Talk:Shine On You Crazy Diamond

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This Pink Floyd-related article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pink Floyd, their members, associates, albums and songs. You can help! Visit the project page, discuss an article at the project talk-page, or even join us!
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.)
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

i think the first part lasts 13 minutes and 30 seconds, not 34. 13 and 34 is for a live version of the first part.

Contents

[edit] OMGWTFBBQ

"The last section (coda), 'Part IX', is introduced by a synth pedal point, which grows in volume as the previous goove dissipates. A slow 4/4 funeral march (9:08) becomes the parting musical eulogy to Syd."

I DIDN'T MEAN SYD DIED OMG! I meant it was thought of as a kind-of funeral dirge. Also, I was wrong... It's in Four. I think I used to play this part in three-four maybe. My mistake. 131.247.98.123


My viynl version says part 5 was (gilmour waters wright)not (waters)

[edit] Take It From There

The article states Syd's theme came from a BBC program, "Take it from there". I think the program referred to is probably Take It From Here, a 1950s BBC radio comedy program, which always started with a four equal-duration-note motif played on glockenspiel that does indeed have similar (not identical) melodic shape and roughly the same rhythmic shape and speed. That said, can someone find more reliable documentary evidence for the assertion? --RobertG ♬ talk 16:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe that is from the Echoes FAQ, the most reliable Pink Floyd FAQ on the web. Hang on. I'm No Parking and I approved this message 19:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The FAQ says it is called "Take it from Here", so I guess that it's inaccurate on that point. I'm No Parking and I approved this message Grrr...

The link above gives the answer. - Sasuke Sarutobi 00:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Laughter at 08:48

Does anyone know whether this is Syd laughing or not? It sounds vaguely similar to the laughter on The Dark Side of the Moon, but I'm not sure. -- Sasuke Sarutobi 00:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be awesome? But it's almost certaintly not true. In his last studio appearance, Syd couldn't be bothered to bring a guitar that had strings on it, so I can't see him laughing on cue into the mike. Nor do I think Syd had much laughter in him by 1974. Plus, Syd was a baritone, with a rather nasal tone, and this chuckle sounds very tenor and breathy. I would bet it's Gilmour -- or else, as you indicated, Roger The Hat from "On The Run". Finally, I think Waters or Gilmour would have revealed such a startling tidbit by now. So, no. But damn, that would be cool. --63.25.113.207 16:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Title

Well, okay, now it's "Shine on", so someone should go through the article and change it accordingly. Personally, I think the article should have the "O" capitalized as it makes more sense, but if wiki-rules are to the contrary then whatever... -albrozdude 03:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The "O" in "On" should be capitalized. The rules of capitalizing in titles indicate that articles, prepositions and conjunctions should not be capitalized. As you can see from my Wiktionary link above, "On" is not functioning as a preposition here, but as an adverb modifying the verb "Shine". It should be moved back. - dharmabum 20:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Composers for the various parts of the song?

Where does this information come from (eg. crediting Waters alone for Pt. V)? The only authoritative sources I can find for the composition is "Waters, Gilmour, Wright" for all 9 parts. - dharmabum 06:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

Having just finished reading this article, the first section reads as if it was written disjointly by many sources... because it was! I'd like to see a unified voice for this section. I don't have time right now to clean it up by myself, but I'll get to it over the next few days if someone else doesn't beat me to it. —XSG 17:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I reorganized the information. From my point of view, problem wasn't that it read "as if it was written disjointly by many sources", but rather there was too much information under the 'Recording' section that didn't belong there. I moved the last paragraph to the introduction of the article (it's about the song and what's behind it, as a theme, and not about recording details), moved the information about the 'Part 1'/'Part 2' nomenclature to 'Trivia', and moved the "Two different edited versions of the composition have appeared on compilation albums." line to 'Edited versions' to pose as an intro to this section (which I also subsectioned for each of the compilations). Hope it's a good cleanup—I think it is, so I removed the cleanup template. —Rotring 17:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I reread the whole article and, apart from the section that was marked for cleanup, there might still be some cleanup base. Info about live performances is replicated, both on the song "analysis" by parts and on the live performances section; maybe maintain only the latter? —Rotring 17:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 4/4 Time in Part V . . . Really?

