Talk:Aphex Twin/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Rumours

In the "History" section, under "Synthesizers and drum machines: 2004–2008" it says: "Rumours that he may have committed suicide in 1999 remain unproven, thou many suspect this may be true, and that the so called public "Aphex Twin" is just a guy in mask." Since when does wikipedia deal in rumour-mongering? Shouldn't this be removed? Wikipedia is not a tabloid magazine or a fan-forum/BBS. And also, it should say "Though" not "thou" 220.239.181.130 (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I removed it, there's no evidence to suggest this at all, probably just a troll edit. Geshpenst (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Stockhausen

Could we please cut out shenanigans like:

Stockhausen influenced Aphex Twin. Fact. It's in the references

All that is referenced explicitly is James having mocked Stockhausen, and even that only once. Could the Stockhausen supporters please cite their sources? And yes, explicitly: with names, date, link and all - the works. Else, it's WP policy to delete what is not sourced, glorious V doing the magic.

Here's James on Stockhausen:

Aphex Twin on “Song Of The Youth”

Mental! I’ve heard that track before, I like it. I didn’t agree with him. I thought he should listen to couple of tracks of mine: Didgeridoo, then he’d stop making abstract, random patterns you can’t dance to. Do you reckon he can dance? You could dance to Song Of The Youth, but it hasn’t got a groove in it, there’s no bassline. I know it was probably made in the 50s, but I’ve got plenty of wicked percussion records made in the 50s that are awesome to dance to. And they’ve got basslines. I could remix it. I don’t know about making it better; I wouldn’t want to make it into a dance version, but I could probably make it a bit more anally technical. But I’m sure he could these days, because tape is really slow. I used to do things like that with tape, but it does take forever, and I’d never do anything like that again with tape. Once you’ve got your computer sorted out, it pisses all over stuff like that, you can do stuff so fast. It has a different sound, but a bit more anal.

I haven’t heard anything new by him; the last thing was a vocal record, Stimmung, and I didn’t really like that. Would I take his comments to heart? The ideal thing would be to meet him in a room and have a wicked discussion. For all I know, he could be taking the piss. It’s a bit hard to have a discussion with someone via other people.

I don’t think I care about what he thinks. It is interesting, but it’s disappointing because you’d imagine he’d say that anyway. It wasn’t anything surprising. I don’t know anything about the guy, but I expected him to have that sort of attitude. Loops are good to dance to…

He should hang out with me any my mates: that would be a laugh. I’d be quite into having him round.

"I don’t think I care about what he thinks", "I don’t know anything about the guy" - no inference at all for Stocky having had influence on James, ok? It certainly doesn't matter that I feel Stockhausen to be an overrated moron, but when James thinks that a "computer [...] pisses all over stuff like that", meaning Stockhausen's taped silliness, it does - righto? Could all the Princes Charming please heed this advice: ridicule is nothing to be scared of! They can? Fine, thank you. --tickle me 17:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

This article in The Guardian cites Stockhausen as an influence on Aphex Twin. --Kaini (talk) 17:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello? One Simon Hattenstone, a "features writer" with a "weekly sports column"(!!), who never had heard of Stockhausen before, never had professional or personal experience with electronical or classical music, engages in humorous banter as the editor designated him as a guinea pig of sorts for the Guardian's "series on 'difficult' art forms", so the slot for a facetious essay can be filled. In the course of this endeavour, he tells of an equally non-descript "Alex Poots", who sends him a CD of electronic music composed by artists he, "Alex Poots" esq., feels to be "influenced by Stockhausen". So, this outweighs James' very own assertion, who doesn't "care what [Stockhausen] thinks", doesn't "know anything about the guy", and likens Stockhausen's clumsy endeavours succinctly to "piss"? Can we please stop being silly? Which eventually means stop cherry-picking from the results of hasty unrelated google-searches? ...to back up Stockhausen's fanboys' notion that their master influenced real musicians, too? The ones with balls and brains? And could we be bothered not to revert disputed edits per WP policy? And *not* to edit until we got verifiable and -hello?!- authoritative sources that outweigh James himself? Once and for all? --tickle me 22:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

You are now removing referenced material from a reliable source in order to make the article fit your ideas regarding Aphex and Stockhausen. This is not the way we do things on wiki. To tell the truth, I don't particularly care if Stockhausen is mentioned in the article or not, what I have a problem with is, and I repeat, your removal of referenced material from a reliable source in order to make the article fit your ideas regarding Aphex and Stockhausen. --Kaini (talk) 22:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

here's another reference for you, from The Independent. --Kaini (talk) 22:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

and another, from an interview with James in The Guardian, Friday October 5, 2001. --Kaini (talk) 23:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It's not enough to quote a reliable source, the source must actually back up a claim. Wikipedia has been touting the Stockhausen/Aphex Twins link for long, and papers copy it: this is disastrous. None of these articles gives any proof of James seeing himself connected in any way to Stockhausen, they exclusively purvey the author's assessments about it. This...

