Talk:Rock music in Australia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Focus[edit]

Erm, isn't this article getting a bit confused with Music of Australia? Definitely! But, it is also getting confused with Timeline of trends in Australian music. Really all three of these articles have a problem with focus. I've given "timeline of trends" a bit of help, but I'm not sure if I've done well. Do you think you could fix it up?

There is quite a bit of information in this article that should be in the timeline page.114.73.1.145 (talk) 07:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the 90s, and to a lesser extent in the introduction, it talks about electronica, acid jazz, electropop, hip hop...and not a whole lot of rock. Guy Sebastian and Shannon Noll? That's almost laughable. It is. This article should be entirely about Australian rock, not rap, jazz, pop, country or anything else. Look to the timeline for ideas.114.73.1.145 (talk) 07:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone going to mind too much if most of the 1994s and 2000s section of this article goes for a walk over to the main music article? Ambi 10:11, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC) Well, I don't.114.73.1.145 (talk) 07:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Ifield was English[edit]

He was born in Coventry, Engand and he was a country singer, not rock.

Please sign your posts on talk pages, User:Ogg. I see this post is a while ago now when you were new here, so I guess you've picked the form up by now. This is mainly to identify you for anyone else reading the page. Andrewa 03:16, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The second wave[edit]

My impression is that this article doesn't do justice to the contribution that Australian bands made to the international scene in the mid-sixties, particularly in the area of use of distortion on rhythm guitar which would eventually become the power chord.

Bands such as The Easybeats, Billy Thorpe and the Aztecs, and particularly The Masters Apprentices come to mind. Their hits may have been local, but when you compare their sounds to those of international bands just a little later, ISTM that overseas musicians were listening to our bands even if the record companies wouldn't release their stuff over there for the public to buy.

Music of Australia#Rock and popular music has a bit of material, but Music of Australia#Second wave of Australian rock is almost empty. Andrewa 03:39, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, though there's a lot of things that this article really lacks. It's still being used as a synonym for Music of Australia - I remember removing Guy Sebastian from this article, and even now it still has a whole section on hip hop, of all things. It'd be lovely if someone could clean it up, focus on the topic, and remove the lengthy sections about specific bands. Ambi 14:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Right now the "Second wave" section, like all of the others lacks sources and references. And, the thing about that music critic doesn't seem to belong there (I am not denying her accomplishments, but that they should be discussed elsewhere). This section should focus more on the music and bands/artists of the period. If a critic didn't have something specific to say about this music, then he/she becomes irrelevant (in this context). Also, there is way too much discussion about record companies--a little bit of mention of them is OK, but, beyond that, this is not the place. Garagepunk66 (talk) 00:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing Article[edit]

Just had to comment on what an absolutely fantastic article this is. Well done to everyone involved. --Biggles 16:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're joking. It focuses way too much on a handful of specific bands, fails dismally to give a true overview of the area, and talks about way too much stuff that isn't rock. It wasn't that long ago that I had to continually evict Guy Sebastian from the article. Ambi 00:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hence my sarcasm, sorry that wasn't clear. --Biggles 18:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So few of the previous editors even took the time to include references and sources (see the thread below--I put it there to draw attention to this glaring defect). A lot of the writing is sloppy, to boot. But, this does have potential to become a great article--its going to take a ton of work, though. Garagepunk66 (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oz Rock[edit]

The musical style of many of the bands in the article is frequently called "Oz Rock", especially the music of Ackadacka, Powderfinger, Daddy Cool, Chisel and quite a few others. Does anyone know the origin and/or significance of the term, and is it worth a mention on the page? I was actually quite surprised to find that "Oz Rock" was not the article title.--ABVS 07:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism![edit]

Check out http://en.allexperts.com/e/a/au/australian_rock.htm

Exactly the same!

I think someone needs to write some original content on the topic.

Anon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.169.19.155 (talk) 10:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The material on that site looks like it was plagarised from here, not the other way around. --BrianFG (talk) 02:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Love this city.jpg[edit]

Image:Love this city.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 05:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Savagegardenalbum.jpg[edit]

Image:Savagegardenalbum.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) 05:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation[edit]

Can we get a citation or removal of the comment that australian rock doesn't really have a distinctive sound. One would argue quite easily that that isn't the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.107.1 (talk) 13:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lobby Loydd and the Coloured Balls[edit]

Why is there no mention of Lobby Loydd and the Coloured Balls. This band was had a heavy influence on punk bands and Lobby was cited as an influence of Kurt Cobain (according to Lobby's entry). The article is obviously incomplete without this section added.

