Talk:Smoke on the Water

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Contents

[edit] Clarification

I changed the description from "chromatic" to "minor key blues etc" as this is technically more correct. I also added a comment on how it is actually played by Blackmore. 30/3/05 Modi

[edit] POV

This article--especially the first paragraph--needs fixing to conform to W:NPOV. Phrases like "immediately recognizable", "the single most famous riff in heavy metal music history", and "Ian Gillan's expressive vocal" are all personal opinions, and need to be reworded in a way that they can more easily be defended--possibly by quoting someone prominent in the music industry using similar descriptions. --Jwanders 18:43, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I just went over the article in detail, and changed a couple of words, but I really don't think it was that bad to begin with (not surprising since I wrote much of it originally). It is undeniably a famous riff, and the word "perhaps" is in there (though you did not quote it above). The adjective "expressive" may be non-NPOV but in the mildest way, it's not like it says "fantastic vocal". Any adjective can be considered POV to this extent -- prose without adjectives is deadly (especially in an article about music or some other art form where you are trying to *describe* something), and I think "expressive" is a pretty neutral and non-controversial one. Please take a look at the current article, remove "expressive" if you must, and re-consider the POV tag which needlessly undercuts the usefulness of the article. Thanks Jgm 14:16, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Yes it's better than I had thought. Before I tweaked on the "immediately recognizable" bit (mostly because I'm sure I wouldn't recognize it) and then misread (and misquoted!) "expressive" as "impressive". But it still seems a little personal essay-ish to be. I mean, take this section:

"Despite the heaviness of the guitar part, constant movement and interplay within the supporting parts keeps the feel of the song from becoming leaden. The song's structure takes a contrasting verse-chorus form, with the driving verse sections building musical tension while the soaring chorus releases it."

This seems like an opinion to me, but maybe such description is necessary in art article. At the moment, however, the article seems to imply that everyone would describe this way, when I doubt most people have ever heard the song. As I said, it's better than I'd thought before and I'll take off the POV tag, but I'd be happier if the description could be attributed to the person or group that holds it. --Jwanders 19:43, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

IMO, it's the most famous riff in rock history, not just metal. Malmsteen Maiden 06:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tabulature

Anybody know if a policy has been defined regarding including tabulature in articles? On one hand, there may be a precedent as some articles (for instance, Riff) have included illustrative quotations of standard musical notation. On the other hand, tab is somewhat less standardized than regular notation and is of interest only to guitarists, muddying up the article for others. Thoughts? Jgm 11:05, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Probably the best move would be to show both standard notation and tablature, maybe with a little comment on how the tablature clarifies the positioning. Don't worry, the Thought Police don't punish you for using tablature. Deltabeignet 07:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which strings

Wouldn't it be more correct to play the riff on the D and G strings, instead of the A and D strings? Bengt 12:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

it was played by the band on the a and d, as you can fret the fourths with one finger that way (b to g is a third). Joeyramoney 03:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

The chords are: GD BF CG GD BF DA CG GD BF CG BF GD —Bill Conrad 23:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The most authentic sounding method is to pluck open G D as the first fifth, and pluck the passage entirely on the two middle strings (open G D) using pick and middle finger. I recall an interview somewhere where a member of Deep Purple said this was how it was recorded.

My point exactly. Blackmore himself has explained it several times. Bengt 16:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clean up

This article needs to be cleaned up.

Point taken.Image:Weather rain.pngSoothingR 19:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swiss or Swedish fan ?

I had read the fan who launched the fireworks was Swedish, not Swiss as mentionned in the article (the document I read even mentionned his nameI was probably asleep.. Dake 18:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC), looked more like a swedish name iirc). Dake 21:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean that the guys name was Iirc? That is not a swedish name, not even close to one.Zoeds 21:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
iirc (or IIRC) stands for If I Recall Correctly - they weren't saying that was the fan's name. ;) 136.186.1.197 05:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
hehe, that explains a lot LOL --Zoeds 08:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mentioned on

This article was read out on Irish radio 13/April/06 by the Irish John Peel, Dave Fanning, in a gently mocking tone.


[edit] Zepp cover?

