Talk:Coheed and Cambria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Band Members Leaving

According to the fansite Cobalt and Calcium, in a statement from Claudio Sanchez, Mic and Josh have left Coheed and Cambria. They also announced replacements, but I'm not sure if they're permanent. I noticed that Mic's and Josh's articles have been edited to reflect this, but not Coheed's article. Someone might want to give it a look.

Apparently its been changed now. Does anyone know why Mic and Josh's names don't show up on the page under former members? The information is in the editing page but it doesn't appear in the article. flame_iv 02:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gear

I really don't know why this has been put on this page. It reffers to the gear of each individual member, not the gear of Coheed. I think it's only bee put there to pad out the article. In addition, this lists has been blatently taken from Cobalt & Calcium. IT's not even been edited, just copied and pasted, complete with informalities; "I still need to 100%-verify the EMG models". I think this information should be sorted then moved to the appropiate article (ie. Claudio Sanchez's gear in the Claudio Sanchez article). Any takers? Neverender 899 22:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC) --> Removed it anyway. Pointless it being there. Neverender 899 00:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Todd

I got hints on Coheed and Cambria's MySpace that Michael Todd ("Mic") has left the band. I could be simply misinterpreting this, or this could be a false rumor... Can someone confirm or unconfirm this for me? --- Xephyrwing 18:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

-->There are lots of rumours about Mic & Josh leaving the band. None of them have been confirmed, so we can only presume them to be false. Neverender 899 22:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


Well the Josh was apparently 'sick' and Mic had 'private problems' according to sanchez butr ive heard two different stories. For instance, in Kerrang he stated that they'd left for good, but in 'Big Cheese' he said they'd be back by the end of the year, so who knows...

I havent heard anything about Mic todd and josh eppard leaving, but i do think that until its officially released by coheed that there are new members or members ahve left, the members list should include Josh Eppard and Mic Todd. also, i think that if they have left and two new people have replaced them, that should be explained, because when i got onto this page and looked at the members i didnt know what the hell was going on. i dont know how to change band member names yet, so if someone could do that ty.--Late Leo 05:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

nevermind found out how to change it.--Late Leo 05:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tetralogy...

It's not a tetralogy, it's a pentalogy:

  • The Bag Online Adventures (Not yet released)
  • Second Stage Turbine Blade
  • In Keeping Secrets Of Silent Earth: 3
  • Good Apollo... Vol. 1
  • Good Apollo... Vol. 2 (Not yet released)

there are five albums, not four. i am going to change the page accordingly.

-->The thing is both Good Apollo's have the base "Good Apollo, I'm Burning Star IV". And so little events actually progress in the central concept to call it a separate part seems a bit weird. It mainly dealt with a metaphor for Sanchez's life and why he's putting the story in this direction. But I guess this point is debatable.

I myself would say that it is a quadrilogy because Good Apollo I'm Burning Star IV is one part broke into two.-Leandreamo

--> I disagree totally. If they had decided to call God Apollo... Vol 2 by a divverent name altogether it would make this a "Pentology" no? Likewise if they had released the whole story over 3 albums we would all call it a trillogy. This needs to be taken at face value - 5 albums = "pentology". -Blackout8

--> I agree with Blackout8. Five albums make a pentalogy, it doesn't matter if two of the albums have "Good Apollo.." at the beginning of their name. -Iamthecockatoo --> Five albums doesn't make the STORY anything. The it is definitely a quad... simply that one of part is split. It doesn't make it move in 5 parts. QUAD!!!

[edit] Velorium Camper

Where later he crashes his ship "The Velorium Camper" into a space colony.

The bulleted list is supposed to be information that is verified, either directly in the albums or from Claudio himself. Can this claim be confirmed? I've never heard it before. - [[User:Defunkt|Defunkt (talk)]] 06:51, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC) Quadrilogy isn't a word.

