Talk:Machine Head (album)

Sources

Personnel, dates etc. from Album Cover. Alf 14:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

The reviews

Something is wrong with the "Q" review, the linked source in just a page trying to sell the album, and there's no reference to the Q magazine on that "source" page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MaxThonder (talk • contribs) 15:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Release Date

The release date is stated as May 1972 yet it reached number one in the UK on April 22 1972 [1]. Surely therefore it must have been released in the UK at least a month before.--Hammard (talk) 18:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Expansion

This album (to me) ranks easily alongside Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon and similar. I hope nobody minds, but I fancy expanding this article to GA or perhaps FA. Parrot of Doom 22:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It is one of my favorites - probably in my top 10. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

How did they come up with the title?

A machine head is the tuning peg on a guitar. How did the band decide to name the album? Can somebody write a little blurb about the title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.161.55.95 (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Rolling Stone Magazine Top 500 Albums

Why was this album not included in that list? Quite the mystery...A P Monblat (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Highway Star intro

It is possible that the intro was inspired by the one on The Doors' "LA Woman". Anyone else noticed it? Chapa1985 (talk) 17:47, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

No. Why are you going around musical articles and asking if song X is inspired by song Z ? [2] Mlpearc (open channel) 17:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Why? Because that way more people can find out about it. After all, there's a whole article on Led Zeppelin and the inspiration behind the songs, the original credit, whether it should change or not, etc. What's the problem? List of Led Zeppelin Chapa1985 (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Taped in a single day??

The infobox says "recording date: 21 December 1971". Now, the album was recorded fairly quickly and spontaneously, but surely not in less than 24 hours from start to finish? 83.254.159.179 (talk) 21:07, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Surely some mistake..

"The song was actually composed by Blackmore and Gillan at the start of the Fireball gigs on a bus travelling to Portsmouth Guild Hall, in response to a question from a member of the press as to how the band created their material."

This doesn't make any sense as it stands. The obvious remedy, to switch around the two parts of the sentence, seems to entail the introduction of the passive voice, viz: "In response to a question ... reply was made that the song was actually composed by" etc.

I invite editors to have a try. Harfarhs (talk) 23:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Machine Head (album)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 20:49, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• "at Montreux, Switzerland and" comma after Switz.

Done

• Is there a link for "gigging"?

There is, gig (music), but I'm wondering if this is a MOS:OVERLINK case

I don't think so. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I'll bung it in Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• "wanted a dedicated amount of time" -> "wanted dedicated time" or "wanted to dedicate time"

I like the second, so gone with that

• "block booked" hyphenate.

Done

• "the Grand Hotel, closed" link?

Done

• "a live room " what's that?

It's where a band sets up in a recording studio, to record a live performance, usually backing tracks before overdubbing. Linked to Recording studio#Layout which describes it

• "didn't" avoid contractions.

Done, and copyedited

• "to try and record" try to

As above

• "because it sounded better" presumably because he thought it sounded better? There's no absolute here.

Yes, to be precise he wanted to record the drums here, he wasn't ordered by the producer to do so. Copyedited to explain this.

• "The Casino was a large " small c here. Only cap when it's the formal name.

In this instance, I'm using Casino as shorthand for "Casino Montreux", however it's not consistent in the article, so changed

• "the Mothers of Invention" the appears to be part of the band name (but don't forget to keep it uncapitalised!)

Done

• "Thick black smoke drifted away, which rested on the shore of Lake Geneva" this is whimsical here without the immediate connection to Smoke on the Water, suggest it's mentioned at that point.

It looks like I meant to merge this, then forgot to remove this original

• "title "Smoke on the Water".."" overlinked.

Fixed

• "Ian Gillan, discussing" overlinked.

I think this is okay, because it's in a quote box and hence in a separate context, but if you can cite a passage of the MOS that says otherwise, I can change it.

• ""Ritchie Blackmore[16]" overlinked.

As above

• "residents flooded the" tone.

Done, also copyedited and trimmed down a bit

• What's a "recording van"?

In the specific case of the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, it's where the control room (mixing desk, tape equipment, onboard effects etc) was

• "Highway Star" was written..." could you say "The opening track" or similar?

Do you mean append that to the start of the paragraph? If so, done.

• "journalists, who could" don't think a comma needed.

Always happy to remove commas ... done

• "Bach's progressions" what are those?

I've removed "progressions". Specifically, I think the source is comparing "Highway Star"'s guitar solo (two rounds of arpeggios around Gm, Cm, F, D7, then two rounds of triplets on the relative scales) to The Well-Tempered Clavier, but that's kind of original research. Gerda is our resident Bach expert, but I don't think she's too au fait with Deep Purple.

• "Claude Nobs managed the..." needs a full stop.

Aha, WP:CAPFRAG. Done Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• "of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony" I'd rather see the symphony linked that Beethoven, but both if you insist on the latter.

Linked

• "didn't think" avoid contractions.

This is direct quotation, can we do that?

Not here: "... of rock music in general, the band didn't think the song ..." The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Got it. Tweaked. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• "with Black Sabbath in " overlinked.

Done

• "but using a " but with a

Done, sounds better

• "sat around" tone.

Tweaked

• theme is repetitive.

Taken out "this theme", the sentence still makes sense.

• ""To support it," promote it?

Done

• "began touring in January 1972" where?

I've removed this. As far as I can tell (looking at tour dates), the January '72 gigs (in the UK, Germany and the US) were rescheduled dates from 1971 and although fans suggest Machine Head tracks were first played then, it's not important to the layman reader

• ""Space Truckin'") were" overlinked.

