Jump to content

Talk:Soft rock: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
ResurgamII (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 25: Line 25:


-ResurgamII
-ResurgamII

:Nice work. The article already looks a lot better, and is more informative. [[User:Korny O'Near|Korny O'Near]] 02:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:00, 19 July 2006

Too many artists listed

I removed a bunch of artists from the article, but they got re-inserted. Some of these make no sense. The Beatles? Simon & Garfunkel? The Supremes? They stopped recording before soft rock was even invented. Others just don't fit the category. Not everything that's "easy listening" is soft rock. R&B like Boyz II Men and New Age like Enya are their own genres. Korny O'Near 08:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm..

The Beatles' "If I Fell" does seem to sound very 'soft-rocky'. Dave Clark Five also had a hit with "Because". Don't forget about the Bee Gees' 1960's material with songs such as 'Spicks and Specks' (a poppy yet soft-rock sound), 'Could It Be' or 'Three Kisses of Love'. Don't know why 98 Degrees or All 4 One were thrown in there by that user. This genre does indeed confuse alot of people.

My idea is to erase the list altogether and simply put artist/singers in alphabetical order with an example of a song or songs, so we know why they were thrown into the soft rock category in the first place.

Example:



etc etc

I'll go ahead and do that now.

-ResurgamII

Nice work. The article already looks a lot better, and is more informative. Korny O'Near 02:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]