[edit] Vandalism

Recently someone removed a link from External Links that led to a fansite that "competes" with the other fansite listed. I beleive it was intentional and re-added the link. - Devin

I have since verified that it was the owner of the other site, Brian. IP is 68.227.40.35. To be clear I think it is fair that I mention I am one of the owners of the site that was deleted. - Devin

This has happened yet again, same person. Is there anything that can be done about this? Horsman 19:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Someone is removing the Last.fm link in the profile page. The page is a link to their Last.fm profile, which is generated by people listening to their songs. The charts are sort of a user submited chart of their most popular songs, with other user submitted content. Who ever is removing this, please state a proper reason for doing so. --Matthew McCullough 03:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a link farm. We don't supply exhaustive sets of links (see Wikipedia:External links. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Granted that Wikipedia isn't a 'link farm', but it is pathetic that Brian from the Cobalt and Calcium fansite is trying to harm our own Severed Ties fansite. All fans should be given equal opportunities and we are not attempting to 'compete' with anyone. Also, the Last.fm charts are a useful tool for people to check whether they would like a particular band or not (in this case, Coheed). Steb2424 21:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC+1)

[edit] Split

I think that the Co&Ca Story section of this page should be spun off into a separate article. There's a lot of information in it and people searching for information on just the band will probably be a little disappointed to see only a paragraph about that and a whole lot about the story. Splitting the pages will let this page evolve and contain a lot more information on the band, while the other page will continue with the story. We should still have a little paragraph about the story on here and a link to the new big page, I think. Anybody agree? Cookiecaper 04:17, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree, the story should have its own article (what would the title be though?) I also think the articles Paris Earth and Coheed and Cambria Killgannon should be merged with the story article, I don't think they need thier own pages. [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 04:28, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hmmm...I think separate pages are good for those two. Somebody could hear or see somebody talk about Paris Earth and come look that up. Maybe it'd be better if they were redirects. But I think they're nice as separate, it's easier to find specific information that way and some good stuff would happen. Probably. But anyway, I'm glad you agree about making a new page for the story section. One or two more agreements and no objections and then I'll split 'em, see. Cookiecaper 04:43, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hi. The story section should definitely be its own article, and I've given this some thought: I think the story section would fit best into a Bag On Line Adventures or Coheed and Cambria (comics) page. While the story is the focus of many of the band's songs, the comic has had thousands sold (therefor notable) and most of the major plot details come from it. I actually vote for Bag On Line Adventures being made into an entry and eventually expanded beyond the story information present. When that dust has all settled, a simple paragraph summarizing the story and linking to the big story page, as Cookiecaper suggested, is a great idea. If you guys want, I'll do all this. Lemmmmmme know. - [[User:Defunkt|Defunkt (talk)]] 07:19, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I think Paris Earth and Coheed and Cambria Killgannon should be redirects. They're not notable enough in and of themselves (at least, as of now... ) [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 14:50, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Agreed. - [[User:Defunkt|Defunkt (talk)]] 18:29, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Okay, I've done the split. The Coheed and Cambria section of the story will now be found at Bag On Line Adventures. Coheed and Cambria Killgannon and Paris Earth have been modified to redirect to that page, as well as some other things. Does this work out okay for everyone? Cookiecaper 04:53, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Love it, thanks man. Nice work. - [[User:Defunkt|Defunkt (talk)]] 06:39, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Relative information that needs to be added is on <a href="http://www.hai2u.com/">the official coheed bandpagea>