58.168.48.254 (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Michael[reply]

JJ's Importance[edit]

The importance placed on the role of JJ seems to be overstated, given that until it went national at the end of the '80s, it could barely have been transmitting to more than 1/4 of the nation's population. Is there much evidence that, for instance, it was substantially more influential than 4ZZZ, 3RRR or 3PBS, to name a few others that emerged elsewhere shortly thereafter?

re: JJ's importance
I'd argue that JJ was extremely influential. Although the station didn't get dedicated national network status until the late '80s, it was relayed after midnight through other stations in what is now the Radio National network in the late 1970s and early 80s. There were also indirect effects -- various broadcasts (e.g. the radio doco "The Ins and Outs of Love") caused a lot of comment and these early controversies were often nationally reported, particularly if they involved the perennial allegations of left-wing bias.
Also, although its transmissions were somewhat limited around Sydney due to local problems (dodgy on the north shore and eastern suburbs, great in the south and west) the 'ionospheric skip' effect on AM signals meant that after dark and under good conditions Double Jay could be picked up for hundreds of kms up and down the coast and out to the Blue Mountains and beyond, so it often reached far beyond the Sydney metro area.
I would also strongly argue that it had an immediate and profound effect on commercial radio programming in Sydney, which then extended to other stations around the country. It had an direct influence on its main commercial competitor, 2SM, and within a short period 2SM was forced to start adding popular singles and album tracks which -- originally -- 2JJ was the only station playing.
There is no question that many rising pop/rock acts of the period -- e.g. The Police, B-52s, etc who were first played on 2JJ -- were were not being played on commercial radio at first, but the popularity they gained through early exposure on 2JJ (and Countdown) eventually compelled commercial stations to pick them up. Within a very short period JJ was being used as a de facto programming research tool by commercial stations, who routinely added the most popular Double/Triple J tracks to their playlists and this continued for many years.
Another instance I often refer to is that of the 1976 album 801 Live. This was totally ignored by commercial radio and wasn't even locally released at first (a commmon problem in those days) but JJ promoted it greatly and it wound becoming the biggest-selling import album of the year, which eventually forced the record company into releasing it locally.
Dunks (talk) 00:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

non-rock (a continuation of Focus)[edit]

This information should not be in this article, because rock, dance and rap aren't really the same.

Australian enthusiasm for rap in the mid eighties was shown in the local craze for breaking after the success of American movies such as Beat Street and the popularity of Grandmaster Flash's The Message, and Run DMC's albums Run-DMC and Tougher Than Leather. Many Australians would have heard their first sample of rapping in an Australian accent in the 1989 television commercial for the Rosebank Stackhat bicycle helmet.

Electro-industrial/Intelligent dance music group Snog formed in 1988.

Def Wish Cast formed in Penrith in 1989 and emulated U.S. rappers in nearly all respects apart from using an American accent and Gangsta rap posturing.

Electronica label Psy-Harmonics was formed in 1993.

In Australia, rave culture was thriving by 1991 and raving exploded in popularity in 1992. One of the attractions of the rave scene was the non-violent image of Ecstasy as opposed to the reputation of the pub scene as aggressive and confrontational. Another attraction of the newer dance music was the absence of focus on the person who created the music, with a focus on genre rather than artist. The music could fall into the background with little debate about the artistry involved. Why is this here?

Swirl was Australia's answer to the shoegazing phenomena. What is shoe-gazing?

Sonic Animation was founded in 1994. Itch-E and Scratch-E formed in 1991. Clan Analogue was established in 1992. Who are these bands?

In 1979, Stewart MacFarlane was one of the first Australian musicians to record with a rapper, Willy B. This article is about rock, not rap.

Insurge released the "Political Prisoners" EP in 1995, featuring the techno anthem "Political Prisoners".