From the description of Part V: "After, a time signature switch from 6/8 to common time (4/4) gives the appearance that the the tempo speeds up the saxophone . . . ."

Time signatures can be arbitrary. You can call the faster section of Part V 4/4, if you like . . . but if you transcribed that section, you'd be putting little "3"s over all the eighth notes, because they're all triplets. Which is my sarcastic way of saying, this section is not in 4/4 time! Rather, the tempo has exactly doubled, where an eighth note at the new tempo is equivalent to a sixteenth note at the old tempo. That's why the arpeggio guitar part, unchanged, fits both tempos. It's in 12/8, or 6/8 if you want twice as many bar lines, but it ain't in 4/4. --63.25.113.207 17:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It's 12/8 rather than 6/8, I think. Listen to Part III of the song and discover that it is a variation on a twelve-bar blues (with the final bar extended by 2 extra beats). 81.154.54.195 15:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah - I've figured it out... Yes, the time signature changes - from 12/8 to 12/16!!! This way that circling guitar riff plays in semiquavers/sixteenth-notes throughout the section. By the time you read this I will already have corrected the time signatures throughout the article to match this. --The guy with the axe - aaaaaaargh!!! 20:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not the case either. The main part of the song is 6/4 and the solo bit is 12/8. BotleySmith 22:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know why I didn't get round to saying this before, but BotleySmith I haven't a clue what you're talking about. However, your solution is OK, I guess. So I'm not about to change it back. --The guy with the axe - aaaaaaargh!!! 17:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pink Floyd Funk

This might seem a bit weird to some people, but doesn't Part 8 of "Shine On..." bear an odd resemblence to P-Funk? When I say P-Funk, I mean the style of funk that Parliament pioneered. Now there have been numerous other times that Pink Floyd have incorporated a few influences of funk music in their sound (like in "Echoes"), but to me, Part 8 definitely reminds me of something I might have heard on Mothership Connection with its "groovy" bassline and high-pitched synthesizer riff. I know the striking similarity is purely coincidental, because Wish You Were Here and Mothership Connection were both made in 1975, but I find Part 8 quite out of place with the rest of "Shine On..." because, like I said, it sounds exactly like something Dr. Dre would have sampled! Does anybody else notice this?71.183.84.74 23:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Wright was quite a fan of Miles Davis and other jazz virtuosi, perhaps he picked up one or two licks from them. Waters and Mason naturally played very funky owing to the wide downbeat they created (with Roger playing quite far ahead of the beat and Nick lagging behind ever so slightly). Check out the "Funky Dung" part of "Atom Heart Mother Suite" for a good example. BotleySmith 22:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Shine On You Crazy Diamond.ogg

Image:Shine On You Crazy Diamond.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parts I-V

According to the tablature book "Wish you were here" the first five parts are not correct..

The last part (the guitar solo) of Part I should be Part II instead, and the following parts should all increase by one, making the four note pattern including the second solo Part III, the following Part IV and the vocal part should be merged with Part V.

80.162.185.210 11:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Synth Solo on First Half

I'm pretty positive that Richard Wright hardly ever or never used a Minimoog synth. I'm pretty sure the horn like synth solo at the beginning is actually a sawtooth wave Prophet V sound. I'm going to change it in the article and someone can change it back if they think otherwise. --User:PhilyG 22:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What a load of bollocks

You talk about music like a lawer. Totally missing the point. As if Pink Floyd give a shite about Picardy thirds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.42.51.27 (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


Impossible. The Prophet 5 didn't come out until 1978 and this recording was made in 1974. So I'm changing it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.26.154 (talk) 08:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)