[edit] comic vs album

I was wondering if the comic(s) should have separate articles from the corresponding album(s). The Second Stage Turbine Blade is the current link for both the record and the comic, but the article only talks about the album. Is there any real difference between the story in the comic and the one on the album? Or should the info on the comic be included in the album article? (And now I must admit that I don't listen to C&C, but for some reason these articles intrigue me. I just downloaded a few songs, and these guys are great. I'm expanding my musical horizons thanks to a Wiki article, how big of a nerd does that make me? :) ) [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 15:10, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The SSTB article should have one of those indented italics at the top explaining a comic of the same name exists and giving a link to The Second Stage Turbine Blade (comics). My reasoning for this is that the SSTB comic is named so because of the first track on the album, not the album itself. There are probably going to be about six or seven comics covering the SSTB album (all with mountains of information not available in the band's lyrics) so it would make sense to give each comic its own page with a synopsis of and link to each on The Bag On Line Adventures. Character descriptions would fit on the Bag On Line page, too. With all these changes taking place, I'm going to write more about the overall story, the character descriptions, and more about the SSTB comic in the very near future. There is still a lot of information that can be put down and the more we expand these pages, the more accessible and better presented it will be. Co&Ca is the best band that has ever existed so any questions about them, their songs, or their story I am fairly confident I can answer. And you're not a nerd, you're modern. That is all. - [[User:Defunkt|Defunkt (talk)]] 20:08, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] albums

Ok, so is the set of albums considered a 'tetralogy' or a 'quadrilogy'? Both terms are used somewhere in the band/album articles. I think this should be cleared up... Lachatdelarue (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] title of the next album...

The correct title for the next album is Good Apollo, I'll Be Burning Star IV Volume One: From Fear Through the Eyes of Madness.

For some reason it's listed as "From Fear Through the Eyes of Men". On the Starland Ballroom DVD released by the band, Claudio clearly says Madness. Just my thoughts.

I'm somewhat new here, so forgive me if my format's all wrong. This error is just bothering me.

[edit] Dates

There seems to be a little conflict going on over the release date GA:IBS4:V1FFTTEOM. What's the correct date and why do people keep changing it? Cookiecaper 7 July 2005 05:00 (UTC)

[edit] the third album

I put the article at Good Apollo I'm Burning Star IV Volume One: From Fear Through the Eyes of Madness. It's the closest to what the offical site flash-thing says. I discovered that there were two nearly-identical articles about the album, one with 'dear' in the title, the other with 'good', with varying punctuation. I also found out that we CAN NOT MOVE those articles. It kept giving me a 'source title is same as destination title' blah blah, even though they were different. I think the title is too long for the wiki-software to handle a page move with. So, once the album is released, if we find that a different article title is more correct, a new article will have to be created there. Also, if anyone thinks the article should be 'moved' again, I think we should discuss it first, so as not to create too many redirects. Lachatdelarue (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

yeah, idk. i guess one page was there, and some guy thinks it isnt, and makes another one, so yeah. a similar event happened to me with the page on the revolutionary war. i'd got to one of the pages, and the text would be in one form, and throguh links, i got to the other, with synonyms used often for words on the original. it was a little odd also, as, at the end of one of the paragraphs was the out of context sentence; "rob vela rocks." i have no idea who rob vela is, and quite frnkly, i dont care.

[edit] The Shabutie EP Base

"Shabutie did release an EP that can serve as the first part of the tetralogy, and until an album is released that fills this void in the sequence, the album will serve as the base of the story." Could someone specify which of Shabutie's EP's this is referring to? --Josh, September 20, 2005, 8:37 PM EST

-->He's probably referring to the Penelope EP. However, Sanchez has never said that this is in anyway connected with the concept. He may end up tying some of the ideas in, he may not, but the concept has changed so much since they recorded SSTB that I doubt it. In my personal opinion that comment about the EP should be removed. --Wes, October 17, 2005, 3:18 PM

You're probably right... I'm going to remove the part about the EP being the first part of the tetralogy. But I still think the EP should be mentioned. --Wikivader 22:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discography, external links, etc

the last edit cut out a LOT of info and it really detracts from the page. I'm putting it back unless someone can justify why deleting it is an improvement.

I found usefull information about the EP at < href="http://www.hai2u.com">www.emacular/interviews/eud%e/cambria.php </href> regarding the meaning behind songs and the album, and the initial strugle to make the ep. Lots of usefull stuff there.

[edit] Progressive Rock?

