Talk:The Fall (Gorillaz album)/Archive 1

Genre
I don't know about you, but I don't hear a single ounce of hip-hop on this album except for the drum beats. Seems like anyone with ears would be able to tell that this is clearly Experimental rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.58.104 (talk) 21:57, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This is without a doubt NOT hip hop at all. I think it's ambient / ambient house. Experimental rock is close. But not hip hop, seriously.--67.248.1.244 (talk) 00:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No one's arguing that this is regular hip-hop, but alternative hip-hop? Definitely. It could be labeled as dance or techno, or an infinite amount of subgenres, but like most Gorillaz releases, "Alternative hip-hop" is the best word to describe it as a whole. Genres are always open to interpretation, and people seem to think that the infobox is for describing everything they happen to hear. For consistency with other Gorillaz articles (which have reached consensus on this) I'm going to change it back. Though techno is definitely a word that could be used to describe any of these tracks, so if anyone agrees with that I'm not against adding it too. Friginator (talk) 18:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You can't necessarily label every Gorillaz album with the same genre. Gorillaz are a perfect example of a band who definitely don't fall under the same music genre for every album. I would say this album does not fall under the category of alternative hip-hop and the previously given genre of ambient / experimental rock is far more accurate - there is very little to suggest hip-hop about The Fall and certainly no vocals to speak of which fit that description. Officially Mr X (talk) 18:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Again, alternative hip-hop. The entire album is rhythm-driven, with a heavy use of synthesizers and programmed sounds. This is exactly what alternative hip-hop sounds like. Experimental rock is entirely different. But how are the vocals relevant? Hip-hop doesn't have a specific vocal style in the first place. Friginator (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Just as an example, see this from the alternative hip-hop article:


 * Allmusic defines it as follows:


 * Alternative Rap refers to Hip-Hop groups that refuse to conform to any of the traditional stereotypes of rap, such as gangsta, bass, hardcore, and party rap. Instead, they blur genres - drawing equally from funk and rock, as well as jazz, soul, reggae, and even folk.


 * That's exactly what I'm talking about. That uses the word "alternative rap" (rap being usually lumped in with hip-hop), but it describes exactly the sort of sound that this album, and much of Gorillaz' music has. Friginator (talk) 19:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Have you ever listened to alternative hip hop, a la De La Soul or A Tribe Called Quest? They have rap. The definition of alt hip hop says it contains rap. This has no rap. Not every album released by a certain artist sounds the same (see Damon's other project, Blur). It's clearly experimental or ambient. I won't revert your change because obviously you're very determined that you're correct and will likely just complain about my change and revert it again, but considering how everyone is is in agreement that this isn't alt hip hop, I hope someone else will. Whether your edits are in good faith or not, you are making this article inaccurate. --67.248.1.244 (talk) 06:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * There isn't a single bit of rapping or hip-hop on this entire album, besides the drum beats certainly having hip-hop influences. Gorillaz have alternative hip-hop songs but that doesn't mean they are completely alternative hip-hop, since most of their songs are NOT alternative hip-hop.  It seems like the person enforcing this genre upon every Gorillaz page has only listened to Clint Eastwood and Feel Good Inc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.58.104 (talk) 06:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * It doesn't have to have rap. That's part of what I'm saying. Friginator (talk) 14:33, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Why don't we just call it "funk" or something that captures what the album actually sounds like?--mikomango (talk) 15:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Seriously, Friginator, the album is not hip-hop. The tone and musicality of the album most parallels with Radiohead's Kid A, another avant-garde creation which is itself listed as alternative rock, electronica. That is much more accurate for this album also which could scarcely bear any more loosely the characteristics of a hip-hop album. Officially Mr X (talk) 15:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think you're understanding what "alternative hip-hop" means or sounds like at all. But there seems to be consensus on "Alternative rock" so let's just add that. Friginator (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Disagree on the alternative rock as this is clearly an electronic album with less rock influence. Standing by the aforementioned that includes the words ambient or experimental. Electronica is good too, but not very descriptive. Alt rock is a bit more accurate than alt hip hop though (which, let me add, it clearly is not and is inaccurate to brand it as such), so I can't complain as much, can I? --67.248.1.244 (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * How about "experimental"? The only track that seems heavily hip-hop influenced is "Shytown" to me...isn't it fair to say that with the iPad-of-it-all this whole thing was just an experiment anyway? Sooooo what about "experimental" as a genre? Because I really agree with Officially Mr X, I can barely hear a drop of hip-hop in this thing, and it was so obviously an experiment...--mikomango (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * This album is clearly experimental rock/experimental house or ambient house in my mind.


