Jump to content

Talk:Blaqk Audio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rewrite tag

[edit]

I tagged this article with "rewrite" rather than "AfD" because I feel that the article is about something notable enough to meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Unfortunately, since I have no knowledge or interest in the subject, I am not going to be the one to rewrite it. If an editor who has put some time into this article would read, understand, and apply the guidelines to this article, I will refrain from putting it up for deletion. V-Man737 06:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this edit was quite inappropriate and will definitely not help this article in an AfD discussion. V-Man737 06:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewritten

[edit]

I do have knowledge/interest on the subject, and I have tried to change it to meet Wiki guidelines, but I lack sufficient experience on editing Wikipedia pages. Nonetheless, it's much better than before, but still needs some work. I didn't write the original page, but I made the last changes to the page as a nonmember. Xxecho 01:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to remove the lyrics because most other band pages don't have that. I'm not sure what else to do, I don't have that much experience in this area either. Lizzysama 17:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed it up a bit, and added everything to the best of my knowledge. The page no longer looks like a chronological order of events and blog posts. Hopefully as more information about the side-project is released I'll be able to continue to add to the page. Stellaaa 15:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace

[edit]

I've re-written the article comprehensively, but then went to 'save' and was unable to, due to blog.myspace.com being a blacklisted link. Davey Havok and Jade Puget have used Blaqk Audio's Myspace blog extensively to post lyrics and information on the band and it is a vitally important link - especially with the sparsity of information about Blaqk Audio at the moment.

I've saved my edit to my desktop. Hopefully I'll be able to put most of it up soon. I'm going to post on this [Page] to try to get something sorted out. Mnesimache 17:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed?

[edit]

Why is it that everything in the article that says "according to their MySpace..." or "according to their blog..." says "citation needed?" The MySpace Blogs are blacklisted so they can't appear in the article, and there is a link to their MySpace in the External Links section... so what needs further citation? --Hotdoglives 06:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I originally intended to reference to specific myspace blogs. Their blog is a long, unwieldy thing, and will only grow as the two of them continue to update it. For example, the lyrics to Bitter for Sweet and Stiff Kittens are posted in two different blog entries. Havok mentions the band's creation in 2001 in another. I was going off Wikipedia:Cite_sources. Posting a link to their myspace profile isn't the same as posting a link to their myspace blog, or links to the specific myspace blogs. I've requested that those specific links be whitelisted, and I hope that they are, as it would significantly improve the quality of the article. Mnesimache 06:57, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete the Article

[edit]

"This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy." Don't do it!The article now is good and gives a lot of information.

Then go comment on the Appropriate Page! Remember to give a thorough argument. Mnesimache 13:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Fan Reactions'

[edit]

I've reverted Hotdoglives' removal of the 'Fan Reactions' section. He cited it as being 'useless' - but I think that we should look to making it USEFUL, rather than deleting it out of hand. For example, the decemberunderground album page has a 'Critical and Fan Response' section, and I think it is a worthwhile part of the page. Mnesimache 08:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see it useless at all. The fans' reaction to "Bitter for Sweet" is the only real source of a response to the Blaqk Audio as of yet. What I mean is that it's the only song Davey and Jade have released as of yet, and it was put on their MySpace where fans could view it — it wasn't sent to any bigshot reviewers or anything like that (or maybe it was, but not that I've heard), so the best way to understand the response to the band as of yet would be the fan reactions to this one song. It is a great song tho ;) R-Tiztik 18:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Davey Havok has said it himself that Blaqk Audio is an EBM-influenced band. Henceforth it's safe to assume that Blaqk Audio belongs to the EBM genre. My question is; WHO THE F*CK is changing it to "Electropop" and "Electronica"?

Their music has nothing to do with EBM or Darkwave. It's simply Electropop / Electronica with an Ambient influence.
Actually, EBM influenced... Blaqk Audio's major influences are VNV Nation, Apoptygma Berkzerk, Covenant, and the like. Their genre? EBM! Also, each of those bands mentioned belong to the Goth culture. For your information, "Electronica" isn't a real genre by the way, it's a blanket-term invented by the media used to describe such existing genres as: IDM, Trip-Hop, Big Beat, Electro and various experimental Electronic music. It was invented because the general public, such as yourself, are too braindead to figure out what IDM, or Big Beat sounds like.