Whereas most white musicians these days are born of the blues and the Beatles, Aphex Twin's lineage is Stockhausen, John Cage, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno and the Detroit techno of Derrick May.

...says: I, the Guardian's author, cited in the non-authoritative and non-reliable source "aphextwin.nu", feel Aphex Twins to be related to Stockhausen et al.

The Independent's E. Dugan, however, does actually purport such nonsense indeed. How can I put it nicely? If James qualifies Stockhausen's efforts as, quote, "piss", unquote, and makes clear that he doesn't "know" him and doesn't "care" about his thoughts, than this is ultimate proof of Ms Dugan copying received wisdom from their peers, who are none the wiser. James makes it quite clear in the only explicit interview available, that he loathes Stockhausen. The interview is copied and linked to above. All sources, at the very best of encyclopedic propriety, can be summed up like this:

Some journalists claim Aphex Twins' music to be influenced by Stockhausen, though Richard D. James denies this in the strongest terms possible, likening his efforts to "piss", asserting that he doesn't know Stockhausen and doesn't care what he thinks.

I edited accordingly. --tickle me 01:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

the aphextwin.nu link is a transcription of an earlier article from perfectly reliable source. i can make the cites pretty and quote that source if you like. and they way the article is after your edits, it reads dreadfully and contains WP:WEASEL words. here's an interview with James where he states (after playing at a Stockhausen-centric event in The Barbican) "I’m doing this Stockhausen thing because it will probably be his last gig and I actually just wanted to get tickets. He’s played live a few times recently but only new things and I don’t really like them. They are conceptually amazing but I don’t really like the music. They are probably too advanced or whatever. (laughs) But this time he is playing his first three electronic pieces.

additionally, repeatedly using "aphex twins" in your response is, well, a bit troll-ish to be honest.

how many references must I add to the article before it meets your standards, Tickle me? --Kaini (talk) 01:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Let's add more of that quote, right?:

I’m not making a conscious decision to play in these places. I’d rather play in a shit club anyday. I’m doing this Stockhausen thing because it will probably be his last gig and I actually just wanted to get tickets. He’s played live a few times recently but only new things and I don’t really like them. They are conceptually amazing but I don’t really like the music. They are probably too advanced or whatever. (laughs)

What of this supports the idea of Stockhausen having had influence on James?

1. James preffering shit clubs any day?
2. James merely wanting to get tickets?
3. Not really liking the "new things?"
4. Not really liking "the music?"

This is getting out of bounds. Please stop.

> WP:WEASEL words
Indeed, I got carried away - and, hey, James' "piss" drives the point home nicely, doesn't it? --tickle me 03:41, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

---

PSF: Any interest in working with interactive systems and components?

I haven't done anything like that but I'm really interested in that sort of stuff. Anything odd or unusual like that. Electro-acoustics like that. A lot of it makes me laugh though because it's kind of like a science lesson with no music. A lot of people forget to make it into music. It's very technical and not very emotional. When it's got the two, then that's when I really like it.

PSF: Anyone in mind when you say that?

At the moment, I suppose it's just my friends who do it and a few old composers. I like the old tape and avant-garde music. I really like Stockhausen's first record. It's awesome. Don't really like much else after that. 'Songs of Youth' is my favorite one. Tod Docstader as well. He's an American (composer) from the '60s, working with tape music. At the moment, I like Luke Vibert. He's doing this tour with me. I love his music. I like Squarepusher as well.

http://www.furious.com/PERFECT/aphextwin.html

Aphex Twin likes some things of Stockhausen but doesn't like other things. Tickle Me, your argument about Aphex Twin not liking Stockhausen is now dead. He likes some things but not others.

Whereas most white musicians these days are born of the blues and the Beatles, Aphex Twin's lineage is Stockhausen, John Cage, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno and the Detroit techno of Derrick May. James takes in his stride the fact that he is now considered as important as these all-time electronic greats. Even having Madonna on the blower didn't faze him. She rang him one day out of the blue at home because she wanted some of his strange magic to rub off on her: cool by proxy. Aphex had other ideas for the mooted collaboration.