Far and away the biggest commercial success of the 1990s was electropop duo Savage Garden. They shot to fame in 1996, scoring huge hits in Australia, Asia, Europe and America. They became the first Australian act since Men At Work to score two #1 U.S. hits, and their 1999 album Affirmation sold over 5 million copies in the United States. alone. A 2004 report in The Sydney Morning Herald rated their album Savage Garden at #4 and "Affirmation" at #15 in the list of the 25 biggest-selling albums (from any country) over the last ten years in Australia. --> not relevant

While overseas hip hop became increasingly popular in Australia in the early 1990s, particularly Public Enemy, whose sound became dated very quickly and the more enduring Beastie Boys, and a number of artists began performing it, virtually none of them were signed to record deals or saw mainstream airplay. Sound Unlimited Posse was signed to a major label in the 90s (CBS). Koolism released "Lift Ya Game" in 1998. Rock bands Big Pig (Payment), Skunkhour (Up To Our Necks In It), Beasts of Bourbon (Straight, Hard & Long) and Def FX incorporated rapping into their acts. I'm not quite sure if this paragraph should be in there.

Wicked Beat Sound System, whose sound was a mixture of electronica, dub and soul, typified the sort of music played at the Bondi festival Vibes on a Summer's Day.

Tina Arena became successful in France with pop hits such as "I Want to Spend My Lifetime Loving You".

Recently, bands such as Cut Copy, Decoder Ring, The Presets, The Potbelleez, Polo Club, Empire of the Sun and Pnau have made a name for themselves in the genre. Cut Copy frontman Dan Whitford has attributed the band's success to a change in public attitude as much as the band's quality, explaining "It's a case partly of timing and a growing awareness of electronic music in Australia".[1] Pnau's first album, Sambanova, was released in 1999, at a time when many in Australia considered electronic music to be a dying breed. Nonetheless, the band traveled around the US and Europe, and slowly made a name for themselves, and for a rebirth of electronic music in the country.[2][3]

Dubstep and Grime have become more available over the internet. Garage Pressure is a show on FBi Radio, dedicated to these genres.

Veteran electronic musicians Cybotron briefly united in the early part of the decade.

Most recently the Australian hip-hop scene has begun to gain national momentum through bands such as:

All this information has been removed from the article, and should be placed in Music of Australia instead.114.73.43.232 (talk) 07:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This article is about rock. Hip-hop, rap, electronic music, and so on should be addressed elsewhere. 124.186.246.195 (talk) 05:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And you've put all the information above in "Music of Australia"? If not, which parts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.73.48.188 (talk) 06:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Christine Sams (7 April 2008). "Cut Copy show true colours". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 2008-04-15. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ "Class of 2008: Pnau". ninemsn. Retrieved 2008-04-16.
  3. ^ "PNAU". Access All Areas. Retrieved 2008-04-16.

Dangerous Goods???[edit]

Is this section completely made up? It looks like it, and I can't find any other information about them anywhere. Someone please verify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.74.231.18 (talk) 14:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rock/Pop section needed.[edit]

Hoodoo Gurus are not a Darkwave band. They might just slip in under a general rock/pop category which clearly needs writing. There are many others that don't fit into the broad categories they've been put. I've removed Hoodoo Gurus from the Darkwave section which seems to lump a bunch of unrelated artists together and potentially needs to be dumped.

I suspect this is a genre applied in retrospect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.215.141 (talk) 08:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

60s Garage rock needs more coverage[edit]