To sum everything up; Blaqk Audio is an EBM band. Apoptygma Berzerk, VNV Nation, Covenant etc. have nothing to do with EBM. They produce Future Pop.

All of those bands mentioned are both futurepop AND Electronic Body Music (EBM). Look up Covenant on this website, and you'll see what I mean.
Irrelevant. The main point is futurepop. EBM is a complete other thing.
Shows what you know about music. Those bands are equally FuturePop as they are EBM.
In your dreams they are.
Can you get any more immature at this point? Look them up! Do some research to back up your claims.

Darkwave can describe them pretty good as well as EBM.These genres should be included.

Are you stupid? There is no Darkwave or EBM sound. Darkwave is an 80s genre, not a techno-influenced genre. Blaqk Audio's Music is electropo / futurepop with modern dance elements, nothing more.
I agree with the person who said "Darkwave can describe them pretty good as well as EBM". Darkwave is not limited to 80's music. It's another name for Electro-Goth, and what is Electro-Goth? Gothic Electropop. Their main influences are EBM/Futurepop bands, by the way.
Bullshit, Darkwave is a term from the New Wave era... it's definitely 80s music.

there are modern darkwave bands so it's not 80s music.Give me proove that the bands I mention do not produce darkwave.You can't, can you? And as I see in the genre section are listed electropop,futurepop - your "techno sound".Darkwave gives another description fot them.Description for the feel of their music. Xr 1 22:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are no "modern" darkwave groups. Dark Wave is 80s sound! Its a musical epoch, not a musical style! The same with New Wave. And Futurepop is a techno-influenced genre. But hey, you kiddie, maybe you have scat in your ears. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.36.159 (talk • contribs)

The term was first use for a bunch of genres but then for a particular genre.There are no modern darkwave groups..oh really?So what music make the groups I mention?Pop-rock from the nu metal era? =] You can't give me a proof that they do not make darkwave, and that in blaqk audio's page shouldn't be put darkwave. Just smile- I'll undo your edit...again =] Xr 1 13:10, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can fuck yourself, kiddie. Read a book about dark wave. All the other thing is your POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.36.159 (talk • contribs)

Darkwave is now a genre term used to describe a sound that combines elements from gothic rock with industrial,ambient and synthpop. Blaqk audio's music has all that.but they do not use any instruments which is represented by adding electropop and futurepop in their genre section. Xr 1 10:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blaqk Audio use modern electronic sounds / instruments. Darkwave is connected to old sounds and instruments. In the 80s there were completely other instruments, such as Yamaha DX7 or Korg MS-10, Emulator II etc. All these instruments are typical 80s instruments. They were a formative influence on the sound of Darkwave. Blaqk Audio is definitely no Darkwave group!

Where have I said that blaqk audio is a darkwave group?!?!It's an elecrtronic side project that makes music which can't be classed in just one genre.Darkwave is just another description to their sound.And it will stay. Xr 1 20:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In your dreams, you stupid scallywag

A person like you that is constantly showing his "good" behaviour will not edit wikipedia. I'll personally remove darkwave and ebm if a registered user, who has helped the improving of wikipedia, who uses proper laguage and who has knowlege about this kind of music give me a proof that blaqk audio's music has nothing to do with these genres. Untill that moment they will stay. Xr 1 10:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC) I had previously added EBM and Synthpop as the genres, but I agree with whoever changed EBM to Futurepop, to avoid the EBM purists complaining "omgz dis is not ebm, skiny pupy rulz!!!". I had added Synthpop because that's how a lot of the current 'indie' bands with an 80's electronic twist (Shiny Toy Guns, The Faint) are described, but I can see why it wouldn't apply. As for Darkwave, I'm still not sure. In my book, Darkwave overlaps with EBM somewhat, but is generally more atmospheric and less beat-driven. By this definition, tracks 4 and 5 could be Darkwave, but a lot of the other songs fall outside that definition. The question is really whether you could imagine this album as being in the same category with The Cruxshadows, La Floa Maldita, or Thoushaltnot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 23:31, August 24, 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Crüxshadows are absolutely untypical for Darkwave. They produced a handful of darkwave-inspired tracks in the 90s, nothing more. Today, The Crüxshadows is simply Rock music meets Electropop/Futurepop. Wave is connected to the 80s music. Darkwave is the dark side of New Wave. The Cure, Depeche Mode, Bauhaus, The Chameleons, Siouxsie & The Banshees....they were typical Darkwave groups. I own a music magazine from 1988, called New Life Soundmagazine. It contains the mention of the term "Darkwave" in connection to the music of Joy Division. There is a compilation with typical Darkwave groups. They have nothing to do with the music of Blaqk Audio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.44.10 (talk) 01:41, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
That's true, but then it's a question of whether you want to cling to the original definition or accept the fact that the definition has evolved (much the same as with the term 'emo'). I think most people today would not associate Darkwave with Joy Division (maybe tangentially). Also, the release you linked to features Clan of Xymox, who have more of an EBM sound and were an influence on Blaqk Audio. I'm just saying there's a big spectrum for applying the term, and Blaqk Audio may or may not fall into it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 01:52, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