Fixed

• "that the group stood in front of." > "in front of which the group stood."

Done, though I'm slightly confused as to what makes the latter more readable

• "hand printed" hyphenate.

Done

• "first single released" overlinked.

Done, must have been in there for ages and forgot to take it out

• "from music critics. Rolling " likewise.

Done

• "their speeding" what does this mean?

I guess it means playing quickly. You'll have to ask Robert Christgau, it's his quotation

Yeah, just wondered why it's in an encyclopedia if we don't know what it means. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• "Blackmore confirmed that the chord ..." you already said something along these lines above.

Removed

• Explain SACD before using the abbreviation.

Done

• "For also celebrating.." reads odd to me.

Fixed

• "Ritchie Blackmore, Ian Gillan, Roger Glover, Jon Lord and Ian Paice." all but Lord overlinked.

I think this is consistent with how writing credits in boxes are structured.

• "technician ,Rolling" presumably should be a new line/bullet.

I've fixed the space, but I think the idea is to list individual people and bundle their roles together

• Perhaps a couple of sentences about the accolades wouldn't go amiss.

Do you mean in the lead or in the latter part of the body?

In the latter part of the body and in the lead if you think it relevant. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

• Plenty of spaced hyphens should be spaced en-dashes in the refs.

Ran the script

• ISBN format consistency please.

Done

• You link Mojo but not Q. What's the method?

Are you sure about that? Q isn't linked below Mojo because it's already linked earlier in the list

• Refs 1 and 2 need to be filled out properly.

I haven't checked, but I'd bet money on an IP or inexperienced user adding those when I wasn't looking. I've pared it back to "Never Before" and "Smoke on the Water", as those are the important ones

• Ref 3 needs a space after the comma.

I'm not sure what "Ref 3" means (now I've reorganised some refs) but if it's page number formatting, fixed

• Why isn't ref 8 in the biblio? And 41? And 66?

As a general rule of thumb, I only put book refs as sfn if they appear more than once. I can still do this, if you want.

• Ref 11 needs en-dash.
• So does ref 17.

I ran the script, and hopefully it will work

• What makes robertchristgau.com a RS?

Per WP:SPS : "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications"; Robert Christgau is described (with a source) as "among the most revered and influential of music critics"

• And Wiki.pomus.net?

Nothing. Removed.

• Ref 80 isn't the Guardian. Is it a reliable mirror?

Replaced with the Guardian original

That's all I have, bet you wished you hadn't (had not) asked... On hold. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: As long as the encyclopedia is improved, I'm easy. Everything addressed, though a few points with further questions. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Few responses. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

The Rambling Man, Regarding the "accolades" section (AFAIK, the only significant issue left), I've dropped a couple of sentences in from the sources, added a sentence in the lead, which also covers the reissues, and shuffled some of the sections about a bit so they make more sense. However, I don't think there's really more that can be added, except possibly another quotation; it doesn't really give the casual reader much more information beyond what they can already tell ie: "lots of metallers like it". Any further thoughts? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:47, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm good with the article. It's definitely beyond the requirements of GA, so I'm happy to promote. I made a few late adjustments but nothing major. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Claims in the lead vs sourced content in main body

Right now the lead claims: "Machine Head is cited as a major influence in the early development of heavy metal music"; that it is "Deep Purple's most commercially successful album"; and it "stayed in the [UK] top 40 for 20 weeks" and remained "on the Billboard 200 for 118 weeks". None of this is supported in the article.

Most of the statements in the following sentences (under Critical reception) aren't supported either: The first single released from the album, "Never Before", reached number 35 in the UK and did not chart in the US. Prompted by heavy radio play of "Smoke on the Water" as an album cut, Warner Brothers eventually released it as a single in May 1973. The song became a hit in North America, reaching number two on the Canadian RPM chart and number four on the US Billboard Hot 100. The only source there is a Billboard chart history for Deep Purple's Hot 100 hits, which couldn't possibly support mention of what the album's first single was, its UK chart peak, or an initial non-charting in the US, nor for Warner's then issuing "Smoke" after heavy rotation on radio (and in a certain month), and its subsequent Canadian chart peak.

Apologies if I'm missing something – eg, regarding the "major influence in the early development of heavy metal" point – I only skimmed through the article up to Release. JG66 (talk) 14:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I've trimmed the lead down, I've never considered Deep Purple "metal" as the term didn't exist back then, or at least wasn't in common circulation. I'm surprised The Rambling Man didn't pick up on this in the GA review. I don't believe the chart positions are wrong (editors like Dan56 used to keep on top of this stuff), but I don't have any sources for them to hand. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Are you? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

The chart stuff was added by in Howenstein115 in this edit. Let's see what they have to say. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I can always re-open the GAN review if it's deemed unsatisfactory. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Release date

The given release date of 25 March is necessarily an error, as in 1972, this date was a Saturday. 31 March was a Friday, and the standard of the day was that UK albums were released on Fridays, with occasional exceptions on Mondays. The LP entered the charts in the UK and US on 15 April, which is to be expected if it was released 31 March. As the only source for 25 March is an online magazine, this appears to be a case of citogenesis Ray1983a (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

What is your source of information for this? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Reissues section

Says "A Blu-ray audio-only disc is also set to be reissued including Zappa's Atmos Mix, 1974 U.S. Quad, and 5.1 surround." I haven't found anything about it being released yet. Is anything known? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 21:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)