You see, it's directly implied here that Aphex Twin is quite relaxed about the fact that his music is influenced by these musicians who include Stockhausen. The word lineage implies the influence behind Aphex Twin's music includes that coming from the listed musicians, including Stockhausen. "James takes in his stride" implies that Aphex Twin is humbled to be considered on the same level as his predecessors. Take a listen to perc#6 or Gwarek2. Sounds similar in style to Stockhausen's Kontakte. The journalist actually talked to Aphex Twin, he didn't get the information from Wikipedia, he got it straight from the horse's mouth.

I don't see any solid argument that Stockhausen should be removed from the list of influences. It's absolutely ridiculous. I'm honestly stunned that it's being challenged. If there are further problems we can sort out the exact wording and references to at least try to satisfy Tickleme. Creating a win-win situation would be best.

"Some journalists claim Aphex Twins' music to be influenced by German composer Karlheinz Stockhausen,[34][35] though Richard D. James denies this, likening the composer's efforts to "piss", asserting that he doesn't know Stockhausen and doesn't care what he thinks.[36]" Well, this claim is not true, as seen by the two references that I have given, therefore I will delete this claim. --[signed User:Gargantuan_Peeder]

"Whereas most white musicians these days are born of the blues and the Beatles, Aphex Twin's lineage is Stockhausen, John Cage, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno and the Detroit techno of Derrick May. James takes in his stride the fact that he is now considered as important as these all-time electronic greats..."[1]

indeed, it could be inferred that one "Paul Lester", having read Wikipedia and copying it for want of better information, feels Aphex Twins to be related by Stockhausen et al. and be proud of it. Unfortunately, all James has to say for himself is, that he

1. likens the composer's efforts to "piss"
2. asserts that he doesn't "know anything about the guy"
3. doesn't care what he thinks.
4. prefering shit clubs any day to playing in Stochhausens behlf
5. doing it merely to get tickets to the barbican
6. doesn't really like the "new things?
7. doesn't really liking "the music?"

whereas in another interview he says that he

1. really like Stockhausen's first record
2. Doesn't really like much else after that

Get it? He "really like Stockhausen's first record" is all that can be added regarding this subject.

Besides, it really would help if one-time one-purpose editors wouldn't pop up anytime this article needs to be defaced in the vain above. cf [2] and [3]. --tickle me 12:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

---

You claim Paul Lester created the article after reading Wikipedia but the Guardian article was published in 2001. The column title of the article is "The Friday interview". A quote from the headline says "From Limp Bizkit to Madonna, everyone wants to work with the Aphex Twin. But those high-paying jobs aren't important, he tells Paul Lester." The article is based not on Wikipedia, but an interview by Paul Lester with Aphex Twin. Paul Lester directly communicated with Aphex Twin. I would like to point out the status of the Aphex Twin article on Wikipedia in 2001, it is a crude discography of 12 records along with 1 fully formed sentence and a few descriptive phrases, without a mention of Stockhausen. You said "indeed, it could be inferred that one "Paul Lester", having read Wikipedia and copying it for want of better information, feels Aphex Twins to be related by Stockhausen et al. and be proud of it." but that claim is simply not true, as shown by the vast amount of evidence in this paragraph.

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Aphex_Twin&oldid=234239

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/stockhausen-enigmatic-maestro-dies-aged-79-763778.html Obituary of Stockhausen: "His unique blend of classical, avant-garde and electronic music propelled him to musical fame in the Fifties, and he has continued to influence a host of musical luminaries, from Miles Davis and Aphex Twin, to Brian Eno and Bjork"

http://www.furious.com/PERFECT/aphextwin.html "I'm really interested in that sort of stuff. Anything odd or unusual like that. Electro-acoustics like that. A lot of it makes me laugh though because it's kind of like a science lesson with no music. A lot of people forget to make it into music. It's very technical and not very emotional. When it's got the two, then that's when I really like it.

PSF: Anyone in mind when you say that?