 * There's nothing experimental about the music, just the brand of device it was originally recorded on. No one had used that technology before, but there's nothing about the sound that breaks any new ground. Apparently people are expecting Jay Z or something when the term "alternative hip hop" is used, but that's not what it means. The relevant issue is whether the genre listed in the infobox meets the description. This album meets that description. This album could be classified using either of the terms used. Friginator (talk) 00:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Friginator's disagreement. "Experimental rock" implies a relationship to prog rock, which this album does not have. Just because this album is largely electronic does not mean that it is "house" music either; house is a specific style of electronic music, unrelated to the music on this album. And finally, "ambient" is an easily misused term and again doesn't really apply here. Honestly, the most appropriate genre for this album, in terms of Wikipedia categorisation, would simply be electronic (or "electronica" if you are so inclined); as well as pop, and perhaps alternative hip-hop (hip-hop music without rap lyrics); all three of Gorillaz previous albums were easily put into these categorisations, and this album continues with this mix of sounds, albeit with a more stripped-down, electronic sound (less hip-hop, less rock, fewer pop vocals) -- and for this reason, I think the very general electronic categorisation is most appropriate. And yes I am aware that some tracks contain acoustic guitar and other non-electronic elements, but that is the nature of Gorillaz wide range of sound sources, influences, etc. I hope this all makes sense. PEACE -220.245.253.81 (talk) 03:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * This album has none of the signs of hip hop music; there is no rap, no djing, no scratching, very limited sampling, no beatboxing. Jay Z is more alternative hip hop than this is... and Jay Z is most definitely not alt hip hop. I support the electronic music term along with the ambient house and experimental terms. Experimental rock has nothing to do with prog rock. This most definitely does have the nontraditional musical instruments of experimental rock and I'm not so sure most of these songs even follow a typical pop V-C-V-C-V-C-C structure. Many of these songs do have a 4 on the floor beat and the mysterious vocal samples and most definitely strange synth pads according to the ambient house definition. --67.248.1.244 (talk) 08:54, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Friginator has definitely lost any sort of credibility by even considering Techno as a genre. Seriously, read up on that instead of using terms without knowing about them. As for this, just call it Experimental Electronic and let it rest. 84.57.53.156 (talk) 11:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC) Funky Tim


 * This entire discussion has clearly devolved into a 'my opinion is better then yours' simply because labeling a genre on a bands Wikipedia article has to be one of the most stressful discussions I've come across so far in my time here. Frankly I believe that this argument will never come to a conclusion and I will not even stress my own opinion on what the genre of the band is for that reason. I am here to state that you guys should try to keep it friendly and keep it clean as you discuss this further and at least try to come to a point where both parties will end up happy. I have no authority obviously to tell you to do this but am simply asking you do it for the good of this talk page. User:Dobat Dobat the Hobbat 12:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that. It's clear at this point that no consensus is ever going to be reached. No one seemed to have much of a problem with "Alternative rock", so let's just leave it at that and move on. The article is in need of improvement, but the infobox genre shouldn't be this important to people. It's certainly not this important to the quality of the article. No article is going to fail GA or FA criteria because of the genre. It's not an important issue. The article is protected for now (and judging from some of the comments here, I'd say that's a good thing), but when it's unprotected can we just work on something constructive that isn't going to be controversial with people? Friginator (talk) 17:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with Experimental, Electronica. Alt rock and alt hip hop are terribly inaccurate, and while Experimental and Electronica aren't very descriptive, at least they're remotely accurate. --67.248.1.244 (talk) 17:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I have put the genre down as Experimental rock, electronica for now. If you feel I haven't summarised the overall consensus enough with this then we can consider changing it again. Officially Mr X (talk) 17:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please, just leave it like it is. I'm sick of this. Friginator (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's going to stop this, electronica works. Let's just keep that.
 * It's not really a "consensus" if you just make it whatever you feel like and undo the previous change, Friginator. You are lowering the quality of this website. At least you removed alt hip hop, thanks for that. I second what the previous comment says. Just electronica works fine. --67.248.1.244 (talk) 18:10, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Erm, back to alt hip hop I guess? Wow. Wasn't exactly alt rock like you had put before Friginator, but now that someone removed your second inappropriate genre tag you felt it fit to enforce the original inaccurate one? Sigh, I've given up on this page. --67.248.1.244 (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)