Did Led Zeppelin ever record this song? I've seen it credited to both LZ and Deep Purple, and I've heard two distinctly different versions of it. PennyGWoods 07:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure? I wasn't aware the Led Zeppelin did any covers... -KingUrth

I've never heard of Led Zeppelin covering this song, but Black Sabbath w/ Ian Gillan on vocals used to play it live. Bengt 21:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Impossible Timeline

The article says they recorded a bit at the Pavillion, got kicked out, then found the Grand Hotel. Then it says SOTW was recorded at the Pavillion. Impossible: The song talks about the Grand Hotel. Barticus88 02:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

It also says "the band was only able to lay down backing tracks for one song before the local police shut them down." So that supports the idea that SOTW was not recorded at the Pavillion.

It was not the song with lyrics, it were backing tracks what was recorded at the Pavillion. The anniversary CD booklet says so. --Yms 22:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Difficulty for beginners?

I'm no guitar player, but if guitar is like any other instrument, wouldn't a song "noted for its extreme difficulty" not be "the first song learned by many beginner guitarists"? I assume the beginner guitarists are playing a simplified version. Also, young brass players also learn an arrangement of it as one of their first 'real' songs.

- Probably a bit of both, I wouldn't have said it's notable for "extreme" difficulty at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.92.60.187 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
- I'm inclined to agree with the above - it's not a song with a complex structure or any truly difficult parts (from a guitar player of 2 years). The possible exception is Blackmore's instantly recognizable guitar solo, which is quite a challenge to play but not something I would call extremely difficult, or expect an encyclopedia to do such a thing.

The outro-solo is performed on Jon Lord's organ. I guess that one is challenging as well. —69.136.244.218 01:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of covers

This song has been covered many many times. I think the wiki should contain a list of (well known) covers. Edwin Smulders 18:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name of the "stupid with a flare gun"

I sent a mail to Claude Nobs ("funky Claude") to ask him about the "stupid with a flare gun". He answered that the guy has never been identified and that he could have fled to some countries in Eastern Europa. I'm wondering what this guy is thinking today about all this story and the song :) Dake 18:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


I always thought it was "Stupid Motherfucker" garbled for radio play (some stupid motherflagger)

[edit] IBM commercial

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but didn't IBM use this riff for a series of commercials a few years back? I seem to recall it being used for a technology-related ad around 2000. MalikCarr 06:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Live Version a "Minor Hit"?

"Smoke On The Water" brings back (as they say) fond memories of my youth.

To my recollection it was a huge Top 40 radio hit. You heard the song everywhere. I even recall hearing it playing on amusement park rides at the time.

However, the version I'm speaking of is the Live version from the "Made In Japan" LP and not the original from the "Machine Head" album.

When I finally did hear the original (I'm guessing a year or so after the "..Japan" LP release) it sounded rather odd. The 2nd most significant part of the song I knew (the audience "rhythmic clapping" - for lack of a better term - that follows the opening riffs) was somehow "now 'missing'".

Needless to say, I've not heard much of the song since that era (I'm not a classic rock radio listener and so forth). But honestly, I don't recall the studio version being a "hit", period (unless maybe it was on AOR stations which I never paid much attention to - I was a "top 40" Guy). --angrykeyboarder (a/k/a:Scott) 03:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Back in the 1970's and early 1980's, the studio version was played a lot on rock radio. Then, around 1984 or so, a bunch of corporate folks invented the term "classic rock" and created dozens (hundreds?) of "classic rock" radio stations. These stations tend to play the Made in Japan version as often as they play the studio version... at least, in my experience. In any event, both versions should be considered "hits" by any reasonable definition. — Lawrence King (talk) 07:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps. But I'm talking mid 1970's, summer and the sound of an audience clapping in time to an opening guitar riff. This could be heard many times daily on Top 40 stations all over the United States. It wasn't till a year or two later that I finally heard the studio version.
And I don't listen to "classir rock" stations these days.
No, my memory is that the live version was not a minor hit at all. It was quite the opposite.

[edit] Proposed correction to sheet music

Since the song is in G minor, the sheet music ought to have the proper key signature. And then the accidental B-flats can be dropped. — Lawrence King (talk) 07:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Deeppurple-SotW.jpg

Image:Deeppurple-SotW.jpg 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 00:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Smoke on the Water.jpg

Image:Smoke on the Water.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 05:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Impact

It is mentioned that a shop in Denmark Street has or had a singn that ask potential buyers NOT to play Smoke on t Water. Was that before or after it was used in Wayne's World or after. And was the joke in Wayne's World based on real live events?

[edit] Lyrics?

Should the lyrics be here? Isn't putting them up here copyright infingement? soldierx40k 04:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Smoke on the Water.jpg

Image:Smoke on the Water.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)