At the moment, I suppose it's just my friends who do it and a few old composers. I like the old tape and avant-garde music. I really like Stockhausen's first record. It's awesome. Don't really like much else after that. 'Songs of Youth' is my favorite one. Tod Docstader as well. He's an American (composer) from the '60s, working with tape music. At the moment, I like Luke Vibert. He's doing this tour with me. I love his music. I like Squarepusher as well."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2001/oct/06/2 "He sends me a CD of electronic music composed by artists influenced by Stockhausen - Orbital, William Orbit, Talvin Singh, Bjork, Aphex Twin."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2001/oct/05/artsfeatures3 "Aphex Twin's lineage is Stockhausen, John Cage, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno and the Detroit techno of Derrick May. James takes in his stride the fact that he is now considered as important as these all-time electronic greats. "

As refuted above, this was taken from an interview article where the journalist communicated directly with Aphex Twin. It was not created using Wikipedia because the Wikipedia page of the time barely featured more than one sentence, notwithstanding absolutely no mention of Stockhausen at the time.

I'd like to refute numbered point 1:

     " 1. likens the composer's efforts to "piss" 

Where?

"Once you’ve got your computer sorted out, it pisses all over stuff like that, you can do stuff so fast. It has a different sound, but a bit more anal."

Aphex Twin is bragging about his computer, not criticising Stockhausen with the word piss.

"Would I take his comments to heart? The ideal thing would be to meet him in a room and have a wicked discussion. For all I know, he could be taking the piss. It’s a bit hard to have a discussion with someone via other people."

He's wondering if Stockhausen's criticism of Aphex Twin was fully serious or not.

http://www.aphextwin.nu/images/interviewsarticles/afx_interview_by_heiko.pdf

I had a look through this source about the Barbican gig but there is no mention of Aphex Twin likening Stockhausen's music to "piss".

Some journalists claim Aphex Twins' music to be influenced by German composer Karlheinz Stockhausen,[34][35] though Richard D. James denies this, likening the composer's efforts to "piss", asserting that he doesn't know Stockhausen and doesn't care what he thinks.[36]

There is no reference of Aphex Twin denying that Stockhausen is an influence on him. There is no evidence of him saying that the newspaper articles are untrue. Aphex Twin didn't liken Stockhausen's efforts to piss, and the reference that you're using to make that claim doesn't contain the claim.

Whether Aphex Twin personally knew Stockhausen or not is irrelevant to whether he was influenced by some of his music or not. Aphex Twin said he didn't care what Stockhausen though, but let's put this into context, this article is from 1995, while the others are from 2001 and after.

Tickleme, it takes a lot of effort to refute all of your claims, but I have demonstrated quite comfortably that most of your claims are untrue, backed up by references. I believe the effort that I am putting in is out of proportion to what has happened: you deleting the word "stockhausen" out of the influences section.

Anyone can edit wikipedia, that's why it's awesome. What matters is whether the people involved are trying to improve the encyclopaedia by telling the truth and backing it up with good sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gargantuan Peeder (talk • contribs) 13:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

what really bothers me about this dispute is that tickle me doesn't really seem to have any interest in Richard James, but rather seems to have a problem with Stockhausen. this attempt to introduce a subtle bias into wiki is a more insidious thing than straight-up vandalism, and it's the sort of thing that makes me very disillusioned with wiki sometimes :( --Kaini (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

RfC on the Stockhausen/Aphex dispute

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

all editors who participated were of at least the conclusion that even if Richard James doesn't like much Stockausen bar Song of the children, he has been cited as an influence on Aphex Twin (and, as an aside, most of the time secondary sources are more desirable than primary ones) - and therefore deserves inclusion in the Influences section of the article.

---

Does Stockhausen deserve mention as an influence of Aphex Twin?

• My two cents: It looks to me like Stockhausen was indeed in some way an influence on Aphex Twin. Even if RDJ doesn't like Stockhausen's music, that doesn't exclude him from being an influence. The fact that there are multiple sources claiming Stockhausen as an influence is good enough for me. Again RDJ doesn't say that Stockhausen isn't an influence, he just pokes fun at him. Heck, I could name a few sucky artists that have influenced my music. Also, I really don't think an RFC is necessary. Wickethewok (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

i agree that RfC mayy possibly be overkill, but i have a feeling that tickle me will not give this up without a proper and definitive consensus, so might as well cut to the chase. --Kaini (talk) 02:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

• Mostly I agree with Wicket. All that stuff about RDJ not liking Stockhausen's music after his first record seems to be true, but all the sources are saying is that he was influenced by Stockhausen, not that he was necessarily a fan. And heck, if RDJ has strong opinions on Stockhausen's music then it certainly would seem that way, no? - filelakeshoe 13:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
• my feelings on this matter are made very clear in the two sections preceding this one. tickle me seems to have disappeared, so i'm giving the RfC one week in case any other parties care to comment, then i'm closing it. --Kaini (talk) 00:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

