Talk:Neo-psychedelia: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 66.56.184.62 - "→Too broad?: " |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
notwithstanding the doubts on the very existence of the page, a 1973 band doesn't really belong in the 2000s section. [[Special:Contributions/76.64.241.70|76.64.241.70]] ([[User talk:76.64.241.70|talk]]) 13:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC) |
notwithstanding the doubts on the very existence of the page, a 1973 band doesn't really belong in the 2000s section. [[Special:Contributions/76.64.241.70|76.64.241.70]] ([[User talk:76.64.241.70|talk]]) 13:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Mazzy Star == |
|||
Surely they would fit quite nicely into the neo-psychedelia genre? |
|||
Revision as of 19:49, 24 October 2009
The Black Keys are not psychadelia. Blues rock revival yes, psyc influenced no. I took them off the list.
Too broad?
This is the first time I have heard the term neo-psychedelia and it seemed to encompass a ton of music with maybe only having psychedilic influence and not actually being pschydelic themselves. (preceding unsigned comment made by Divster on 03:44, 13 August 2006)
- Agreed, to broad. Althought I'm not sure what are the exact borders of the term, I'm pretty certain it applies only to music that grows out of the alternative and indie scene, and only to rock acts. Squeal 18:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Clearly too broad if grunge bands like Soundgarden and the Screaming Trees are being included. They're not even remotely psychedelic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.56.184.62 (talk) 06:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Early Noise Rock as Neo-Psychedelia
Specifically, I speak of bands like Throbbing Gristle. Their original self-classification was "post-psychedelic trash", which I think is fitting considering the surreal lyrics and disassociated sound of their early records. The first few records by '80s No Wavers Sonic Youth and Swans show a psychedelic influence too, particularly Bad Moon Rising and Body to Body, Job to Job.
Sounds like a made up genre
Can you give examples of this clasification being used by major or indie publications or labels as an actual genre? it sounds made up to me. QOTSA, Wolfmother? no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.134.13.133 (talk) 02:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Merge
This article is just a list and its range is far too broad for 'Psychedelic Rock'. Tim flatus (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not sure I understand what your getting if the article was a List it would be "List of Neo-psychedeila bands." Also can you clarify range is to broad because much of this is already covered in the rock article. Ridernyc (talk) 18:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
List?
This is "Neo-psychedelia" not "List of Neo-psychedelic bands"Brando26000 (talk) 00:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Stars (UK band)
notwithstanding the doubts on the very existence of the page, a 1973 band doesn't really belong in the 2000s section. 76.64.241.70 (talk) 13:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Mazzy Star
Surely they would fit quite nicely into the neo-psychedelia genre?