Talk:Two-tone (music genre)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Second wave ska

Does anyone agree with me that a new page should be created, titled 'Second wave of ska'. It could either suppliment or redirect to this page. There is a whole page for the third wave of ska which could give some ideas. Falcolombardi87 18:10, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

That wouldn't make sense, since 2 Tone is synonomous with the second wave of ska. There would be nothing different to write in a separate article.Spylab 16:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Spylab

I Say 2 Tone, You Say Two Tone...

With regard to the previous post, I think that there should be a separate 'ska revival' article which could cover not only the 2 Tone bands and their contemporaries and associates (Bad Manners, UB40 etc) but also the acts who eventually emerged from the US like No Doubt. --Paolo Meccano 11:51, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Why oh why is this listed under Punk Rock? It's punk-influenced, but more attitudinally (DIY music-label; musicians with daft stagenames) than musically (which is basically Ska/Reggae with a Pop flavouring). More to the point, why in hell is Punk being called Punk Rock? Punk Rock was invented by Malcolm McLaren (as he never stops telling his home help) and lasted all of five minutes in real musical terms. --Nuttyskin 05:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Given that the scene was named after the label itself, I feel that the article would be more correctly titled '2 Tone', especially as that is the most widely-used form of the name.

The label itself lent its name to the type of music called 'two tone', but as the article rightly points out, there are 'two tone' bands signed to the Stiff and Go labels as well. ::[[User:Gerry Hillman

Merge or not?

I disagree that 2 Tone and 2 Tone Records be merged, however the articles should be improved to make more of a distinction. Not all bands associated with the 2 Tone genre had records on 2 Tone records, and not all bands released on 2 Tone Records fits the typical 2 Tone sound, which was a mix of ska and punk rock. Spylab 16:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Rename?

Maybe this should be renamed as 2 Tone (genre) or 2 tone (subculture) or something similar, to further distinguish itself from the 2 Tone Records article. Spylab 16:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Spylab

In my opinion there is little difference between the two. None of the sources actually cite the term as a genre. 'For the record label, see 2 Tone Records' cant stay, it's not the right way to do it, that is used as an alternative to a disambiguation page, these two terms are linked. --Neon white 21:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

These are two separate subjects. Before the god-awful term "second wave" was applied to the era, it was commonly refered to as 2-Tone, even when refering to bands such as Madness and Bad Manners. 2-Tone Records needs a stand-alone listing. Upsetterfc 01:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

How is it seperate? they are clear linked. 2 Tone refers to bands on the 2 Tone label. It remains that there are no citations that this is anything other than a description based on the record label. --Neon white 13:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad Manners (Magnet), Madness (Stiff), the Beat (Go Feet) and a host of other minor bands did not record their music with the 2-Tone record label.Upsetterfc 14:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

madness, bad manners and the beat all recorded on the 2 tone label[1] which is why they were known as '2 tone bands' it refers only to bands on that label and there are no sources I can find that refer to 2 tone as a genre which means this whole page is based on OR. --Neon white 23:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Licensing tracks to 2 Tone (like Bad Manners) or getting your 1st 45 issued on the label doesn't make the subjects interchangable. The record label as a business is separate from the ska revival of the late 70s which was known as 2 Tone, due to the label's prominence. Labeling common knowledge of a subculture you have little experience in as OR shows a lack of effort in your research. I suggest doing a little more research in books instead of just on the web. Start with some of the books from S.T. Publishing before you label things OR.Upsetterfc 01:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Found a book published in 1986 that in a review of "Reggae, A People's Music" mentions the "2-Tone movement". The mention is on p. 318 of "The Literature of Rock, II: 1979-1983, With Additional Material for the Period 1954-1978".

by Frank W. Hoffman (Author), B. Lee Cooper (Author), Lee Ann Hoffmann (Author), Publisher: Scarecrow Press (June 1986).

I will footnote when I find a copy of "Reggae, A People's Music" to reivew. --Upsetterfc 14:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It does make them linked enough for a merge, all bands refered to as 2-tone were called that because they recorded on, originated on or had links to the label. --Neon white 18:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

"2-Tone movement" might refer to the record label. It doesnt say genre. Again, find a source that says it is a genre otherwise there is no evidence to suggest it was anything other than a unique label. Ska revival pre-dates the founding a label by some years. --Neon white 18:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't know which dictionary you're using to define movement, but I'd like to see the citation. The term genre wouldn't apply until there was a need to differenciate between the 2 Tone ska revival and the ska bands that evolved in the late 80s. Your POV cannot change the life experiences of myself and anyone else who grew up in that era. Also I notice that you have a history of agitating changes against consensus in various music genre articles. It will not work here.Upsetterfc 18:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Punk?