'

Computer albums

I've altered a section in the analord section that claims his previous albums were just soft synths and computers, as it seems a lot more likely that he used hardware then processed it for drukqs as well as for some late nineties material. it was probably just the mid 90's stuff that used computers exclusively. Melaena (talk) 19:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I believe I added that, it was my intention to refer to those previous albums like Richard D James in that sentence. Despite, I think the article is best without it.Rtyq2 (talk) 22:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Electronic music genre

Please, Electronic music is too broad to have listed as a genre. It needs to be more detailed, like whether it is IDM, ambient, etc. etc. {Tim C} 08:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

i'd encourage you to have a read of the talk archive. the use of the term IDM and the corresponding cat has been the source of much wailing and gnashing of teeth in the past. --Kaini (talk) 23:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Electronic music fits it. Richard's music is too diverse to be caged in only one sub-genre like IDM. Show me s.o. dancing to let's say "Bucephalus Bouncing Ball". Is "Come To Daddy" IDM? Or "Windowlicker"? What about "Milkman"? --Say Headcheese!--hexaChord² 19:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Aphex Twin's career is defined by his exploration of electronic music. "I.D.M" is Aphex Twin's career processed through the minds of American internet geeks and sprayed onto the internet. Aphex Twin is a British artist so the article should represent the original British interpretation of his career (electronic music) as evidenced by over 20 sources from the world's print journalism. American misconceptions as evidenced by the American fan site (www.watmm.com) and the American "IDM list", and pathetic blog sites should be removed or played down. In conclusion Aphex Twin = electronic music. Editors should defend against accidental vandalisms by ignorant American editors and fanboys who frequent the American fanboy websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flamingpikey (talk • contribs) 11:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Electronic music is a precise and accurate descriptor. Time would be better spent proving the with sources the claims made in the article to stop trolls from causing disruption. Tonyfey (talk) 16:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

rare artical. where to download??

1991-XX-XX - New Music Express - Material World 1992-XX-XX - New Music Express - Doin' The Digeridoo 1992-XX-XX - Sounds Music Weekly - Double Trouble 1993-01-XX - Melody Maker 1993-03-XX - Zine - Twin Peaks - by John Pavely 1993-04-XX - Future Music - The Aphex Effect 1993-06-05 - NME - Trapezer Good 1993-09-20 - Trance Express Europe CD booklet 1993-11-27 - Melody Maker 1993-12-XX - Melody Maker's Push talks to Aphex Twin... 1993-XX-XX - Interview With Richard D. James - by Bob Gourley 1993-XX-XX - Man, Machine, Music - Paint It Red - by Tim Johnson 1993-XX-XX - Melody Maker - The Six Lives Of Richard D. James

http://forum.watmm.com/index.php?showtopic=4785

link dont working —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackmanRaheem21 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Stockausen II

" ... But I’m sure he could these days, because tape is really slow. I used to do things like that with tape, but it does take forever, and I’d never do anything like that again with tape. Once you’ve got your computer sorted out, it pisses all over stuff like that, you can do stuff so fast. It has a different sound, but a bit more anal."

Some English semantics for beginners from a non-native speaker: "he" refers to Stockhausen - "things like that," "anything like that," and "stuff like that" a computer "pisses all over" refers to Stockhausen's "stuff." "stuff" Stockhausen did with tape, which James feels to be a bad idea, as he prefers computers, because with it "you can do stuff so fast."

> There is no reference of Aphex Twin denying that Stockhausen is an influence on him
There's no evidence of Aphex Twin denying to peddle crack, either .

> There is no evidence of him saying that the newspaper articles are untrue
There's no evidence to the contrary, either, but many instances of James mocking Stockhausen, his work, and his procedures, making it highly unlikely that James feels S. to have had influence on him. We simply won't write anything that can't be proven. Cut it out. And please, stop arguing by attrition, bizarro logic, and sock- pupettry to circumvent policy. --tickle me 22:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

what "pisses all over" refers to is the process. he's saying that the process of making concréte type stuff is made much easier by having access to things like wave editors and sequencers. i get the feeling that you should learn a bit more about the article you're editing, and james' frequent use of colloquialisms, particularly london ones ('lush' is another favourite of his, used to describe things that are good, for example). as to your accusations of sockpuppetry, it's frankly offensive. feel free to get a mod to checkuser. i'm about a hair's breadth (that's a colloquialism) from escalating this anyway --Kaini (talk) 22:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