  • The first (and by far largest) Garage rock movement in Australia and New Zealand was in the 60s, not later, as this article makes it appear. The "Second wave" section should mention how a lot of these bands were part of the whole 60s Garage rock phenomenon--the Australian version of garage rock, which is the historically correct way to view them. That is how the best sources describe them--not so much the pop style bands like the Bee Gees, of course, but the plethora of harder edged groups (i.e. the Missing Links, the Throb, etc.).
  • There is a terrific book about the 1960s "Second wave" period. It is called Wild About You, by Ian D. Marks and Iain McIntyre. It is essential reading on this topic and should be the "go to" source for this section. The vast array of bands profiled in Marks and McIntyre's book are spoken of in this manner ("garage"/60s "punk"), and, stylistically they do indeed have that sound.
In reference to the matter brought up at the top, in the "Second wave" section, I have added a sourced explanation of the garage rock phenomenon that took place in those countries in the 60s, which is absolutely crucial to understanding the period. I listed the book mentioned above in the "Specific references" section. Furthermore, I changed the name of the section that had been titled "Garage rock" to "Garage rock revivalists," because the section had discussed the later 1980s period, not 60s. It is the Wiki norm to use the term, "Garage rock" as an official category to designate mid 60s era garage rock. While some more recent bands do, indeed, use the term "garage rock" to describe themselves (and that is perfectly OK, and Wiki can even make casual mention of this), the term should not be used as an official heading or title in this formal kind of way, particularly in a major article that covers such a wide time period. We must avoid any possible confusion. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC) :::In reference to the matter brought up at the top, in the "Second wave" section, I have added a sourced explanation of the garage rock phenomenon that took place in those countries in the 60s, which is absolutely crucial to understanding the period. I listed the book mentioned above in the "Specific references" section. Furthermore, I changed the name of the section that had been titled "Garage rock" to "Garage rock revivalists," because the section had discussed the later 1980s period, not 60s. It is the Wiki norm to use the term, "Garage rock" as an official category to designate mid 60s era garage rock. While some more recent bands do, indeed, use the term "garage rock" to describe themselves (and that is perfectly OK, and Wiki can even make casual mention of this), the term should not be used as an official heading or title in this formal kind of way, particularly in a major article that covers such a wide time period. We must avoid any possible confusion. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In reference to the matter brought up at the top, in the "Second wave" section, I have added a sourced explanation of the garage rock phenomenon that took place in those countries in the 60s, which is absolutely crucial to understanding the period. I listed the book mentioned above in the "Specific references" section. Furthermore, I changed the name of the section that had been titled "Garage rock" to "Garage rock revivalists," because the section had discussed the later 1980s period, not 60s. It is the Wiki norm to use the term, "Garage rock" as an official category to designate mid 60s era garage rock. While some more recent bands do, indeed, use the term "garage rock" to describe themselves (and that is perfectly OK, and Wiki can even make casual mention of this), the term should not be used as an official heading or title in this formal kind of way, particularly in a major article that covers such a wide time period. We must avoid any possible confusion. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Excuse my ignorance but I don't know how widely the term "garage rock" was used in Australia during the 1960s. I see a lot of its use after the 1980s phenomenon of a similar name, which sometimes had "revival" appended. I agree that the "Second wave" subsection requires further work: I have just got around to start editing here. I began by reorganising the subsection's composition to deal with the beat boom first: from reliable sources (= RS) it was the most significant change of that era. From those RS I read that hard rock, suburban R&B, and heavy blues became more important later in that era. Consequently this phenomenon should be described after dealing with "beat boom".
  2. Marks and McIntyre: I haven't read the book but I have adapted the ref tabs to give page nos. Assuming good faith it appears to be another RS. The RS I'm using include: Cockington, Jenkins, Kimball, and McFarlane (the latter two have [online] versions). A balanced synthesis of a number of RS is best for this article.