I know that they may like to call themselves progressive rock but any yoohoo knows that they progressive rock was born in and died in the seventies mainly and can be seen in such bands as "Pink Floyd" "Jethro Tull" "Rush" "Emerson Lake and Palmer" "Yes" "Moody Blues" and "Genesis," there was a neo-progressive movement in the 80s with band like Asia and the continuation by Pink Floyd but since then bands may incorporate progressive rock elements but they don't sound like any of the aforementioned bands, in no way shape or form does Coheed sound like any of the bands i just mentioned. Can we please just call them Alternative Rock or Modern rock? I'm not calling them emo or saying they don't deserve Progressive rock title its just music people know that's not what Progressive rock sounds like at all. - Patman2648 17:52 20 January 2006

It sounds a lot like prog rock to me, and it follows a storyline, another common characteristic of progressive rock. I consider it prog rock, and everyone else I know or have talked to about this does as well, so I believe it is categorized appropriately. cookiecaper (talk / contribs) 13:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that the band does hold some characteristics of prog rock due to the fact of concept albums, extended songs and many of the topics of the songs are similar to Prog Rock but it probably is just a debatable topic of what is prog rock. Some believe it ended with the bands that start it, that direct sound of Yes and Jethro Tull is progressive rock, it has that distinct sound from the 70s. If you're a bit confused look at the prog rock page on wikipedia, it states "It should be noted that the term "progressive" in the early 1970s had been coined to emphasize the newness of these bands, but by the 1980s the term had become the name of a specific musical style. As a result, bands such as King Crimson which continued to update their sound were not always called "progressive", while some newer self-described "prog" bands purchased vintage mellotrons in order to recreate the sound of early 1970s prog. Fans and hostile critics alike had established "progressive rock" as the permanent name of this genre, and so the connection to the usual meaning of "progressive" became irrelevant." The info basically states that progressive rock defines an exact sound from the 70's and that modern day calling of bands progressive isn't technically correct unless they sound like the old 70's band which could be done by purchasing their old equipment and using most of their characteristics, coheed doesn't use old equipment nor does sound like that 70's prog rock. If people still want to call Coheed prog rock then I won't change the page because this is a concensus community but I just want to inform what might be wrong with that. - Patman2648 13:13 21 January 2006

I agree with the fact that Coheed shouldn't be called Progressive Rock, but to label them "pop" is a horrible injustice to their sound. Even something along the lines of prog-pop, or alternative rock, or neo-prog or something would be more accurate than just "pop".--Bouyeeze 05:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I classify them as progessive pop-punk, because that's basically what they are. Bands such as Dream Theatre are progressive, but it's in the form of metal. I see Coheed & Cambria as a progressive rock band, but the type of rock that they convey this through is pop-punk. Simply labeling them as pop/punk would be unfair, in my opinion, because I think they are too talented to be compared to Good Charlotte, Simple Plan, et. al. I would rather label them prog-rock over pop-punk, simply because I think the prog title suits them better, but I think "Progressive pop/punk" would classify their genre the best.--Greg 12:50, 5 February 2006

I think your all missing the point as music can't sound progressive it is called progressive cause it changes music and is a new genre of music and as i have new heard anything quite like coheed and cambria before although it does sound a little like screamo bands such as sounds like violence but with a more pop punk beat to it i would agree that it is progressive as it is very different and is pushing music in a new direction. a different Greg, 14 February 2006

The use of "progressive" might be debatable, but to include "pop punk" is insulting and inaccurate. Don't confuse "pop punk" ( defined as bands like A Simple Plan which have nothing in common with c&c) with he modern idea of "emo" or "screamo" (bands like my chemical romance or AFI, which do share some similarities). The band really eludes label, perhaps it would be better not to try and pin them down at all.

I agree with Greg|Greg as to me they do sound very much like pop/punk, but with progressive influences so I definatly wouldn't label them prog rock but progressive pop/punk. As with Dream Theater or Opeth, they are very much metal but also prog rock also earning them the label; Progressive Metal. Coheed and Cambria deserve the label Progressive Pop/Punk simply because that is what they are. Erm, I hope that makes sense. SamL, 18 February 2006.

