Talk:Ratt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is part of the Rock music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to rock music, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
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] Mickey Ratt

I've been trying to learn all i can about the Mickey Ratt period of the band. They went through various line-ups during that time, including quite a few people who were also in Rough Cutt. Gringo300 09:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyrighted image

This article contains a copyrighted image downloaded from the Internet Image:CurrentRatt.jpg which was tagged incorrectly as a Windows screenshot. Unless an editor can get permission to use this image under GFDL or similar, the image is going to be deleted. Zetawoof(ΞΆ) 09:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beth Fairbrother

I removed the following:

"On the back cover of the EP, the band gives a "special thanks to Beth". This is in reference to Beth Fairbrother, who managed Ratt prior to the band signing with Atlantic Records."

The back cover of the original album I have on Time Coast/Enigma contains no such reference.--DannyRay 23:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walkin' The Dog

True, the song was written by Rufus Thomas. However, Ratt's cover was inspired by the Aerosmith version, from the album Aerosmith (1973). Indeed, Aerosmith was very influential in the Southern California metal scene. GnR covered Mama Kin from the same Aerosmith album. My revision notes the Aerosmith connection.--DannyRay 23:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Writing Music?

Does anyone know if Ratt is still writing music or have any plans to release further albums?- Cory pratt


Based on Pearcy interviews, if RATT recorded new music and released it, Pearcy would be owed money because of the use of the RATT name. So from what I understand based on various articles read, RATT as it is today will simply tour but not record or release new tunes. Best bet would be to watch the VH1 show tonight to see if they offer any insight for Ratt's future.


Damn! Pearcy should go to hell then!-Cory pratt

[edit] Glam or Hair Metal?

Does it really matter if we call Ratt a hair or glam metal? For me I think that Glam Metal is a more appropriate genre to call them. What do you think?--Cory pratt 15:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

---Response My honest opinion is that they were a Glam Metal band. I say this because of how they dressed, but to seperate them from the Poisons, Warrants, and Cinderellas, they were much, much heavier.

[edit] Rate Your Music

In the Ratt albums I noticed that somebody is trying to delete the RYM links and ratings. I think we should keep it because there are alot of other albums with the RYM ratings. It may not be professional reviews but thet are reviews made by fans and if certain fans liked the albums you might like it too. And if certain fans hate it you might also hate it. So I think we need to work something out like maybe create a section on the infobox that says "Fan Ratings" or "Fan Reviews". Any ideas?-Cory pratt 20:31, 16 May 2006

[edit] Album sales

Does anyone have any links to show how many albums Ratt has sold to date?-Cory pratt

[edit] In need of clean up

As it currently stands, this article approaches hagiographical tone in regard to the band's quality. What is the sourced, scholarly justification for Ratt being "talented" (how does one even measure this?) or "pop-savvy" (when was its last hit on the pop charts?)? (Not fan sites, blogs, or chat rooms.) Can anyone seriously make the argument that "Dancing Undercover" is "important" in the "annals of rock ' roll history"? Also, the claim that they are "pioneers of the Southern Callifornia music scene" (in any sense, "intrepid" or otherwise) is pretty tough to make given that they first charted in the 1980s, well after, one would imagine, that scene had established itself with, say, the Beach Boys and Jan & Dean. Obviously, Ratt is in a different generic category (and incidentally, enjoyed far less commercial success) than these groups, but the fact that such claims allow for the confusion only highlights the problems with the article to date. The article is simply trying to hard to make the band sound as if it was/were significant within rock history--and its tough to make a comparison with Chuck Berry, Nirvana, Elvis, Beatles, etc.--rather than significant within the more appropriately limited genre of glam metal. I mean, though they're before my time, I like the previously mentioned California groups. But the Beach Boys was an important rock group; Jan & Dean was "only" an important surf rock group. Any arguments to be made against some fairly substantial deltions and/or re-writing? --Patchyreynolds 16:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] clean up

The article does need a clean up but not for the reasons that the previous comment suggested. The tone of the article is not a grandstanding attempt to make RATT on par with the Beach Boys, as that comment said. It is obvious that this person a negative POV toward this type of music. RATT may not be important to critics but they did have an enormous effect upon the music of the 80's and the substantial amount of people that bought their records and watched them on MTV.

