Talk:Roland TR-808/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 16:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Every now again, my watchlist flashes up a new article to review at WP:GAN where I think "ooh, I've got to do that one", and this is one of those. I can't see any immediate reason to quickfail this, so I'm happy to give this a full review. From the outset, however, I'm concerned that for such a groundbreaking instrument, the article may be a little short, though not by much. Also, I notice you're not using this source from Keyboard magazine (AFAIK), which is where I originally learned the basics of the '808. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks for this great source; in all my googling I didn't discover it (I think an earlier version of the article cited it but it didn't have an online source). Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

I was fortunate enough to have bought the original book some time back :-) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Lead

• introduced by the Roland Corporation in 1980 - are you sure it's "the" Roland Corporation?
  • No idea. To me it's much more natural, and sources including Sound on Sound refer to it as such. On the other hand the official site doesn't. Happy to go with whatever you prefer, though if I were king of the universe I'd go with "the" and reflect what I suspect is its natural use by real human beings. Popcornduff (talk) 14:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Well if sources don't agree, I guess we can go with the status quo Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• The infobox says "MIDI in/out" - I think this is factually incorrect; the correct term on an 808 is DCB, although it's mostly forwards compatible with MIDI.
  •  Done Yeah, that's something left over from an old version I didn't think to question. Popcornduff (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• one of the most influential musical inventions of recent decades - I don't really like "recent decades". Can we say "one of the most influential inventions of popular music" or something like that? Also, I think the lead should mention its importance to dance music generally (as the body does)
  •  Done Though I had to delete "popular music" from the previous sentence to avoid repetition... Popcornduff (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Development

• they were not programmable and offered only preset patterns, typically bossa nova rhythms - this claim does not appear to be in the source given
  • The bossa nova thing was there, but I've shuffled the cites around in this sentence to hopefully make it a bit clearer. Popcornduff (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• creating his own rhythms and wiring the device through his organ's expression pedal to accent the percussion - the source also mentions that nobody else was doing this at the time, which may be worth dropping in
  •  Done Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• hired Lewis to help design the first programmable drum machine, the CompuRhythm CR-68, launched in 1978 - isn't the CR-68 just a cut-down version of the CR-78, released at the same time and much better known (not least by Phil Collins).
  •  Done Yep, fixed. Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Design and sounds

• The Keyboard Magazine source I mentioned earlier goes into some depth about the user interface design of the 808 and why the front panel was designed the way it was. I think this would be useful to include
  •  Done Though I haven't incorporated the information about "step programming" as I'm not sure exactly what it means or why it was different from the CR-78. (Note that I haven't used physical versions of either machine, so feel free to clarify here...) Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• The machine is particularly noted for its powerful bass drum sound, built from a combination of a bridged T-network sine oscillator, a low-pass filter, and a voltage-controlled amplifier - I can't get the archived copy of the Sound on Sound source here to load (though none of the information looks obviously wrong)
  • Works for me... maybe just a hiccup? Popcornduff (talk) 14:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Probably Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Impact and legacy

• It was first used by the Japanese electronic group Yellow Magic Orchestra, on their 1980 track "1000 Knives" - minor nitpick but the source mentions the band but not the song
  • Annoyingly, I can't find a reliable source that mentions both facts, even though it seems to be the perceived wisdom. Unless you have any other ideas I'm inclined to just remove this. Popcornduff (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
    • @Ritchie333: Any thoughts about what to do here? Just delete? Popcornduff (talk) 12:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

No, I found another source that had it, and added that. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• Gaye was drawn to the instrument as he could use it to create music without other musicians or producers - it was a bit more than that, he'd fled just about everything and holed in Belgium of all places in complete isolation, and that's why the 808 appealed as he could do everything himself.
  • I'm aware of the full story, but I'm not sure this article is the place to discuss Gaye's emotional problems or explain why he wanted to work alone, only that the 808 meant he could. Having said that I won't object if you think it's worth including. Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• and popularized the 808 as a tool of "futuristic" sounds - the source goes a little further, it says it's "a fundamental element of futuristic sound"
  •  Done Popcornduff (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• I can't get the openculture.com source to load, and what makes it a reliable source in the first place?
  •  Done Yeah, looks dead. Replaced with BBC source. Popcornduff (talk) 14:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• Nine Inch Nails used the 808 to create "doomy menace" on the single "Closer", making the sound ubiquitous on North American alternative rock radio stations - this doesn't appear to be in the source given
  • It's there: " The 808 sound hits saturation levels on alternative-rock radio stations in North America when Nine Inch Nails main man Trent Reznor exploits its potential for doomy menace on the industrial-strength hit Closer." Popcornduff (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah okay, if the rewriting of the source text isn't obvious I tend to ask to be on the safe side Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

• A picture of Kayne West would be useful in this section, given his own article has a picture of the 808. File:Kanye West in the Studio.jpg could be used, though there isn't an 808 in shot.
  • Nice idea.  Done Popcornduff (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
• The 808 continues to be used in popular music and samples of its sounds are common in modern music software. - sourced, but I can't help thinking that (AFAIK) Logic Pro X does not appear to have a stock 808 emulator (as in something with an absolutely identical UI to the original machine, similar in concept to Logic's Hammond organ emulation which is brilliant), that this isn't quite true.
  • I don't understand. 1) Why would a single DAW not coming with 808 samples mean they're not common generally in modern software? 2) Why do you need it to have a full 808-style UI? That's not what the source is talking about. Popcornduff (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

It's more a discussion point than anything else. As you say, you have a good source that states the general fact, and I think that will do. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Summary

This is a well-written, interesting and (mostly) factually accurate article, and once the above comments have been addressed, I think this will meet the GA criteria. I'll put the review on hold now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for this amazingly quick and thorough review. (You've done this before, haven't you?) I'm a little tight for time over the next few days, but I'll start addressing your concerns sometime in the next week. I look forward to it! Popcornduff (talk) 14:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, I've responded to your points as best I can right now. Let me know what you think or if I missed anything. Thanks again for your feedback so far. Popcornduff (talk) 16:54, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe I spoke too soon - I keep spotting things in the article I thought I'd changed; I seem to have lost some edits somewhere, possibly via a browser fart or connection drop or something. It's late now so I'll double-check it all tomorrow. Popcornduff (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: OK, I might have missed something, but I think everything's in place now. Popcornduff (talk) 12:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I think everything's done, so I'm going to pass the review now. Well done. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Bitchin'. And thanks again for your work. Popcornduff (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)