Again, I must insist the use of pop punk in this case is the result of a confusion of genre definitions and an inaccurate label. C&C in fact have little to nothing in common musically with bands that are correctly considered pop punk, other than the fact that the vocals sometimes share a slighty "nasal" quality. People throwing these labels around loosely has resulted in greatly distorted perceptions of the definitions. This seems to be a very common problem now. Just use "rock band" if nobody can agree. :P 19 February 2006.

There is no way they should be put into the pop punk category. I agree with the progressive rock genre. But if anything it should be rock simply because they are a rock band. Anything with pop is selling them short they aren't pop. Myxomatosis 08:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This is not prog. I am also thoroughly disgusted with any comparison to Dream Theater. They are about as similar to Jay-Z as they are to Dream Theater. Just because they have concept albums does not make them progressive. My goodness, do you guys honestly think these jokers can play like Petrucci, Myung, Rudess, and Portnoy? This is a joke. Just call it emo and combine this with the fallout boy page.

After a lengthy consensus, with no clear genre decision, the main vote getters are Progressive Rock, Progressive Pop/Punk or just plain Rock but with distinct votes against Progressive Rock and Pop-Punk, it was wisely noted if no one can agree just to put Rock, I think to appease everyon it will be Rock that way there is little to debate about and everyone can agree that they are a rock band. Thank you everbody for expressing your voice and I hope other concensus discussions can be this productive, thanks again. --Patman2648 22:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

actually, i find them to have emo-like elements. by thaat i mean taht their guitar chords kind of have a mood to them. and the very lyrics to camper velorium II are "i wish i would never hurt again." now, i know that they follow a storyline, so i guess they are emo-prog. butthey are in no way pop or punk. they cant be pop because a local radio station (taht i hate passionately) that plays hit music has no idea that coheed and cambria even exists. and they are not punk because, punk is like the kids who absolutely hate the government in every way and are strongly anarchist, if not libertarian. also,i'd like to adress the fact that there has been no resurection of prog rock in the 2000's, yes, but isnt it possible that is what coheed and cambria is trying to start?--Late Leo 23:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

also, claudio sanchez has said that the best label for the band is prog, so i guess they are trying to bring back prog rock.--Late Leo 05:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The band have repeatedly stated that they should be labeled prog-rock is anything, so I'm going to change it. Horsman 05:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

As much as I love Coheed and prog rock, they arn't prog. They're an alternative rock band with some influence from progressice rock. --Ack44

honestly, they could be trying to bring back progressive rock. idk, maybe the correct label for them is modern prog. but they are by no means pop-punk, a label i find to be oxymoronic.--Late Leo 23:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I think they should be labeled Emo I have listen to some of there work and find that there vocals and style of guitar playing sound very Emo to me. And I have even hared a song of theirs that is indeed Emo so saying that they have Emo influences --ZASH 10:45, 9 April 2006 (Hawaii)

What song was it? All their songs tie into the concept and therefore are not emo.--Alawyshous 9:00 4/25/06

Just becuse a song has a concept has nothing to do with it being Emo. They play Emo music, the way the guy signs is Emo, they even fallow Emo fads. So get over trying to call them prog there Emo and thats all they will be.

and the song that you want proof of is welcome home Here is even part of it

You could've been all I wanted But you weren't honest Now get in the ground You choked off the surest of favors But if you really loved me You would've endured my world

--ZASH 4:22, 1 may 2006 (Hawaii) how is that emo? And what emo trends do they follow?

I'm trying to figure out why progressive? There is nothing progressive about them. It's modern pop/punk musically, however, the lyrics don't quite fit in with the modern punk. If you are going to classify them as prog, then I guess Dream Theater and Rush are not progressive. That's like saying "The Final Countdown" by Europe is progressive because of the lyrics. Musically they are 100% modern pop/punk. The lyrics are another story, but even the Misfits can say some profound things. When I hear progressive, I think about music that is going out on a limb, and at times technically superior. There is nothing of that in their music. They don't push the limit musically, and they surely don't try anything so technical you would have to be a very sound musician to play. High schoolers can play their music, with ease, so it doesn't fall under the technical aspect progressive rock, and they surely don't go out on a limb musically, as not one passage of music that they play is anything new or has a new sound to it. The only thing I can see about them being progressive, are the lyrics. I'm not certain that in itself puts them over the edge. Until they start pushing the edges of modern music, they won't be progressive. Calling your band progressive and actually moving modern music forward are two different things entirely.