There's enough evidence and references to back up having the word "Stockhausen" in the list of influences. I suggest getting Administrator attention, as I believe Tickleme will keep removing "Stockhausen" regardless of the evidence and good references. Tickle me is adding some heavily biased version of quotes to the Stockhausen VS the Technocrats section, which is the totally wrong section. What he is trying to add should go in the influences section, and the sentence that he is trying to add drips of bias, as he is twisting the source and chopping it up and presenting it to support his personal opinion. 1995 was when Aphex Twin was getting into computers. 2001 is when he peaked with laptops and then he got into tape for recording Analord. People's opinions, tastes, methods, and influences change as they grow up. It's a shame that Tickle me hasn't realised this because he is creating a lot of work for other people that is truly a waste of time.

> it pisses all over stuff like that

subject: it [the computer]

predicate: pisses

object: stuff [that Stockhausen does with tape]

"concréte type stuff" - if one so likes to heighten discourse with buzzwords.

> escalating

Please do. --tickle me 22:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

the situation at present-

there is a small amount of primary-source stuff (interviews from around the time of the release of drukqs, and the stockhausen gig in 2000) which would suggest james would count stockhausen as an influence.

there is LOTS of secondary evidence (articles and editorial matter) to suggest the same thing.

your evidence to the contrary is one article from 1995 which you are misinterpeting, or twisting the semantics of, to suggest the opposite.

i'm inviting further opinion on this argument. you honestly need to get real. --Kaini (talk) 22:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

> further opinion

That's talking - but: will funny, ugh, editors please abstain? Admins welcome. Another good idea: add quotes by James on Stockhausen having had influence on him, and let the readers judge by themselves - sound & basic WP policy. But: please don't plaster the place, instead reduce, shorten, and put what he says in a nutshell.--tickle me 23:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

> What he is trying to add should go in the influences section

Indeed, even funny editors have good ideas sometimes. I complied, and, to add icing to the cake, added {{Refimprovesect}} to the "Influences" section. Presently it's just unsubstantiated name dropping. No artist at all should be named as influence, unless sources say so, particularly James himself. And no, I don't mean press blurb by guys with, say, a "weekly sports column" needing to fill some lines. Can we please stick to known experts who make a case for their assertions, wouldn't that be a good idea, too? Anyway, we're getting somewhere. --tickle me 19:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

---

"Paul Lester is a freelance music journalist who has been contributing to the Guardian for most of this century. Among other things, he writes the New Band Of The Day feature for Guardian Unlimited Music."

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/arts/author/paul_lester/profile.html

Tickleme, you realise that you are creating a lot of pointless work for other editors? You realise that the biggest claims that you have made have been demonstrated to be wrong with references?

Paul Lester wrote the following quote, and he is an experienced music journalist who interviewed Aphex Twin directly. As proven above, he did not copy this claim from Wikipedia as the Wikipedia article of 2001 was a few sentences! The following quote is more than enough evidence to support having Stockhausen in the list of influences, so please stop removing it.

Whereas most white musicians these days are born of the blues and the Beatles, Aphex Twin's lineage is Stockhausen, John Cage, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno and the Detroit techno of Derrick May. James takes in his stride the fact that he is now considered as important as these all-time electronic greats. Even having Madonna on the blower didn't faze him.

It's just my Original Idea, but.., I think To Cure A Weakling Child, Contour Regard (on the Come to Daddy EP) is a reference of Aphex Twin to Gesang der Jünglinge by Stockhausen.Biggiesmartypants (talk) 22:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The second sentence: Aphex described as "the most inventive and influential"

"He has been described as "the most inventive and influential figure in contemporary electronic music."[1]" from source [3]

This is an opening of an article that's ment to lure readers in, I left it out. It is not a source that can be copied in the opening paragraph of this article. I guess Aphex Twin could be called influential somewhere in the article but with extreme caution because it's Point of View.