The definition hasn't evolved. The books ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) describe Darkwave as a genre from the 80s. All the other is irrelevant. 

Template:Unsigned -->
Gothic rock is a part of the dark wave movement. Dark Wave and New Wave are umbrella terms. Both were movements of the 80s with different, stylistic genres, such as synthpop, goth rock, cold wave etc. In 1986, depeche mode's album "black celebration" was called darkwave. It was a dark and claustrophobic longplayer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.1.191 (talk) 20:02, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

ok I have to agree with that. New wave and post-punk were movements and there was an overlap between them - the two scenes have their roots in punk rock and goth rock for example is stated to be part from both of them... Darkwave represented the dark side of the new wave movement - all these goth bands,synthrock and even some post-punk bands (may be because of the overlap).Ok, I understand why joy devision and the sisters were called darkwave.But since then darkwave have become a Genre term for so called "electronic gothic music." and these bands do not fall in that genre category.But blaqk audio's music can be descibed by darkwave as a genre term. Xr 1 20:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So there we have it. Going by the definition given in the darkwave article here, which no one seems to be challenging, Blaqk Audio would qualify as darkwave in the Wolfsheim, Cruxshadows, and Clan of Xymox vein. Unless you are willing to challenge the categorization of those groups, Darkwave is going back in. Also, for anyone who still insists that darkwave strictly applies to 80's music, here is a quote from the article: "After the New Wave movement faded at the end of the 1980s, Dark Wave survived and experienced a fresh impetus with the music of bands such as Deine Lakaien, The Frozen Autumn, Love Is Colder Than Death, the early music of Love Like Blood, The Garden of Delight, Wolfsheim, Schwarz Stein and others." Hope that puts this matter to rest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 00:06, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
I cannot see any relation between deine lakaien, frozen autumn etc. and blaqk audio. It's electropop/futurepop with an inluence of ambient/electronica. Btw: wolfsheim was a darwave group in the early 1990s, nothing more. Their first album "No Happy View" has darkwave elements. The same with deine lakaien. In Germany, the darkwave epoch is over since the middle/end of the 1990s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.1.191 (talk) 00:16, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

"So there we have it. Going by the definition given in the darkwave article here, which no one seems to be challenging, Blaqk Audio would qualify as darkwave in the Wolfsheim, Cruxshadows, and Clan of Xymox vein. Unless you are willing to challenge the categorization of those groups, Darkwave is going back in" - that's what I'm talking about!electronic gothic sound!darkwave as a genre 88.87.6.72 08:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC) 88.87.6.72 08:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC) ps. I wasn't logged. ps2.I'm changing it to darkwave with reference to it's narrow meaning. Xr 1 08:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't add your POV. Darkwave isn't "electronic gothic sound". Many bands were guitar bands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.39.220 (talk) 11:18, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Look, this isn't about trying to impress everyone with your knowledge of whatever you consider to be the 'true' Darkwave bands. Everyone keeps giving their opinion of what Darkwave is, but so far no one has given a legitimate reason for why Blaqk Audio (which is what the article is about, remember?) should NOT be considered Darkwave. So I am going to list the reasons for why they SHOULD be:

1. The more I listen to the album, the more most of it sounds like The Cruxshadows in terms of lyrics, music, and ambience, especially the Ethernaut album. The Cruxshadows, while unique in their own sense, are indisputably Darkwave, so if they belong in the genre, so do Blaqk Audio.
2. The slower, more piano-driven tracks sound like Wolfsheim's more recent work, while the more beat-driven EBM-style tracks could still fit into Darkwave in the Clan of Xymox vein.
3. The fact that they are a modern band has no bearing on its genre categorization, and the Darkwave article unequivocally states that the genre continues to thrive today.
4. The article also states that Darkwave included the French Coldwave movement, which is specifically listed as an influence on AFI's most recent work (see AFI, Mainstream Success section).
5. The categorization as it is now is obviously incomplete. Only tracks 3, 7, and 9 sound like EBM/Futurepop; the rest are slower and more gothic/atmospheric. So another genre is needed no matter what, and Darkwave is the best fit.

The bottom line is this: Darkwave is a broad genre that includes some of the early gothic rock, the more ethereal Projekt Records stuff, and yes, some of the more modern electro-goth stuff like Cruxshadows. Blaqk Audio fits the bill under the latter classification. That is the fact that is relevant, NOT what you THINK constitutes 'true' darkwave, or trying to restrict it to only the style that you like best. I have followed policy in explaining the reasons for my edit. I would hope that the rest of you do the same instead of just scrawling one sentence that repeats points already made.Baligant 04:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethernaut isn't an album from the 1990s. The Crüxshadows' most representative darkwave album is The Mystery of the Whisper. Wolfsheim most represetative dark wave album is No Happy View. Wolfsheim produced never EBM sounds. You're looking for completely wrong albums and titles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.4.21 (talk) 11:55, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
I never said it was from the 90's, it's from 2003, which proves my point even further. Also, where did I say Wolfsheim was EBM? Finally, I would love to see some citations that say this or that album is or isn't Darkwave, because the information in both bands' articles describes the BAND AS A WHOLE as being Darkwave. You have a very restrictive view of what Darkwave is 'supposed' to be and are now trying to fanagle the defintion around your own conception. You're saying that Darkwave is an 80's sound, and then when given examples of albums by darkwave bands that are much more recent, you say that those albums aren't Darkwave. Don't you see how circular your logic is? See my full response below. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 01:36, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

cruxshadows are described as darkwave and nothing else.Wolfsheim is synthrock/darkwave band.Baligant is abolutely right!he (she) goes from the definiton and compares with other darkwave bands.You're just writing "no, they are not darkwave" and even you don't know why!And You didn't answer me have you even heard the album! and stop vandalizing my page!you do it again because you can't proove you're right.And you're not. Xr 1 19:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are the vandal... and the absolute fuckhead. You stupid guy knows nothing about darkwave. At the time of the darkwave movement, you was a diapershitter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.22.60 (talk) 21:11, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

See?You just say " I know everything about darkwave" and nothing else.You do not say why blaqk audio is NOT darkwave you just say they aren't although we gave proper proofs why they ARE Xr 1 21:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

READ A BOOK, fucking peabrain. Your shitty POV is absolutely irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.22.60 (talk) 21:18, August 27, 2007 (UTC)


THEY'RE NO DARKWAVE BECAUSE THEY USE MODERN ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTS!!! DARKWAVE IS 80s MUSIC! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.22.60 (talk) 22:08, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
Check the Darkwave article and calm the fuck down.

that was...so educational.it's the music and sound that is imprtant not the instrument that makes it. Darkwave is 80s movement and since 80s is a genre term that describes electronic gothic music. and don't be so...nervous. Xr 1 22:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious to see that in this case, all the pro-darkwave people are using calm, reasoned arguments, whereas the anti-darkwave people are resorting to unprovoked name-calling, typing in all caps, and general examples of retardation. Someone is a 'fuckhead' because they don't agree with you on what genre a band belongs in? And no one who's not an aging goth is qualified to talk about music? I see. Good luck with that. I don't care if you blew Peter Murphy back in the 80's, this is a community that goes by consensus opinion and logical arguments, not your sole claimed expertise.

