Talk:Electric Light Orchestra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Electric Light Orchestra article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.
England Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] 150 million + records sold

In all fairness, it HAS been estimated & speculated that ELO has sold in excess of 150 million records among fans and employees of the RIAA.

http://eloforever.proboards46.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1187086172

How is stating that estimation and speculation among fans regarding ELO's sales totals has taken place an opinion? Calling ELO's material Beatlesque is opinion, and diverts attention away from ELO and towards The Bealtes.

No offense was intended in this post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheChurchMale (talk • contribs) 14:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Hold On Tight

My memory is failing a bit, but wasn't "Hold On Tight" also used for commercials in the 80's for the "Coffee Drinkers of America"? If I remember correctly these commercials showed up frequently on MTV at the time. I might be confusing this with a Weird Al spoof of the commercial. Anyone remember a little more clearly than I? --163.150.15.182 15:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

No, your memory is correct. It was a generic advertisement touting coffee; not any particular brand name. I can't remember who sponsored it (maybe the National Federation of Coffee Growers). It had a caption (or maybe a "voice over") that mentioned the "Coffee Generation" with Jeff Lynne singing in the background, "Hold on tight, to your dreams".

I remember quite clearly "Hold On Tight" used in commercials for milk, not coffee. This was a time before the "Got Milk" campaign, when milk was down in popularity. Afrayer 01:14, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Category

I've started a new category for fans, just type the following at the bottom of your user page {Category:Wikipedians who listen to Electric Light Orchestra}. The Equaliser 12:00 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date inconsistencies

In reading this article I have noticed several inconsistencies between the dates in the text and the dates in the list of band members. The text states that the original ELO broke up after the release of a 1986 album, and the band member list confirms that this indeed took place in 1986, as the 3 remaining members (Lynne, Groucutt and Bevan) are listed as having departed in that year. OK so far. The next event in the text is Bevan forming "ELO Part II" in 1990. However, the band member list has Bevan, Groucutt, McDowell and Kaminski "rejoining" in 1988, and Eric Troyer (the only "original" member of Part II who was not in Part I) also joining in 1988. But, how could they have joined/rejoined a band in 1988 if it was not formed (or re-formed depending on how you look at it) until 1990, two years later? Unfortunately, that is not all. The text states that Lynne "reformed" ELO in 2001, but the band member list says he rejoined in 2000. The text also says that once ELO had been reformed (which was in 2001), "Richard Tandy rejoined the band a short time afterwards..." So one would expect to find in the band member list that Tandy rejoined in 2001 or 2002, or maybe even 2000 to match Lynne's rejoining (but not reforming!) date. One does not: The band member list says Tandy rejoined in 1999! He could not have, since ELO had not yet been reformed and Part II had gone out of business.

It also appears that although the text states that the former Part II members (other than Bevan) "have reformed under the name The Orchestra," this is not reflected in the band member list. Otherwise, there would be yet another rejoining date for Groucutt, Troyer and others, after 1999. I realize that this may be intentional rather than an error, since "The Orchestra" is now getting pretty far afield from ELO, mainly sharing a bass player/backing vocalist and a couple of part-time string players. However, it does add to the overall sense of confusion a bit.

I do not have any information that would resolve these conflicts, incongruities or whatever they are. My suggestion for anyone that does have such information is that once the correct dates have been figured out, to either list the members of ELO and Part II separately to reduce confusion, or if it is to remain one list, then next to the "rejoining" dates (after 1986), put in parentheses which band (ELO or Part II) the person was joining/"rejoining." Zeutron 03:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Band Member Inconsistencies

Is it accurate to say Tandy "rejoined" the band at all? The liner for Zoom mentions him as a "special guest" on "Alright" and to imply he rejoined from that is to say Ringo Starr (guest on "Moment in Paradise" and "Easy Money") and George Harrison (guest on "A Long Time Gone") joined the band.

From all indications, all that separates Zoom from being a solo effort by Lynne is the fact that Lynne credited the album to the band, rather than himself. Afrayer 01:27, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Marc Mann is given as joining the band in 2000, but is listed as performing on only one cut, "Moment in Paradise," on Zoom. Suzie Katayama is listed as playing cello on three cuts ("Just For Love," "Stranger on a Quiet Street," and "All She Wanted"), yet she isn't listed as a band member.

I'm interested in consistency. At what point is a performer considered part of the band, and not simply a guest? You can't say touring, since there are many cases where guests toured with bands (Michelle Branch touring with Carlos Santana coming to mind). Unless someone has access to the contracts, I propose you go by credit placement on the liners, and on Zoom that means Lynne is the only actual band member.Afrayer 01:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


Where is Dave Morgan listed? I didn't see his name in this section.