Why has this been placed back?Biggiesmartypants (talk) 19:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Removed this sentence again.Biggiesmartypants (talk) 20:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

..and it's back again. my 2c - it's a referenced statement, and is relatively neutral. to put it another way, we can't say 'he is the most influential figure in electronic music' but we can say 'he has been described as the most influential figure in electronic music', and provide a reference. i say keep it. --Kaini (talk) 15:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

A source would be a book or an article from someone who knows what he's talking about, not the quoted article. The quoted article is not scientific. It may be fun to read for someone who doesn't know aphex twin but otherwise it's worthless. This second sentence of this wiki page makes it ridiculous from the get-go. The rest is sub-par too so i guess it fits. I'm out Biggiesmartypants (talk) 12:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

that ref is from the guardian. refs don't get much more verifiable/notable than that. Also this article should be geared towards 'someone who doesn't know aphex twin'! --Kaini (talk) 09:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It's been kind of quoted out of context because what I said about luring the reader in, it's typical journalistic stuff to keep the reader interested. Also this journalist isn't an authoritiy on musical influence (I have looked the writer up). I personally am not able to read past such a sentence in an opening paragraph in a wiki. I agree with your "Also this article should be geared towards 'someone who doesn't know aphex twin'!" but at the same time I'd want the article as scientifically correct as possible. Biggiesmartypants (talk) 14:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay I'm proposing this instead: "Many artists have said they've been influenced by the music of Aphex Twin. Many critics have applauded the innovativeness of his sound." Or something that's worded better. I propose this becauese it is more factual and therefor encyclopedic (sources with these sentences would be nice). Or I'm proposing a sentence similar to the one that's there now, but from an authoritative figure. Biggiesmartypants (talk) 07:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I put this discussion back from the archive, I don't agree on it being archived after a month. Also I still don't agree with the sentense, I should remove it again, as the last time it was removed by a bot. Also I could do a poll, but as a poll is a way of starting discussion I don't feel like it because I'm done discussing this, I'll leave it to future editors Biggiesmartypants (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the statement should be removed as well unless it's been said by someone relevant. You could cite a sentence like this from somebody about virtually and band. I think the sentence should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.159.148 (talk) 01:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

This article will forever be a joke to me as long as that sentence (with that source) is in the opening of it. (That's just another opinion though). Biggiesmartypants (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

if you have a problem with wikipedia policy regarding something like WP:V, the village pump is probably a good place to start discussing that. the talk page of an article probably isn't --Kaini (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

No I have a problem with this particular article. I think this is a bad source to get such a bold claim from, in the opening sentence this article no less. It should be taken from a respectable authority on music (who, I hope, won't make such a strong statement though, because it's hard to be the most influential) (maybe this borders into problems with WP:V, yes). With my joke remark I'm mostly saying that, if I was unfamiliar with Aphex Twin and looked him up on wikipedia to find out more about him, I would disregard this article as juvenile after reading the first sentence and would stop. Biggiesmartypants (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

the claim is based on The Guardian as a source. this is a respected and venerable english paper. there's no question as regarding the verifiability or indeed notability of the source. your problem is with policy, inasmuch as policy affects this article. --Kaini (talk) 00:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I was too lazy to do this before but maybe I want to do it now: shall we have a Straw poll about this? I'd like to have more opinions on this and maybe this will help get those. Biggiesmartypants (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

whilst polls can help gather a feel of what the consensus is, polls don't decide stuff like this. i've amended the lede a bit - should actually be longer, really... ---Kaini (talk) 01:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I read about polls and I understand they aren't for deciding on stuff. However, I want to use it to get people to post here about this subject. Because now it's just us two discussing this. I don't want to use the poll to get my way but it would make me feel better, as a wikipedia user, to know the general consensus on this. (I appreciate your last patch but I still can't agree).Biggiesmartypants (talk) 09:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

awards?

he probably hasn't won any grammy's but i was surprised to see no mention of awards in this otherwise comprehensive article. a section on awards and accolates might be appropriate? Roadnottaken (talk) 23:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you know of any off-hand? If so, feel free to add it to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.114.226.227 (talk) 01:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Antiques Roadshow appearance

yes, it's obviously richard (although without a reference that matters not). however, does it deserve a section in an article on wikipedia? no. even if it passed WP:V, WP:N would lean toward it deserving - at the very most - possibly a line in the article. deleted content below:

Shortly after the airing of the 2nd episode of the 32th series of Antiques Roadshow, rumours surfaced that James was in attendence and visible during the inspection of an Edison Electron Gramaphone. This was notable due to his reportedly reclusive nature and apparent lack of concern at being filmed (however briefly).

The same day Grant Wilson-Claridge confirmed reports stating that "We had been in the North making preparations for a Manchester show. He heard about it and wanted to look into buying a Wurlitzer but ended up trying to buy Donald Bradman's autograph". He also expressed surprise that fans had noticed this so quickly given the obscurity of the program.

Kaini (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Last Step - a Aphex Twin Venetian Snares collab ?

