Talk:Breakdown section

The proper term in it's highest form has always been breakdown section. Breaks is a derivation of this.

Copying this comment over from Break (music) where this page had been redirected: I object to the redirection of "breakdown section", which is a separate and distinct terminology and the parent concept behind break as in breakdance. Breakdown Section is the highest and most proper terminology for this usage, and it has its own singular origin and usage. Start asking REAL DJs what the most appropriate term is before you take the entire language into your own hands and move things out of order. What about discussion on such matters? - tednor

Also, I reverted the page back to the proposed merge template. Tednor may have a good point here, I really don't know enough about the topic to judge. I'll tag it as a stub for now, we may want to have an AFD discussion as I'm not sure if there is enough material out there to justify a whole article. Perel 13:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I must've moved right after the merge template was put up, so I didn't see it. Unless you can provide some kind of proof that this is the "real" term, or you can provide more information and cite some sources, I suggest that you merge this information into Break (music).  Also, you can sign your posts by typing four tildes or ~ . John Reaves 15:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the timestamps are real close everywhere. If this goes to AFD, my vote is Merge. Perel 19:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing is going to be difficult, I recommend that this matter is given some time so that professional DJ's can weigh in on the matter. There is indeed a distinct difference between "break" and "breakdown section". I will cite the fact that "Good Times" by Chic (one of the most famous hip-hop usages of breakbeats in "Rapper's Delight") was sampled from its breakdown section specifically. The breakdown section contains the most bars of uninterrupted non-tonal information, making it the preferred area from which to take a sample. Prior to digital equipment, it was quite difficult to use smaller sections as it necessitated constant cutting in and out by the DJ who was mixing (usuall live) between copies of the record.--Tednor 00:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Please notice and read this clarification of my assertion
The article on Breaks itself makes the point that breakdown and break are distinct. Has anybody read it??? What is missed here by those recommending to move is that hip hop would not have developed from breaks alone: they are simply too short to use for the purpose intended in hip hop music. Only an extremely skilled DJ cutting at lightning speed could use breaks and not breakdown sections! It had to be the breakdown sections which were used, else the hip hop era could not feasibly have begun until after the era of digital audio, capiche??If this is accepted, then Breakdown Section becomes the parent concept of hip hop musical culture and must have unique placement to avoid screwing up the whole lineage. Also, I can elaborate on breakdown sections and I'm only one user of the Wiki. (see the artist Lime page for some further ideas which can be placed in breakdown section, there are far more I assure you, such as dance records without noticable breakdown sections, breakdown sections which themselves became SONGS (Ride on Time by Black Box and Rapper's Delight come to mind right off the cuff). I am frustrated because the people who want to mess with this language simply don't understand it and yet are voting for deletion less than a day after i posted this, in fact someone wanted to delete it right away!  C'mon people, how about we all LEARN something from the WIKI!  I am sorry for the tone but this is my first editing dispute and I am incredibly frustrated by the lack of advocates and the haste of my opponents.  I thank you all for your consideration and for Wiki-ing in the first place.--Tednor 18:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)