Anyway, like I said, the Darkwave article clearly states that it is NOT limited to 80's music. It's absolutely idiotic to argue that it is. Blaqk Audio aside, there are bands like La Floa Maldita, Thoushaltnot, Bella Morte, etc. that are constantly described as Darkwave. And even if you throw out all of the electro-goth stuff (which there is no basis for doing), you are still going to have to deal with the fact that Projekt Records continues to use the term for releases coming out today.

The only person that has even come close to giving any sort of valid argument is the one that claims that certain albums by The Cruxshadows and Wolfsheim are darkwave and some aren't. But I'll have to go go with Xr 1 in this case: who are you to say which albums are and aren't representative? And yes, The Cruxshadows are described only as Darkwave. If some of their albums weren't Darkwave, they would be described as something else. They're not.

Darkwave article clearly states that it is NOT limited to 80's music. Bullshit! The darkwave article says that Darkwave is inseparably connected with the stylistic developments of the late 1970s and the 1980s. This means that all the bands of the 1990s and 2000s should use SOUNDS FROM THE LATE 70s AND 80s! Listen to the music of Wolfsheim. Their early releases were 80s sound. Listen to the early releases of The Garden of Delight. Their music has an 80s sound. Listen to the early releases of Project Pitchfork. Their old music has an 80s sound. Listen to music of The Frozen Autumn. Their music IS 80s sound! Listen to the early music of Love Spirals Downwards, Lycia or Black Tape For A Blue Girl...they used 80s sounds! All these rock and synth music groups used the instruments & sounds of the 80s! A music group such as The Crüxshadows (especially their new albums), which uses modern electronica and futurepop sounds or simply techno elements, cannot be a darkwave group!
How exactly do you define "sounds from the late 70's and 80's"? Are you laboring under the delusion that synths or electronic sounds didn't exist or weren't used back then? Even "techno" has been around since the late 70's. And EBM/Futurepop has been around since at least 1982 with Skinny Puppy. So I have no idea what your insistence on an "80's sound" means in this case, because electronic sounds of the type Blaqk Audio uses were prevalently used in the 80's. It's better produced and there are more samples, maybe, but that doesn't qualify it as a completely different sound. Every genre obviously has its beginnings and is connected with some period, but that doesn't mean the sound can't evolve in any way. And The Cruxshadows dispute was settled long ago: not only are they darkwave, but they are probably the most popular darkwave group today and thus strongly definitive of the genre. If you want to focus on the 80's, Clan of Xymox has been far more electronic/futurepop sounding than Blaqk Audio, and no one has argued that they are not darkwave (they are even on that compilation). I strongly suggest you listen to the Blaqk Audio album completely. There are only a couple of songs that can be called futurepop. The rest are slower and more atmospheric, and yes, some use guitars. The point is that the album was made to sound like a New Wave album, but darker, which is exactly what darkwave means. And there's also the coldwave connection, which you haven't addressed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 05:21, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
How exactly do you define "sounds from the late 70's and 80's"?
THE INSTRUMENTS make the sound of the 80s. Korg MS-20, Yamaha DX-7, Emulator II, Oberheim Matrix 12 etc... typical 80s instruments. Typical for the music of The Cure is a Fender Bass IV.
Even "techno" has been around since the late 70's.
Maybe the term, but not the genre! Techno of today means the Techno of the 90s... Boom Boom Boom... the typical techno bass drum. Mayday, Loveparade, this is techno.
And EBM/Futurepop has been around since at least 1982 with Skinny Puppy.
Bullshit! EBM was created by DAF and Front 242 about 1980/81 in Europe. Skinny Puppy were never an EBM group! Futurepop is a style of the 2000s, strongly influenced by the techno and trance music of the 90s! Boom Boom Boom...
but they are probably the most popular darkwave group today
The Crüxshadows are a popular group, yes. But not the most popular Darkwave group of today.
Clan of Xymox has been far more electronic/futurepop sounding than Blaqk Audio
Forget Clan of Xymox. Their Darkwave era is over long ago. The most representative darkwave album of CoX is "Medusa" from 1986. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.32.18 (talk) 12:09, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
