Talk:Cocteau Twins

Old peer review

I kept most things from the old article intact, only removed the 'year in music' links.. I thought they really cluttered the text up, while every 'year' article has links to 'year in music' in it. - Jashiin — Preceding undated comment added 13:31, 10 October 2004 (UTC)

My Bloody Valentine influenced by CT?

Do My Bloody Valentine say they were influenced by the Cocteau Twins or is that just the opinion of the editor? I find it hard to credit because for all that the Cocteau Twins are a great band, MBV so are not influenced by them that it hurts. I'm not even going to start on whether they are "shoegazers".Dr Zen 05:29, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• • I agree that this statement should be removed until a specific quotation by Shields can be found. Still, the Twins can be seen as prototypical of shoegazing, and Guthrie went on to produce two recordings by Lush.

• • • Thanks for your comment. Prototypical? Hmmm. Precursors, maybe. The family connection is there. But I'm not sure about MBV as shoegazers. Lush, only their early stuff. They became much more pop as they chased fame. Dr Zen 06:13, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're so reluctant to admit CT influence on MBV - because, well, while Loveless certainly doesn't sound anything like CT and relies on different things, MBV's Isn't Anything and their earlier recordings have shoegazing/CT influence everywhere around. CT had a number of 'rough' songs/EPs (the 1985 Aikea-Guinea EP, for instance) that, when compared to MBV's songs like Cupid Come or Sundaysundaesmile, show lots of similarities.. well, only in my eyes maybe? Anyway, while I haven't found any direct evidence in Shields'/MBV interviews, Shields still talks about CT and admits he likes them (lists CT as one of his favorite bands 1 while commenting about song lyrics), and that his approach is the same:

Interviewer: Geez, wouldn't it have been quicker just to hook up a CryBaby? If you're Kevin Shields, probably not. There's more than a touch of the Cocteau Twins' Robin Guthrie in Kevin's studio obsessiveness. "In attitude toward sound, yes," Kev allows. "But not in approach." (...) I think Robin Guthrie is quite good, by the way 2

So.. I think the notice should stay there, given the general similarities of style (which are inpenetrable guitar riffs, use of effects as instruments, experimentation with traditional structure and indecipherable vocals), and that CT were actual precursors to the whole shoegazing movement. -- Jashiin 09:06, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You've just given a quote yourself that says exactly that "in attitude to sound" Shields shared characteristics with Guthrie, but not "in approach"! IOW, they liked to fiddle in the studio but made different music. "I think he's quite good" does not mean "I was influenced by him"!Dr Zen 22:53, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Uh.. "there's more than a touch of Robin Guthrie - in attitude towards sound, yes (there is more than Robin Guthrie here), .. but not in approach (ie here its not more than him, its the same)." At least thats the way I read it. Maybe my English isn't good enough, okay, but what about all the other things I wrote? I still maintain it that if you compare early MBV songs and CT of early 80s, you get lots of similarities. -- Jashiin 08:39, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If you listen to the Cocteau Twins EP Aikea-Guinea, dated from 1985, you will find in "Rocococ," the instrumental track which closes the EP, the entire blueprint for the sound of Loveless, which wouldn't come out until 1991.

Sampled live drums, sequenced parts, the combination of delay and pitch bending, complex vocal melodies and unintelligible lyrics are just some of the similarities between the Cocteau's Treasure and MBV's Loveless. Of course Kevin Shields would never admit to such an influence...

62.77.181.13 (talk) 12:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Victorialand stub

FYI: Created and heavily stubbed the Victorialand page, you may want to check/add. ←^#6  _talk 19:33, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The current photo

I heavily doubt that this promotional picture can be offered under the GFDL. Can someone vouch that the photographer has released it to Wikipedia? Crculver 02:56, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Drum Machines, Tapes and Rhythms

This page desperately needs to mention that the Cocteau twins were pioneering in their usage of drum machines and backing tapes. They actually used a four track system on the road to create 'that' sound. Also Guthrie was one of the first people to use the Ebow and made popular the use of the Fender Jaguar and Fender Jazzmaster guitars. If I can find sources I'll add this info. ----

You might also want go back and listen to some Bill Nelson and Be-Bop Deluxe. "One of the first people" - jeez....you kids....

"The"

The band is "Cocteau Twins," not "The Cocteau Twins" (cf. the official site). However, the members of the band collectively seem to be referred to as "The Coctau Twins." Please keep this in mind when editing. Intelligence3 15:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Weren't they "members of Cocteau Twins" instead? --tranquileye (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

ELIZABETH FRASER'S NEW ALBUM SPRING 2007

When I heard that Elizabeth Fraser was FINALLY producing something new, I honestly couldn't contain my exitement. That exitement was short-lived. Disappointing is not a good enough word to describe my feelings for this lame mid-90's-sounding-background-rave-club-can only enjoy if you are tripping on X-waste of time. The new track "Underwater" not only sucks so bad I want to cry, but it droans on tauntingly for over 9 minutes. I never write on these forums but I just couldn't contain myself. Do any other devout Cocteau Twins/Elizabeth Fraser fans feel similar? I just have to know. I just can't believe that I have waited ten years to hear this crap!!! Elizabeth, please, if you can't produce something tolerable, preserve your memory and hang it up (and I was willing to forget about the bizarre, in a bad way, rendition of "Frosty the Snowman").76.18.51.254 12:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC) K —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.18.51.254 (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

This is not a fan forum. --tranquileye (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Podcast not from band?