I concur. Should people who think prog has been absent from the year 20-- (despite the existence of the Mars Volta, Porcupine Tree, Tool, APC, Oceansize, Pure Reason Revolution or dredg) really be weighing in with an opinion here? From what I've heard of this band, they sound nothing like a prog band, and I'm left wondering if they only claim to be because it prevents the press from bundling them in with emo bands that it shares certain elements with ('emo' lyrics, singing in a high pitched voice, 'chugging' guitars providing the background to high pitched guitar squeals). How representative of their style is 'Devil in Jersey City'? Because the similarities to the music of a lot the 'emo' bands out there are apparent. Emo or not, it certainly doesn't fit the profile of prog rock, and I'd hate to see Wikipedia taken in by a deliberate marketing ploy Philbradley 11:11, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I disagree... partially. Second Stage and In Keeping Secrets for the pretty much do not push any boundaries, with a few exceptions. Good Apollo, however, contains many progressive pieces, with non-progressive pieces here and there. Then again, I'm not exactly answering the question. I judge a band on what it currently is, not what it was. Given that their most recent album is IMO progessive, assuming that this album is characteristic of Co&Ca, it is a progessive band. 69.19.14.15 03:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

If you ask me, Beck and is far more progressive than Coheed-- he incorporates myriad influences that seemingly have nothing in common to create music that actually has a unique sound. ---SoFaRo

[edit] I might be wrong...

I'm no expert and don't know much about this band, but surely the following doesn't make sense:


"...Kelley left the stage and started packing up his drum set in front of a packed audience. Thus, on February 19, 2000, Shabütie’s original lineup, save Sanchez, was gone.

Kelley and the rest of the band chose current Coheed and Cambria drummer Josh Eppard, then of the band 3, to take his place."


If Kelley left the band then he wouldn't have been there to choose another drummer, especially as he was the drummer. Surely it should read "Sanchez and the rest of the band...". My apologies if I have missed something.

Don't apologize, if did miss something then it wasn't well explained. Which it wasn't. I don't know much either, but either that part is factually incorrect or it is poorly explained.

This information, taken from a blog by ex-drummer Kelley, is actually true. Kelley got angry at a show, packed his stuff and left...but he remained friends with the guys and helped them pick out a new drummer.

[edit] Just a thought...

Anyone thought that in the song, a Favor House Atlantic, is sung through the eyes of Chase? Seeing she is a power IRO-bot maybe to defend House Atlantic from an attack or defending it? The sniper part sticks in my mind as an outsider looking in on someone, watching what they do, etc. This and the other more popular singles have something BIG to add to the story, but the matter of decrypting it is another. Hope this helps spark imagination and ideas in you all.


Nice theory. I'm waiting for the comics though, haha. --Myxomatosis 01:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

yeah, im waiting for the comics too. but in the meantime, not to burst ur bubble, but isnt chase introduced in gaibsIVvolI:fftteof (wow that really doesnt work for an anagram). but also, the one about claudio and al going to the house atlantic to recieve a favor makes sense, but i do think its from claudio's perspective. seriously though, a favor hose atlantic is the song that got me intrigued with co&ca in the fist place. i was lookin up the lyrics, and after itook a step back and tried to look at what it meant, i was befuddled. seriously, look up the lyrics to the song, and show the first half of the first verse (your eyes tell the story... up until ...i wouldnt ask this of you) to a friend that doesnt know the storyline. the results are great.--Late Leo 23:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Chase was introduced in the first SSTB comic. "Why did you have to KILL him?" Horsman 01:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Severed Ties