Fine, the point still stands that EBM has been around since the early 80's and would thus fall into the '80's sound' you attempt to outline. I can't say for sure what instruments Blaqk Audio uses, but there's no basis for restricting the genre based on instruments since, as you can see, some of the most representative bands of the genre have gone on to use more modern instruments since the 80's. So, according to you, a number of the bands that people typically associate with Darkwave are no longer Darkwave or were only Darkwave for a particular album (chosen by you), even though these bands are always the ones that come up when describing darkwave and are not classified as anything else. Why is it so hard for you to accept that when enough bands from a certain genre expand their sound, it means that the genre itself has progressed? Instead you insist that the genre is only represented by one specific sound cryogenically frozen in time and anything that deviates from it gets thrown out. It's pretty clear to me that at the very least there is a 'modern darkwave' sound exemplified by all the bands you claim are no longer darkwave, that is different from but still rooted in the original sound of the 80's. The same hapenned with 'punk', 'hardcore', and 'emo'. Can you think of a better description for Blaqk Audio? Btw, I don't know why I even bothered to argue the 'techno' point with you, that label doesn't apply to BA at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 00:02, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, you do get genres that cannot exist outside a certain time, or become impossible to make. I've heard punk purists say that real punk can never be made again, and hasnt been able to be made since 76-78 in UK and no later than about 83/4 in the US. Even aside from that, you couldn't make a proto-punk band now, even though that genre definitely has a distinguishable sound and is quite well defined. Even if you replicated a classic proto punk track now it wouldnt be proto punk, because the genre depends as much on its era as anything else. I don't really know enough about dark wave to say whether dark wave is one that depends on era or is a more transcendent term, but its not logically impossible for such genres to exist. Jdcooper 00:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a heated dispute going on regarding whether Darkwave can properly be listed in the Blaqk Audio infobox as one of the genres that this new side project from AFI falls into. Please see "Genre" section above and provide input 11:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Hi guys, I've come here as a result of the request for comment that someone put up. My first comment is to say that all of you, but maybe particularly User:87.122.22.60, should remember to be nice to each other. Keep in mind that the exact issue you are arguing about is not so important that anyone is excused from being rude. Calling names never helps the argument, and it will not facilitate consensus. My second comment is that you should all remember to put four tildes, like this: ~~~~ at the end of every reply you do. This isn't that important, but it makes the conversation easier to read. Some bits above are quite hard to follow, and that's not what you want if you want new editors to come in and help build consensus. With respect to the actual issue of genre, I must admit that I have not heard the band's music, so I can't give an opinion myself. However, it is important for wikipedia consistency that the definitions we use of different genres are the definitions that are used in the articles about those genres. The Dark Wave article gives us a clear definition, and states that there are bands who existed after the original movement and who exist today who fit that definition. However, the article also does seem to describe Dark Wave as a movement, and the impression I get from reading it is that the Dark wave bands who still exist are considered more dark wave-influenced than Dark Wave themselves. When it comes to EBM I think it is an appropriate genre to include, since it is fairly broad. If you guys can agree on which specific subgenre of EBM the band is (from the looks of things Futurepop would be the most likely) then go for it, but there are far more important aspects of the article, don't let little things like these impede progress. That would be a shame, since you all seem to very much care about this article. The bottom line, and main thing to remember, is that if you include anything which other editors are likely to have a problem with, you should provide a source. They tend to avoid a lot of problems like these. As well as that, because you can never say it enough, BE NICER, and assume good faith. I hope some of my comments have been helpful, and happy editing to all. Jdcooper 14:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
DARKWAVE IS AN 80s MOVEMENT. ALL THE OTHER PEABRAIN SHIT IS IRRELEVANT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.57.219 (talk) 16:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well... just to add, Darkwave isn't only an 80's genre, there's She Wants Revenge, an also fairly new band that over much evaluation has fit pretty nicely into the darkwave genre, and they started in the 00's. Of course their indie rock influences over shadow it's darkwave, but they've also got goth rock influences to fall back upon. I guess it helps sometimes to have goth rock influences, if not darkwave ones, before going as far to call a band "darkwave".

I do not see this with Blaqk Audio I'm afraid.