Is there any indication that the podcast mentioned at the end of the article is actually from the band? It seems to be a fan-generated project. --tranquileye (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Dreampop?

I never heard that term before. From 1982 til 1983, the Cocteau Twins played Goth/Post-punk in the veins of Joy Division and Siouxsie & The Banshees. „Garlands“, „Lullabies“ und „Peppermint Pig“ are Goth works par excellence. From 1983 til 1985 the band created a more 'ethereal' sound that was a strong influence on the later Ethereal movement, a part of the Darkwave culture, with bands such as This Ascension, Lycia, Love Spirals Downwards and other groups. In 1986, Victorialand was released. With Victorialand, the band started a new style... pop-oriented and catchy (Dreampop?). They never returned to their dark, goth-like Ethereal style. And all the sinister guitar sounds and The-Cure-like bass guitar lines disappeared. --Ada Kataki (talk) 01:08, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Cocteau Twins were certainly known as a dreampop band in the later eighties, and also as shoegazers. "Dreampop" doesn't mean pop orientated, it means music that is more abstract and dream-like than mainstream pop - I'd cite Tiny Dynamine or Blue Bell Knoll as examples. I disagree that they became more "straight" pop orientated with Victorialand - that happened later from "Heaven or Las Vegas" onwards.Burtonales (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Dreampop wasn't even used in the later 80s, except for A.R. Kane. I removed shoegaze from the infobox. Nobody called the Cocteau Twins "shoegazing" back in the '80s or early '90s. They're possibly a forerunner of the genre, but not a part of it. This revisionist shit has to stop.

Release Dates

I've added release dates, however I have a couple of conflicts. I haven't amended the details on the main page, but I have "Garlands" listed as released May 1982, not September; "Head over Heels" as September 1983, not October; and "Heaven or Las Vegas" as 17 September 1990, not August 28 (I have that as the release of the single "Iceblink Luck" which I'm sure was a few weeks before. Any verification would be welcome! Burtonales (talk) 13:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Complex?

"known for complex instrumentation"

Really? Where is this referenced from? Quite frankly, their instrumentation can be quite rudimentary, with simply a drum machine and a guitar. "Complex instrumentation" would imply multiple musicians and more than several instruments, such as a classical music group.

Deepcloud (talk) 07:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Down with the complex!

-Daniel

Genre wars

We need to simplify and reference the genre field in the infobox. Any takers? --John (talk) 19:39, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yup, me too. The genre field is not meant to list out years and stuff. I'm reverting it.—indopug (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I would have preferred to discuss this for a bit before getting right back to reverting. Anyhow, was the genre information incorrect? It's obviously more conventional to only have a list, but assuming that that sub-sectioning by years was verifiable, I'd found it preferable. The infobox is empty enough to so that it doesn't, in my opinion, clutter it. Amalthea 18:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

The genre field has now been expanded a bit, I'd very much appreciate if we could discuss this here and people would hold off reverting for a while. Amalthea 14:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I've protected the article now for a week. Let's come to some kind of agreement until then. Amalthea 18:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

If the band were so obviously "Gothic rock", then why is the only place that is mentioned in the infobox? Ditto on "Ethereal wave," whatever that is. Instead of just mentioning these genres in the infobox and then edit-waring over them there, shouldn't there be some content about these genres added to the body of the article, before they get added to the infobox? -- Foetusized (talk) 16:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

As you say, that might be a shortcoming of the article. Also, ethereal wave was already in it, the additional ones are gothic rock and ambient music. Albums Garlands, Head over Heels, Treasure, Lullabies, Peppermint Pig, Sunburst and Snowblind name gothic rock among their genres, while album Victorialand names ambient. Amalthea 17:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The ethereal wave article seems pretty light, and includes an undiscussed proposal that it merge with dream pop. The fact that it was already in this article doesn't mean it needs to stick around. Including The Cocteau Twins in a marginal article like ethereal wave seems more important to the folks trying to make the case for the "genre" than mentioning it in this article helps define the music of The Cocteau Twins. I think that when I first started editing this article it just had dream pop in the infobox.

The article lede states "the Cocteau Twins tended to defy concise categorisation, and their music was a key influence on dream pop." I guess this whole disagreement stems from this defiance. Personally, I'd say that only their first album, with the clattering drum machine sound, would somehow fit under "goff"; by Treasure their music had changed to something different. I do think that trying to set date ranges to when they were producing music of different genres is problematic.

