Talk:4AD
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
Note to potential page movers: The name of the company, according to their official website, is just plain 4AD, not 4AD Records or 4AD Recordings, neither of which are mentioned anywhere in their domain. (If this page ever gets archived, please retain this notice at the top of the new talk page.) --Geoff Capp 11:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
However the name of the company is 4 A.D. Limited. [1]. Rich Farmbrough, 22:48 4 September 2006 (GMT).
Contents |
[edit] Logo
The 4AD logo is a spoof of the AAD Audio CD process designation.
[edit] "resigned"
"after resigning to Throwing Muses and Pixies" - I'm not sure what that clause means, but I have two guesses: "after resigning [itself to the more homogenous music of] Throwing Muses and Pixies" or "after re-signing Throwing Muses and Pixies." The first explanation seems rather more likely, but I'm not aware of that construct in English. And is resignation really what's meant there (i.e., were more ambitious goals a failure?), or more like limiting its scope to Throwing Muses and Pixies? At any rate, it's a very confusing clause so I'd like to ask what's meant before I try to copyedit it. Regards, PhilipR 07:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Guernica
Is it worth mentioning the sub-label Guernica? I'm not really sure what the distinction is, but certainly Insides were signed to Guernica (Euphoria has the catalog # GU 4 CD and is copyright GUERNICA for 4.A.D.) and I thought that at some point or other so were UVS pcrtalk 07:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Good point. Guernica should probably be mentioned somewhere here. They put out some good records, and are considered just as "4AD" as anything bearing the actual 4AD logo. Leamanc (talk) 00:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] classic?
a lot of talk of "classic" era 4AD. I dunno whose opinion this is, I would like a source. -72.81.123.153 (talk) 05:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I guess it was my opinion, as I wrote most of this. :-) This is a tricky area for Wikipedia, as most 4AD fans would agree there was a classic period, although there is a lot of debate about when it started and when it ended, and it's hard to quantify. It's a subjective thing, and the only sources are endless debates on message boards around the 'net. Since it is so hard to quantify, it may fall out of Wikiepdia's guidelines, but I'm glad that it's survived edits by fellow Wikiepdians and is not littered with "citation needed"s. I dunno...maybe it could be worded differently? Break down the eras a little bit more concisely? Like 1980-1982 was definitely 4AD's post-punk era, 1983-1987 was their goth era, 1993-1997 was their infatuation with the USA underground. Leamanc (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Reverse chronology?
I wrote all of the original "Classic and Noteworthy Releases" section, up to 1995. At that time, it was in chronological order. I am THRILLED that someone decided to pick it up and list some of the great releases from 4AD's recent resurgence (licensing Atlas Sound and Bon Iver was a stroke of genius). But I think it may be a more effective read if we started from "1980 forward" again, rather than going from the present back to the beginning. What does everyone else think? Leamanc (talk) 00:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