Thanks for your thoughts on this. First, I don't know why it's "obvious" I have negative feelings about the band or its genre of music. I simply suggested that the claims of the article, as it stood when I wrote the comment, were unsupported, and, it seems, overblown in some cases. I don't deny that RATT was influential for people who bought the record (though one would need to be specific in precisely how this influence manifested itself to include the claim; e.g., "The studio complexity of 'Pet Sounds' was influential on the Beatles as they worked on "Sergeant Peppers...."). Nor would I counter the claim that the band influenced others within and without its genre. But I disagree that the article, in places, does not try to make sections of the band's recordings "on par with the Beach Boys" (which was, if you read my post carefully, never a comparison I made; I compared Jan & Dean to the Beach Boys in terms of quality and only mentioned RATT in relation to the Beach Boys in terms of the dates at which they appeared on the Southern California music scene). Certainly, the claim about RATT having an album--and that album, of all that one might have chosen-that remains a "pillar" to "the annals of rock history" is one that few would support. Really, would any serious rock historian or knowledgable fan consider "Dancing Undercover" an integral, supporting album that helps support an understanding of sixty-five years of rock? There's no problem with developing well supported, qualified claims defining the band's influence or importance. That's simply not what the article does right now. Finally, I like the music, grew up on it, but none of that should matter at all as the article develops. Indeed, having crtical voices in the mix can really help the tone and quality of the evolving product. --Patchyreynolds 15:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV

Again, the previous Hall of Fame assertions were extremely POV and completely unsupportable. There's simply no way to demonstrate the the bad is "guaranteed" admission, a fact the bulk of the current article admits in detailing mainstream critics' frequent dismaissal of much of its work. Also, what is the legitimate source for the band being of "continuing importance and influence over rock music and the United States|American music industry"? On the former claim, one or two bands claiming they like RATT's sound doesn't qualify, otherwise every band could claim similar influence. Where is the source from objective rock journalism, or the multiple sources to multiple successful and productive current bands that nod toward RATT as an influence? Also, even if sourced, the claim will most likely have to be qualified, i.e., "RATT's early music continues to be influentital for..." or "RATT's music continues to be influential for the rising generation of metal bands." For the latter claim, precisely how is RATT continuing to influence the music industry today? Have they reimagined the album format, brought legions of new fans to a small genre, returned the genre to its roots in live performance, pioneered downloading, etc.? Finally, the claim that the band is "rivaled" only by Nirvana, GnR, Metallica, and Def Leppard appears tremendously vague and incredibly overblown. First, rival in what way? In terms of influence or historical importance, the band isn't even close to being regarded alongside Nirvana. In terms of album sales in the 80s, Def Leppard far outstrips them; in terms of album sales today, Metallica far outranks them. In fact, to claim that the band is "only rivaled" by this handful of bands implies that RATT sits atop a hill onto the peak of which that the other mentioned bands occasionally nudge their way. In its current state, the article simply uses the term "widely" five times, each use allowing the claim to elide concerns for sourcing, qualification, and specificity. --Patchyreynolds 15:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hall of Fame

Please injclude sourced support for the claim the the band's induction to the Hall of Fame is "guaranteed"--is it even possible to do this?--or cease reverting to the section that includes this claim. This is POV, and more properly the realm for fan sites, not an encyclopedia. --Patchyreynolds 21:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Avoiding edit war

It would be helpful if the anonymous poster reverting to POV comments would use the talk page to address these problems or provide sources for his/her opinion. Failing that, the page would seem to be fated to bouncing back and forth. Is there any reason not to submit this difference for mediation? --Patchyreynolds 22:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too POVish

Hello everyone, Cory pratt here. I would like to thank all of you for helping me with this article and the articles related to this, however, some of you are making too much POVish statements. Some of you are making Ratt sound like they were like Zeppelin and the The Beatles which they're actually not. Some of you need to stop making these POVish statements in the article. Bye for Now--Cory pratt 09:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pooh or Grateful Dead?

Hello again. I'm kinda confused whether that sticker on that car in the VH1 Classic Commercial is Winnie the Pooh or that Grateful Dead Bear. Does anyone know? Because both of them look a lot alike.--Cory pratt 02:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Uncle Miltie

I see no mention anywhere of Milton Berle. I'm positive that this band's lead singer is Milton Berle's great-nephew--that's why Uncle Miltie was in the band's video, if anybody remembers the Round and Round vid. I may start to look for a citation. For someone as significant to entertainment as Berle, at least a passing refence seems right. Added 09-06-06 1315 CST by Jason S. Klepp

Milton is not the lead singer's nephew, he was the band's manager's nephew.--Cory pratt 18:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caps

Their website renders their name in all caps. I changed it on the page, but someone reverted it. Tim Long 05:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RAT:ATT:AGG

As well as a similar name the 'british' band RAT:ATT:AGG uses the same fonts as the RATT logo, any one know any more about this

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/t/Talk%7ERatt_9cda.html"