[edit] Do Ya

In the article, the paragraph relating to A New World Record refers to "Do Ya" as a re-release of a song by The Move. Is the song merely the same recording from one of The Move's albums spliced into New World Record, or is it a new recording? In the latter case, it should be listed as a cover or remake. Kouban 18:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

This matter has now been resolved The Equaliser 01:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

ELO re-recorded the song. Jeff Lynne originally wrote the song while he was a member of the Move (per-ELO). When the Move became ELO, the song "Do Ya" was melded into the hit single "10538 Overture" as a short medley. Eventually Lynne ELOized the song on the hit album, A New World Record.

The Orchestra during their 2002 tour of the US, performed the Move's version.

[edit] Band's-name-in-spanish controversy

There should be a reference to the origin of the band's name cause in some spanish-spoken countries the band is wrongly referred with the name of "Orquesta Luz Eléctrica", like if it was an orchestra named Electric Light (as the light that electric lamps emit), instead of thinking that is a lightweight orchestra that uses electric instruments. --Manuel Cuevas 23:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that either interpretation would be correct. Given that their first album had a big light bulb on the cover (at least the U.S. release), and an early version of the second album had it as well, the possible confusion was intentional -- it's a pun. So, "Orquesta Luz Eléctrica" doesn't seem so terrible. Truthfully, I'm so used to the name and was so young when I became familiar with them, I had never even thought about the "light orchestra" interpretation until now. Regardless, whatever discussion of the origin of the name would need to be sourced - it'd be good to have something authoritative from Roy Wood or Jeff Lynne describing what they were thinking rather than just assuming. -- RobLa 05:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't realize that it was intended as a double meaning. I always thought, you know, the light that electric lamps emit. Reading this article (especially the trivia) has given me newfound appreciation for the band (I've liked them since college -- which was in the late 90s for me). --Tckma 02:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Having an authoritative comment would be great. I took account of this matter when I once saw an album of sci-fi movies themes from a Space Light Orchestra and since the Space Light term make few sense, I thaught that the same could be happen with ELO, I commented this with others that agreed with me. Also I've heard de Orquestra Luz Eléctrica name from an mexican radio station (Universal Stereo) notable for always try to translate all the songs and bands names into spanish, often with disastrous results (such as "Kiss on my list" translated as "Lista de besos" and things like that). --Manuel Cuevas 23:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
How about not translating it at all? You don't hear English speakers talk about Puerto Rico as Port Rich...
I'm with you --Manuel Cuevas 23:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
On the BBC Radio 2 programme transmitted on 7th July 2005, Jeff Lynne explained about the origin of the name. Back in the 1960's the band members were familiar with the usage on radio of "light orchestras", eg. the Midland Light Orchestra or the Southern Light Orchestra. So they decided to use a play on words, and settled on the Electric Light Orchestra - an intended pun! The subsequent use of the light bulb graphic inadvertently distracted fans from the original thinking behind the name. I'll leave it up to you chaps if you wish to include this in the main text for the ELO page. Rob Orland 21:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inspirations, Followers, Contemporaries, Similar Artists

Looks like it was ripped from All Music Guide. I think this is a copyright infringement. Mrbluesky 23:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


Yes I agree, It is now gone The Equaliser 17:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I also think LEO and all the Japanese art and samples should be either moved to one place rather than being weaved in with general ELO information.This would make things clearer because although samples,Japanese art cartoons and LEO and related tribute bands are relative to ELO,they should all be merged into a tributes or related section away from the main body of ELO history.

Also the Randy Newman piece is too long and would fit in better in Randy's own wiki section.

Also the US bias seems to dominate the whole piece and maybe it should not be assumed that Fire On High,is played throughout the world on Classic Rock Radio. Same thing goes for US film and tv trailers,seems unimportant to me as someone who lives in the UK.

I think it is looking better each day but still needs a tighter focus on ELO,with less related info overflow in its own section as I suggested earlier. Any thoughts on this? {Eloidle 22:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)Eloidle}

[edit] "ELO" should not redirect here

"ELO" can refer to a number of things besides Electric Light Orchestra, as demonstrated by the previous disambig page that "ELO" was [1]. However, AmbigDexter claims that these are "false entries", which I have disagreed with on the user's talk page. I am contemplating weather to create ELO (disambiguation) or just revert ELO back to the disambig page. -albrozdude 00:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sound Bites

What are the copyright regulations on sound bites? I've seen some articles post sound bites for, e.g., musical groups. However, I was thinking more along the lines of sound bites for the trivia section, i.e. "Please turn me over," or "The music is reversible... (etc.)". Since it's more than 10 years old, is it considered public domain? --Tckma 02:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

They won't be public domain for another 25 years or so; see Copyright law of the United Kingdom. However considering that The Beatles article has samples, it shouldn't be a problem (but IANAL). Otterdam 16:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dr Who

What about setting up a trivia section with elo's prominent featuring in the recent Dr Who episode "Love and Monsters"? any thoughts....