I run a website called Severed-Ties[1]. I wanted to invite whoever would like to join our community to sign up on the boards. If there are no objections I'll re-add the site to External Links in a few days time. Horsman 02:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

There is an objection, I'm afraid. There really are plenty of links there already, and another link of this kind is unnecessary. This is an encyclopædia article, not a Web page that tries to offer every relevant link (there are, of course, plenty of those around). We also have a rule against people adding links to their own sites. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 07:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
So what of the owner of the other site adding his website? Does it not matter? I don't understand why only one fansite is linked. There are plenty of people who would probabally like to know that there is more than one. Horsman 19:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
If you're objecting because of 'plenty of links' existing already, why are there still two links to the same site - cobaltandcalcium.com (a site with ads, I note, although one which seems to have a large enough forum to be a representative fansite I'll admit) - in the External Links section, which you just 'tidied' in an edit? Can't we zap the lyrics one, or change it back to the previous link? --Fuzzie (talk) 15:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Good point — I missed that; I've deleted the lyrics sub-link, and added the description to the main link. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do you assume that the link was added by the site-owner? Again, though, we're not here to provide complete sets of links; people can go elsewhere for that. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I know the site owners IP address. He's the guy that edits external links like 20 times a day. Horsman 00:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Then it's up to you to remove links that he adds. Why do you assume that whatever you know, everyone else knows? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

It's posted above in vandalism header. I understand what you mean though. I'm clearly just a little miffed. Horsman 18:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

User:68.227.40.35 certainly seems to be repeatedly reverting any edits to that link section, whether adding other fan sites, fixing the description, or removing duplicate links. I've asked them on the talk page to come participate in this discussion. --Fuzzie (talk) 14:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Why does the one fansite get to stay in, but the other doesn't? According to the rules only one main one should be listed if there are a lot of fansites for the same band, but there are only two. It seems obvious that it is someone from the other fansite editing ours out, since they continue to do it on a daily basis with no personal gain. Our site can give more insight into the Coheed and Cambria story, as well as a place to talk with other fans. So why can't it be stopped? It is not my site, by the way, I merely find it to be irritable and unfair. You could at least make the page semi-protected, since the people who continually vandalize are not registered users.-- Sunshine748

[edit] #influences and similarities

hey y'all. I put up some of an older version of the coCa#influences and similarities section, cuz I think it fits. some of the stuff under this section that came later was indeed getting reeeeeal crufty edit by edit. citation was asked for regarding the whole section, but I think what I put back is acceptable. KzzRzzKnocker 03:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted the word impressive from this part because it seems to give too much of a one-sided view for an encyclopedia. And don’t get mad i'm not hating against them I just don’t think that should be in there. --ZASH 10:28, 9 April 2006 (Hawaii)


[edit] criticism

Can we please remove the link to Dream Theater, Rush, and Yes from this band's page. They make a song that features varied instrumentation and their lead wishes he was Geddy Lee. This does not make them comparable to these bands. Please, think about it. Even Itunes calls them not much more than emo.

The riff to Welcome does seem like a rip off of led zeppelins Kashmir to me. And don’t try to pull a vanilla Ice here and say that one extra beat makes it not a rip off I have noticed a lot of bands ripping off older bands stuff. Just the other day I heard some song with a piano into that was almost the same as John Lennon’s Imagine. --ZASH 15:48, 1 may 2006 (Hawaii)

Most emo bands have a strong connection to older bands and the big hair bands (whiny voices, tight pants, makeup). It is not uncommon to hear of an emo band making a song very close to an older song, or riffs that are common to them.