I'd be fine with just the general post punk and the specific dream pop in the infobox. -- Foetusized (talk) 20:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I want to state that my last revert on the article was an error and that I was about to self-revert when the IP beat me to it. Having said that, I tend to agree with Foetusized's points above. Genres are a very tricky field; I think we should definitely have a well-referenced mention in article text before it goes in the infobox. --John (talk) 01:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The Ethereal article has been manipulated by Wesley Dodds (it's not the first time). The size of the article has nothing to do with reliability. Ethereal is only a small genre, a kind of Dark Wave music that blends the darkness of early Gothic Rock with ethereal vocals and space guitars (reverb, echo, delay) in connection with deep & dark bass guitar lines (typical for Goth). Try this. The guitar sound is too dark for Dreampop. Dreampop is light pop + space guitars. Compare it with Cocteau Twins' „Victorialand“ era. Their early tracks, such „Five Ten Fiftyfold“ or „The Spangle Maker“ (listen to their bass guitar!!!), are much darker than their later tracks. Use headphones!

Cocteau Twins' Goth era:

• Perhaps Some Other Aeon (Goth guitar + Goth bass)
• Grail Overfloweth (Goth guitar + Goth bass)
• But I'm Not (Goth guitar + Goth bass)

Cocteau Twins' Ethereal era:

• Five Ten Fiftyfold (Ethereal guitar + Goth bass)
• Pink Orange Red (Goth bass lines in the veins of Cure & Siouxsie)
• Great Spangled Fritillary (Ethereal guitar, Goth guitar and Goth bass (@ 02:55), later used by groups such as Lycia)

Cocteau Twins' Ethereal/Dreampop era (started in 1984/85):

• Ribbed and Veined (a really interesting track: the first guitar ist typical for Dreampop and Ethereal, the second guitar @ 00:43 is typical for Ethereal and Goth, and the bass guitar line is typical for Goth)

Cocteau Twins' Dreampop era:

• Heaven or Las Vegas (it's light and dreamy, and more alternative pop music)
• Evangeline (here the same, it's like summer day surf music)
• Bluebeard (typical Pop... Dreampop with a twangy surf guitar sound)

Dreampop and Ethereal Dark Wave are definitely different genres. Ethereal has been strongly influenced by Goth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.134.28.99 (talk) 17:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

That's all way too complicated and specific. Per the template instructions at Template:Infobox_musical_artist we are supposed to "Aim for generality (e.g. Hip hop rather than East Coast hip hop)."

I stand by my contention that post-punk and dream pop are probably enough, without delving into all this detail -- Foetusized (talk) 02:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

East Coast Hip Hop is Hip Hop. But Ethereal or Goth is not Dreampop. WTF is the problem with 4 genre terms in the infobox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.134.26.123 (talk) 11:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Ethereal Wave and Goth are both part of post-punk. My problem with them in the infobox is that they still are not mentioned in the band's article. Add some content to the article about CT's relationship with these sub-genres (something cited, and not like the original research posted above), and I'd have much less of a problem with them. As the rest of the article now stands, they really ought to be removed -- Foetusized (talk) 03:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Ethereal is not a part of Post-Punk. It's an Goth outgrowth. It's "Post-Post-Punk". Furthermore the band article contains their influences: Joy Division, The Birthday Party and Siouxsie & The Banshees. All three groups were originators of the Gothrock movement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.134.4.174 (talk) 17:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

There's a difference in their music being influenced by Goth and being Goth. Why are you so resistant to the suggestion that perhaps some content about Goth be added to the article? -- Foetusized (talk) 01:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Cocteau.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Cocteau.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:CocteauTwins11.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:CocteauTwins11.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:CocteauTwins11.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cocteau Twins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080510153407/http://www.4ad.com/cocteautwins/ to http://www.4ad.com/cocteautwins/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110805112700/http://www.strangewaysradio.com/ to http://www.strangewaysradio.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cocteau Twins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130614224153/http://www2.qawards.co.uk/2008/2008/10/cocteaus_an_inspiration.html to http://www2.qawards.co.uk/2008/2008/10/cocteaus_an_inspiration.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Contextual significance of audio listening samples

All non-free listening examples must have a description of what is being heard, per WP:NFCCP rule number 8. Right now, the article has a sample of "Spangle Maker" but it does not satisfy the rule with just a name of the song. It needs "contextual significance", usually satisfied by telling the reader what to listen for in the way of musical style or instrumentation or production. Binksternet (talk) 13:26, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Elizabeth Fraser, Cocteau Twins.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

2020-2022 Updates

Robin Guthrie has released an album and three EPs in the past year -- I added those along with Another Flower by Robin and Harold Budd, and updated languages to reflect the new pieces. Cheers. Johnathanzen (talk) 02:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Adding Bass to Robin Guthrie's Roles

Would this edit be fine? Robin himself has stated that he's played bass when necessary, with Head over Heels and Sunburst & Snowblind being examples of such. WikiUser426 (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gorepixie (article contribs). Peer reviewers: KSimoneweb.

— Assignment last updated by WikiEdit7205 (talk) 19:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)