  3. I have no preference out of "Garage rock" vs "Garage rock revivalists" for a subsubsection heading.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The term "garage rock," itself, was not used in the 60s, whether in the states, Australia, or elsewhere (although the term "garage band" was sometimes used to designate small time bands, individually speaking, here in the states). Garage rock was not yet identified as an actual genre at that time, but that was when the first and biggest thing happened. The first time garage was identified as a genre came in the early 70s when certain influential American rock critics, such as Dave Marsh, Lester Bangs, Lenny Kaye, Greg Shaw, "Metal" Mike Saunders, and others used the term "punk rock" to designate the usually American 60s garage bands (and artists who had followed in their style), but they also extended the use of the term "punk" and the whole garage bands thing to other counties as well (i.e. Lester Bangs wrote of England's the Troggs as part of this genre). Later, after the mid-70s punk scenes in New York and London (and Australia), the "punk" term became reserved for the post-1975 groups and "garage rock" or "protopunk" for the 60s (and early 70s) bands. I have always felt that the 60s bands deserve the right to both of the titles, "garage rock" and "punk" (but not exclusively, of course). I have always felt that 60s garage should properly be viewed as the first form of punk rock. There is no historical or musicological reason to do otherwise (except that so many people require the whole subculture self-identification thing that came after 1975). I have written extensively on this on talk pages (see Garage rock, Punk rock, and other articles). The link to garage rock will give you a basic explanation, but that article is in need of growth, for instance, it could do more to recognize 60s garage outside of North America, in places such as Australia).
Garage punk is another term often also used (by both "moderns" and "retros"). I realize that all of these terms can be used for different eras, including later periods, and I think that in places such as Australia and Japan, the term "garage rock" may be popular for post-1980 bands. Wiki uses "garage rock" to refer to the mid 60s and "garage punk" to refer to more recent music.
Concerning garage in Australia during the 60s: You absolutely must read Wild about You, by Ian Marks and Iain McIntyre. It is a very informative book. There was a huge garage thing going on in Australia and New Zealand (like America) in the mid 60s. Australia easily had the second biggest garage boom to the United States (here in the states in the suburbs circa 1965- 1967, there was a little band playing in a garage or rec room on practically every other block--this is where the term garage derives). There may have been close to a hundred thousand or more recordings made, just here in the states alone, but also a lot in Australia. You will notice that Marks and McIntyre often use the terms "garage" and "punk" (never "protopunk"--although Wiki has to use that "proto" term for the 60s, due to popular misconception, even in the majority of RS's) for the 60s Australian bands. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I noticed that you created a two new sub-headings, "Beat boom pop and rock" and "Harder R&B rock." I'm not sure if either are quite right. I have a problem with the latter, because, though many of those bands did, indeed, have R&B influence, they were not exactly R&B or R&B rock. I have never heard the music of these bands referred to as "R&B rock." The name most often used is "garage," and that would be the best sub-heading, if one is to be used at all. That how Marks & McIntyre portray them.
  • Another problem: the way the two sub-headings are juxtaposed is that they make it look as if most of the beat boom was mostly lite pop, which was definitely not so, and that the garage stuff was something separate form the beat boom. When, it was part of it and constituted a large part of it. Some of the bands listed in the paragraphs above (and many more not mentioned) could be considered garage.
  • The part about the music magazines could come at the end of the article could have its own sub-heading "Culture" that comes after discussion of the music.
  • Practically everything underneath the "Harder R&B Rock" section is the irrelevant stuff and has nothing to do with the new sub-heading over it. It is the material that I mentioned that we have take out and put into new articles (w/ links at the bottom of the page).
  • Another problem: after I remove the irrelevant stuff, there is not going to be enough under the "Harder R&B rock" (or better "Garage") heading.
  • Solution: we can take all the unnecessary stuff out and have one big sub-heading for the music called "Beat boom: pop rock and garage. And then a sub-heading "Culture" for the magazines. Garagepunk66 (talk) 08:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just made some changes and I think you will like them. I placed the non-music items into their own section, so they no longer distract from the music discussion--making it possible to keep these items in the article. I moved the statement about the rock critic into the paragraph about publications, where it is best suited. I used a colon to make the top sub-heading more inclusive of all of the genres--they were all part of the beat movement. The passage about the garage/protopunk bands, without the things that were below it, is now one small paragraph, now too small to have a sub-heading (we can expand the garage coverage later). I made reference to it in the top sub-heading. I used the term "garage" rather than "harder R&B rock," because that is the term that is used (as per Marks & McIntyre), and it is the Wiki norm to use that term for 1963-1967 garage/protopunk music. Garagepunk66 (talk) 09:40, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Need to eliminate irrelevant material form "Second wave" section[edit]