Why this article is categorized in punk genres? There is a confusion, this kind of music refers to skinheads (not only I know), not punk, its not the same thing. Stevo 11:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

2 Tone is a mix of ska and punk rock music, so many people consider it a subgenre of punk music. The categorization is based on the style of music, not what subcultures the fans belonged to.Spylab 13:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab

I don't see any punk influence in 2-tone ska, but if you say so... Stevo 14:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

2 Tone music was created by combining ska and punk rock. It even says so in the opening sentence of the article.Spylab 16:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab

Organ?

It seems that in most of the 2 tone bands, including the Specials, Madness, the English Beat (on occasion), and the Selecter all had used organs at some point which was a strong instrument during the era and, it seems, helped to define the sound of Two Tone. Should "Organ" be added to the instrument list? If not organ, then at least "Keyboard", considering every single major band in the 2 tone era (the above with the addition of Bad Manners and the Bodysnatchers) had a "keyboardest".

Also, should the article somewhere mention the lasting effect of the checker pattern? The article states that they were used but never seems to state that they became a well known symbol for the 2 tone era as well as a symbol associated with ska itself. --Glassbreaker5791 20:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Question..

"The music term 2 Tone was coined by Jerry Dammers of the Specials, who has said he came up with the idea because he liked the black-and-white check pattern on his scooter when he was a young mod. However, many people think the name refers to the black-and-white outfits worn by rude boys and skinheads — and to unity between black people and whites. "

Does it deserve some mention that the words 2 tone did actually end up standing for those things? its not like the people were wrong, unity was a pretty strong topic of the 2 tone movement. This makes it seem like unity and the 2 tone tonic suits were simply misconceptions, rather than a part of the movement. Glassbreaker5791 16:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

That paragraph (like the rest of the article) has no references anyway, so there is no way to prove whether it is accurate to begin with.Spylab 16:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Off-topic trivia about museum

This article is about the 2 Tone music genre, so that is what the content should focus on. It is appropriate that the 2 Tone museum is mentioned briefly, but the information about the museum should not be longer than the History section, and it must not include all sorts of trivial details. Also, the Coventry Music Wall of Fame is not exclusively about 2 Tone musicians, so that topic cannot get undue weight in this article. This is an encyclopedia, not a platform for free advertisement.Spylab (talk) 14:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I totally agree. These things should be mentioned, but only in proportion.--SabreBD (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree with sentiment here however as I see it the problem is threefold; (1) Proportional issues are with the thin/small amount of information contained within the history section not other areas (2) A couple of editors (Spylab inc) seem hell bent on reducing the Museum and Wall of fame sections to trivia are simply showing a total lack of knowledge of the subject matter and (3) I would hazard a guess that neither of you have visited the Museum, Wall of fame or even Coventry for that matter. Finally Spylab your continued editing is 'A' typical of Wiki in general and why it is mistrusted. Adequinney (talk) 21:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not quite understand how you can agree with the sentiment and then disagree. You also need to be aware of Wikipedia's policies on personal attacks. On a sidenote, I am not sure how reverting a clearly erroneous loss of formatting makes me "hell bent" on reducing these sections, as I take to be the meaning here. It is also unwise to make assumptions about other editors, and where editors have been, or what they know, as we only have the evidence they disclose. (It is in any case irrelevant - editors do not need to visit a place to edit on a topic related to it: if they did it would be almost impossible to edit Wikipedia.) To that end I note that prior to beginning to edit this article, adding information about the museum, your only other edits were failed attempts to create an article on the museum at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Coventry Music Wall of Fame. To a neutral observer it could look as if, having failed to do that, you have attempted to place that information in this article. So, for the sake of clarity and openness, could you please confirm here that you have no connection with the museum and a possible conflict of interest. I also note the similarity between your edits and those of User:CovSkaGirl, so it would also be helpful if you could confirm for us that you have no connection with the holder of that account, bearing in mind Wikipedia's very important policies concerning sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry? Please note these are not accusations, but merely requests for transparency. On the substance of the argument, the focus of the article must remain on the primary topic and normally I would expect this subject to receive a line or two at most, notwithstanding the scale and quality of material on the primary topic.--SabreBD (talk) 09:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

• Speaking of trivia, a quick google search of "quinney and "2 Tone"" brings up a few interesting articles and blog posts.Spylab (talk) 01:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Again I note that the article has been edited without waiting for a balanced outcome of further discussion or considering alternative opinions. I am now bored by this process and have better use for my time so wont be contributing any further. Please note these are not accusations, but merely observations for the sake of transparency Adequinney (talk) 01:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)