Leonie Miller

[edit] Electric Light Orchestra Part II

I suggest that information on this spin off band be given its own page. At the moment it shares credit with the main ELO page. - The Equaliser 00:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ELO Videos and Links

Hold on Tight http://www.mediamob.co.kr/tearsfor/Post/PostView.aspx?PKId=50754

http://music.aol.com/artist/main.adp?artistid=4177

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&n=2&videoid=629173924&&Mytoken=159E80C4-BE2B-F18E-7D37146F5537044842748766

David Lee Roth, Steve Vai and Ben Beven http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qjvs7mtf6iE&search=yankee%20rose

Should all the links to all the official and unofficial sites be removed,it does state in the terms about links to sites personal or otherwise are not acceptable.{Eloidle 22:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)Eloidle}

[edit] {{cleanup}}

The discography section is effectively an image gallery using the fair-use images as decoration and not critical commentary of the artwork itself. As such, they should probably be removed as displaying them in this fashion is not fair-use. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. How is it any different from the identical section on the Beatles article? Besides, Wikipedia:Fair use#Images says cover art is just fine. -- Scjessey 19:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Fair use#Images explicitly states that this is fair-use "for identification and critical commentary (not for identification without critical commentary)." The latter is the specific fashion in which the album images are being used. I spoke with another user on my talkpage some time back about this same thing; I brought up the topic on the WP:FU talk page: Wikipedia_talk:Fair_use/Archive_9#policy_quandry.3F and was supported (albeit not heartily) in that using album covers for decoration or identification w/o the cover art being the subject of the commentary does not fall under fair-use. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I disagree Many other major bands have a similar layout without anyone moaning at them where is the harm ,I have worked extensively on this rock bands profile for months now cleaning it up and presenting it and I am very proud of the way it looks now ,leave the page alone and let the light shine on! -- The Equaliser 09:51 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Song

My mother is curious which ELO song has no lyrics. Could ya help a boy? -Yancyfry 02:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, Fire On High from the album Face the Music contains nothing but a very heavily distorted voice in reverse; and The Whale from Out of the Blue is entirely instrumental. Hope that helps! Hassocks5489 12:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC) (ELO Fan)
    • First Movement (Jumping Biz)
    • Mahattan Rumble
    • Battle of Marston Moor (Roy Wood does 'Cromwell speech' at the begining of track)
    • Daybreaker
    • In the Hall Of the Moutain King
    • Eldorado finale
    • Fire on High
(The choir does sing "Fire On High")
    • The Whale
    • Believe Me Now (This track does have lyrics,"Believe Me Now"
    • Another Heart Breaks
("Another Heart Breaks"is spoken by Jeff Lynne)
    • After All
    • Grieg's Piano Concerto in A Minor
    • The Quick And the Daft

Hope this helps .

Maybe another listen,may help further. {Eloidle 14:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Eloidle)

[edit] All Over the world

Superscript text

The album was realesed in the USA I got the album!

-GD1223 —Preceding unsigned comment added by GD1223 (talk • contribs) 11:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pop Masters/Pop Domination

What purpose does these sections serve? This is an encyclopedia article, not a shrine to a band's success. Very weaselly choice of acts, some of which weren't singles acts at all. Should both be taken down.

Vytal (talk) 18:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds a bit POV to me. Marlith T/C 18:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply:

What's the big deal guys? Can't a fan compare his/her favorite band's success to that of other bands who were active in the same period? Success based on numbers?

I'm trying to make ELO look better than they have on these pages... within the rules. Read what I claimed: ELO had more UK & US Top 40 Hits than any other band in the world from 1972 to 1986. The comparisons made aren't "weaselly" like Vytal stated.

After viewing The Beatles, Queens' and various other bands' home Wiki pages & discographies... I'd say the notion of removing information on ELO that had never before been on Wikipedia is kind of a hypocritical one, since many other bands' pages look like shrines to their respective successes...

Thanks.

-TheChurchMale —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheChurchMale (talk • contribs) 19:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:ELO Band 1979.jpg

Image:ELO Band 1979.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confusion

I read through the article's sources, and found nothing as to the group having 46 top forty hit singles, rather 26. However, I wouldn't want to look stupid, so I'd rather not edit it myself.

Winnemuccan (talk) 01:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Winnemuccan 3/8/08