid genre, but the range of available sources indicates that the album is diverse not just across influences but also across different tracks. None except AbsolutePunk even mention trip hop, let alone associate it with the entire tracklist, and even AbsolutePunk as I have argued calls this a "full-blown" hip hop/trip hop album not just to simply describe its but to accentuate what influences Gorillaz have downplayed from their earlier work. I'm not sure what your own opinion on the album actually is, but surely you would not consider the more upbeat, playful songs such as "Superfast Jellyfish" to fall under trip hop, a genre known for its downtempo, melancholic sound. This sound does play a role across the range of the album's songs, but only as one among many. The available sources emphasize this, and collectively indicate the central approaches which inform the album such as pop, electronic, hip hop, funk, and rock, so why you would think it useful to highlight one specific sound within these is beyond me. Even if I cannot convince you on our central disagreement – that abstracting generality from specificity in regard to genre is not only plausible, but advantageous – you should be able to see that the support for trip hop is simply too weak.--MASHAUNIX 10:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

My opinion of this album's music is irrelevant, just as is yours. And "...collectively indicate the central approaches which inform the album such as pop, electronic, hip hop, funk, and rock..." is an opinion. As for the supposedly "too weak" support for trip hop, the one source that unequivocally describes it as such is one more than for electronic or rock, which is none. Dan56 (talk) 06:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

To describe this album as "unequivocally" anything is mistaken. However, we seem to be at an impasse, so let's end the discussion here unless another user offers their opinion.--MASHAUNIX 10:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Your first statement is just your opinion; there are obviously sources that have clearly given general descriptions of the album as a whole. Dan56 (talk) 06:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Doncamatic?

why there is not a single mention of Doncamatic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.147.192.4 (talk) 19:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)