We need to get rid of irrelevant and extraneous material in this section:

  • One passage carries an unnecessary reference to a famous critic, but it does nothing to demonstrate how her writings had anything to say about this music (of the second wave), so the mention of her becomes totally irrelevant. That critic already has an article devoted to her. That is good enough. Unless we can find something insightful that she actually said about the music of this period, then the anecdote should be removed.
  • Another passage goes on and on about magazines, publications and record companies, etc. Discussion of publications and record companies should be brief at most (or better not at all). We should create two new separate articles: "Australian record companies of the 60s" and "Australian music publications of the 60s," and, then, take them out of this article, and place link to them down at the bottom in the addendum area.
  • Rather than just list bands and artists, we should create a meaningful and interesting narrative about them, filled with well-sourced facts and relevant anecdotes.

What ends up happing is that the reader trying to learn about the music becomes distracted and bored by all of this irrelevant stuff. The focus, here, should be on the music and its creators, not critics, record companies and the like. We need to make this section interesting for the rock and roll fan or person of casual interest to read. Garagepunk66 (talk) 09:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC) Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:45, 6 July 2014 (UTC) Garagepunk66 (talk) 07:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  1. I haven't yet got to Roxon but her Rock Encyclopedia (1969) may be useful as a "General reference". Even if it is not directly cited from. As for the paragraph describing her achievements, I've had a quick read and believe that mention of the encyclopaedia itself is justified in an article on Australian rock since this is the world's first to deal with rock music and it was written by an expat-Australian. I'll probably describe her as an "Australian rock music journalist" or "Australian musicologist" or some-such and cut back on much of her life details where they are not directly relevant to this article. I don't know how many Australian artists made her volume (or its later editions) but a quick check finds Easybeats and Bee Gees appear in there, see Google books.
  2. Record companies/labels: an earlier subsection describes many of these. Perhaps some of those descriptions can be pared back when you create the new articles. New labels with significant impact on this era should be briefly described in this subsection too.
  3. Magazines/publications: likewise create a useful article on these and then trim back these sections here. However they should still be mentioned for their impact, e.g. Go-Set according to RS was quite important in chronicling the music of second part of the second wave and most of the third wave.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, those seem like good ideas. Garagepunk66 (talk) 08:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you create these articles then you will need to have RS and establish the notability of their content. Otherwise they may be deleted leaving the information off WP and making any link to them useless.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  2. List of bands/artists: take care not to remove any ARIA Hall of Famers. Also check on the talkpage to see whether the articles are rated as Mid, High or Top importance to Australian music. Those ones should be left in this article but a brief "meaningful and interesting narrative" should be added.
  3. For comparison of an article which is better written than this one check American rock. Note that its equivalent subsection to "Second wave" describes the British Invasion before going on to Garage rock.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a makeshift start , I have already created two new articles (Australian music publications of the 60s and Australian record companies in the 60s, by copyediting the material here, but I will have to re-work them later. Perhaps, you could help me with the sourcing (and also help me overcome a severe lack of knowledge about Australia). Please forgive my ignorance (please don't get mad), but the only book I have on an Australian topic is the one by Marks and McIntyre (although I may have a nature book stuffed away somewhere with little pictures of Koala bears in it). Save me!!! Garagepunk66 (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs more sources[edit]

Attention: This article desperately suffers from a LACK OF REFERENCES AND SOURCES. While I recognize that most of the topics are truly essential for understanding the history of Australian music, and that most of its contents are likely to be true, we still have to cite them with reliable references and sources. I am not necessarily in favor of removing most of the contents (unless certain things are incorrect or irrelevant), but the presence of unsourced material can be challenged at any time. It is time to get this article properly sourced. Garagepunk66 (talk) 02:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, things are moving in the right direction at this site--the article is beginning to be much better sourced. Steady progress. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:29, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Focus: non-rock volume 3[edit]

Last ¶ of "First wave" focuses on Frank Ifield and Rolf Harris. Ifield was UK-born, largely UK-based country music singer and yodeller. Harris was .au-born, largely UK-based novelty/pop entertainer. Are either or both of these non-rock? I'd like other opinions before I remove material on them.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you 100%. The article should discuss rock only. I have no problem with people removing any non-rock stuff (after all, AC/DC rules!!!). Who cares about all that yodeling, anyhow (unless it influenced rockers)? I think that there is also a lot of irrelevant discussion about record companies, etc. in the "first wave section (as in the second wave section). We could probably remove that stuff, too, and create new articles for it (or merge it with those other two articles I just created, maybe have those articles re-named to encompass both the 50s and 60s). Garagepunk66 (talk) 20:37, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Late 70s query[edit]

In the section "Late 70s" there is the following:

  • The progression of the Australian independent scene from the late seventies until the early nineties is chronicled in Stranded: The Secret History of Australian Independent Music 1977–1991 (Pan Macmillan, 1996) by author and music journalist Clinton Walker.

Is this allowable under the guidelines? It seems to be very close to a free plug. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 09:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Australian rock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Australian rock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Rock music in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Floyd concert 1972[edit]

Need to find promoter or anyone who was there that saw the show. Daryl Robinson. 0499785150 Navistar1999 (talk) 06:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rock_music_in_Australia&oldid=1206857132"