That sort of speculation isn't acceptable in an article — see Wikipedia:No original research & Wikipedia:Citing sources. Incidentally, would people sign their comments (using four tildes: ~~~~)? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 07:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The only thing they really "ripped off" was the three note beat but other than that its a completely different progression than kashmire, not to mention a different feel entirely...and the only explination to them inspiring it from kashmir is obviously cause claudio is a huge fan of zepplin and coheeds even pulled a cover of kashmir...honestly inspiration is what you make of it, i dont really see it right to take the time to criticize, just find somethin better to do... and P.S. coheeds changed the world. in twenty years we'll look back through the emo teenage drama bullshit, retarded hip hop rapers who brag about not bein able to dodge a bullet, and even throught the pointless boybands and only one real band remains that truely set the stage and rocked the world...Coheed... --65.247.32.191 18:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)kalb

"Even Itunes calls them not much more than emo." Read the lyrics man, just cause he sings in a higher pitch than most guys at times does NOT make them emo at all. Their lyrics are NOT emo. the music is NOT emo. --Scott 21:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Lyrics may not be emo. By the band byfar is. Its complete emo culture. Emos enjoy coheed. Your most likely and emo in denial.

Wikipedia is not a message board to discuss your hatred of emo and what qualifies as emo, this band has called themselves Progressive Rock and has the songs to back it up, case closed.

--User:Sir Crimson 14:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] musci videos

just so i dont offend or annoy anyone, when i last looked at the page, it said the band was currently working on the music video for ten speed. however, i read a bulitin on my myspace from coca, saying that they will be filmingthe video the next day and were asking ppl to be in it. this was like, 2 months ago now at least, and it usually takes 2 days to film a music video, so it has to be finnished.--Late Leo 22:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe they are waiting to release it.


--The video has been released in Europe. You can actually find it in YouTube.

[edit] Renounced?

I was just looking up Coheed and Cambria for some information and I noticed someone had put up an advertisement for a band called Renounced. Now I am quite new to Wikipedia but I am pretty certain that this is inappropriate for this article. I'm sure that Renounced is a great band but unless Coheed and Cambria have specifically mentioned them in any interview or other related media, or on their website or at all, that they should be removed as a reference. It smacks of dodgy advertising to me so i'll remove it in entirely.

136.186.1.194 06:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This was commented out of Influences and similarities

"Coheed and Cambria's music is often compared to that of Rush, partly because of lead singer Sanchez's wide vocal range and high-pitched voice, Dream Theater, for their technical phrasing and intricate time changes, and Yes, partly because of the intricacy and "dueling" style of guitar and bass work. Their technical precision, terse rhythmic phrases, and the advanced compositional structures of songs evoke earlier similarly crafted rock. Story elements and melodic themes are cohesively wrought throughout their albums to date. Coheed and Cambria are the most visible proponents of a new sort of "prog-rock opera" style for the 2000s. Notably, though, the futuristic science-fiction storyline on which all their music is based harks back to the epic sound and feel of 1970s progressive-rock."

due to "Comparing them to Rush and Dream Theater is utmost ridiculous!"

If anyone feels all or part of it should be re-inserted, feel free to do so, preferably with reasoning in the edit summary or here on the talk page. References, such as a prominent music magazine or reviewer comparing it to Rush, for example, would help a lot too. Gotyear 04:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

-- Considering that I know a few people who mistook Coheed & Cambria for Rush, yes, it should be reinserted. I'll wait for someone to agree with me first though... it could just be me. Spike the Porcupine 02:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Track and Soundtrack not noted in the Article?

There seems to be no mention of the track that Coheed have in the Snakes On A Plane Original Soundtrack, the track is Wake Up in acoustic, do you think it should get some mention in the article? and will someone put it in? UkNegative 12:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the first paragraph...

When it mentions the three areas of New York that C&C are from, it repetitively says New York after each area... It looks rather redundant. Would it be better to just say 'New York', or list the three areas then mention in brackets that they are all areas of New York?

Zombequin 09:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup and corrections

This article needs cleanup. There is some information listed in the infobox that is probably false, and there is no mention of former members in the infobox. In addition to this, this page and linked pages have been vandalized constantly. Explanations on this page are either too confusing or are too short to be useful. I advise that this page be completely rewritten with accurate information because this article is simply not up to snuff.

18 November, 2006 4:00 PM UTC

second that motion UkNegative 19:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] halaju

Yo nig6a check yo self.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/h/Talk%7ECoheed_and_Cambria_3912.html"