Allowable genres for Blaqk Audio: Electronica, Synthpop and Futurepop

(Skinnydrifter 16:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Just as a suggestion: have any of you bothered looking at the official Blaqk Audio page that suggests, and actually, defines themselves as being Electro/Darkwave? I think that the word of the artist should be taken into consideration because afterall, they are the source of the music and are the ones that constructed the original sound. Thanks.

Jotsko 06:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The word of the artist is irrelevant. They produce music, they don't study music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.52.253 (talk) 12:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me? No! The word of the artist is NOT irrelevant! Blaqk Audio belongs to the Gothic Industrial scene, and they create Darkwave, and Futurepop music. My apologies if your traumatic memories of rape have clouded your vision and sense of hearing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.137.11.58 (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This whole discussion is getting really tedious. The problem is that the many of the fans of the emo / punk band AFI have no experience with a genre very far away from their usual pop-punk. The word of the artist should be relevant but the music really is not darkwave or gothic. Please refrain from insults aswell. (Skinnydrifter 20:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

First I'd say darkwave started as a scene that contained dark\gothic sounding bands from the New Wave movement. But since then these styles have totally mixed up. Today Darkwave is used for

  • electronic gothic rock
  • gothic sounding electronic music & neo-classical music

Blaqk Audio's music is not typical for darkwave,but it's not just mainstream techno and pop. So Darkwave should be included as one of the genres in the infobox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.87.6.72 (talk • contribs)

AFI really wasn't a typical mainstream pop punk either. Blaqk Audio are really difficult to put anywhere near darkwave, as yet, because they have such an electronica dominated sound. Right now they are definitely not darkwave - I doubt the band members really know what darkwave is themselves. The best description of modern day 'darkwave' is electronic gothic music or rock, neo-classical, and heavenly voices / Ethereal. This is not it. (Skinnydrifter 22:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

"The best description of modern day 'darkwave' is electronic gothic music or rock, neo-classical, and heavenly voices / Ethereal."

  • Hmm didn't I say the same thing...?I've mentioned neo-classical and electro goth as well as electro goth rock..

Well... I think Davey and Jade know what darkwave ang goth is, because the members are fans of 'The Cure' and 'Clan of Xymox' for example. And as I said there is something dark,moody,melancholic, and goth sounding in the veins of Cruxshadows in some of the songs such as the "Love letter", "Bitter for Sweet", "Cities of night", "Wake Up, Open The Door And Escape To The Sea", "Where Would You Like Them Left?" ... However,the genre paragraph was the best choice. P.S. AFI is not pop-punk. Yeah miss murder was a mainstream hit but everything else...Go listen to their early stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xr 1 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blaqk Audio are electronica (techno and electropop etc.) and AFI are pop punk. Blaqk Audio has nothing to do with Wave music. They've jumped on the current trend of 'dark' electro type bands claiming to know what EBM is. Regardless of the band member's connections to VNV Nation, they are not EBM or darkwave. They are electronica. (Skinnydrifter (talk) 16:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Electronica does not exist as a genre. It's an umbrella term which was applied to everything from Synthpop to Techno to Trance back in the 1990's. The correct term would always be "Electronic Dance Music" or "EDM". Electronica is a meaningless word, therefore it shouldn't be a genre category. It would be like using the word "Music" to describe something like Depeche Mode (which has a specific genre categorization). (NineInchNailed) (talk) 14:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

blaqkaudio.com

[edit]

it doesn't exist. 67.119.194.126 03:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's still under construction. R-Tiztik 12:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was up for a short time a while ago with a quote, possibly from a song, but since has gone offline. 71.224.63.83 23:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hot Topic Listening Party

[edit]

I don't know if this was a full scale thing, or only a NY/NJ area thing. The employee I know at the Hot Topic closest to where I live showed me an email from her regional manager to her saying that there was a problem with the system the stores use to download the full alum for the listen parties. It basically said a lot of the Hot Topics he knew of were having trouble and didn't have the listening parties because of this. Since I was unsure and didn't have any proof so far other than me saying what I saw first hand, I left it out when I edited about the listening parties held today on August 3rd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramystein (talk • contribs)

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Blaqk Audio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blaqk Audio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:12, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blaqk_Audio&oldid=1256557186"