Soundwise and by the look of the artwork it looks like it especially "Your'e a nice girl"(http://planet-mu.com/discography/ZIQ129) which has the Aphex Twin logo. Does anybody have some hard evidence or info ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.55.76.229 (talk) 20:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

firstly, that's not the aphex logo, secondly, it's pure WP:OR. last step sounds like aaron trying to ape the analogue sounds of analord. in 7/8. --Kaini (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

OK - so there is no evidence of any connection. Then just leave it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.55.76.229 (talk) 20:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Doesnt sound anything like aphex twin, RDJ has said he doesnt like Vsnares that much anyway. --66.158.232.98 (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Source please - 122.106.163.229 (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Why should he provide a source for a trivial conversation on a talk page? ≤ ^alvareo [speak to me] ≥ 16:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

rdj begged af to release his music on rephlex. BEGGED. af said no but they were still e-mail bum chums years ago, dunno about today. source is my fat ass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.221.163 (talk) 21:02, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Wrong Attribution? Fabricated info?

in: Advice from Aphex Twin

Future Music: What pisses you off about the current music scene?
Aphex Twin: Too many sheep and not enough shepherds. Let's all sit back and have a long hard think, then make something different! We can all do it, surely?[37]

It references http://www.furious.com/perfect/aphextwin.html, however, there is no mention of this quote. I looked on the internet archive: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.furious.com/perfect/aphextwin.html, and I didn't see it there either. I also search google and couldn't find any reputable sources of the quote. It appears the quote originates from Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revil (talk • contribs) 03:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

future music 2005 (2005?) interview —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.221.163 (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC) http://musicthing.blogspot.com/2006/07/aphex-twin-interview-in-future-music.html evidence for the article's existence. whats the wiki policy regarding print magazine sources? does it need to be scanned and uploaded to wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.221.163 (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I think as long as the magazine is sourced properly, it should be fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revil (talk • contribs) 20:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

New album?

Is this worth placing into the article? http://www.bbc.co.uk/6music/news/20090313_aphex_twin.shtml 91.111.126.70 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC).

Why not? A new album, and on Warp. That's news. --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 23:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

whats the deal with konklaver? his so called new album, anyone know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.78.87 (talk) 17:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Still waiting......

2001 lost Mp3 player

Why on earh someone would label his mp3 player "Unreleased Aphex twin tracks"? It makes no sense at all this is in main article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.192.235 (talk) 07:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

what matters is what aphex said. readers can make their own mind up as to whether it's bullshit or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.221.163 (talk) 21:00, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

actually the [20] reference says it's a bullshit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.13.225.158 (talk) 21:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

"The release of Drukqs two years ago was prompted by a mistake. James left an MP3 player on a plane that held a mind-boggling 282 new tracks. It was labelled "Aphex Twin Unreleased Tracks" to make any would-be bootleggers quite sure that what they might post on to the internet was the real deal. This never happened, but James hurriedly put together a double CD just in case. "

The posting to the internet of Aphex Twin's mp3 tracks is what never happened. The source doesn't make any claim of bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.159.216 (talk) 04:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

self-promotion vandalism

"Hard Jam Ciders" is a pseudonym? lol. i'd do it myself but the page is protected —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.119.219 (talk) 22:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Disgusting Vandalism

Ugly vandalism, not maintenance template. Write the lead longer if you care that much. Do you realise that there is a INFOBOX full of information that would go in the lead? So what do you say, have the lead and infobox as the EXACT same information? What nonsense. Only a thick Marxist brain could suggest such an unintelligent opinion and back it up with the force of anti-intellectual moderation policy. Pathetic scumbag criminal people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.157.64 (talk) 08:34, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

firstly, please remain civil. secondly, calm down; you're talking about 2cm of screen real estate and getting this worked up over it is ridiculous. finally, why not be bold and improve the lead yourself, if you have such a problem with the template? --Kaini (talk) 11:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

A brief moment of thought will suggest that since you are going against the policies of the Wiki, and apparently care enough to personally attack people, it makes more sense for you to expand the lead. Some guy (talk) 12:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

"Do you realise that there is a INFOBOX full of information that would go in the lead? So what do you say, have the lead and infobox as the EXACT same information? What nonsense." Why does it make sense for me to edit the lead because I don't believe there is worthwhile information to enter there? In fact, the opposite is the case. In fact, Aeternus, Kaini, Some guy should enter the information or remove the vandalism. Hohoho, you will leave a maintanence box for 5 years rather than add the informations yourself that you claim is necessary, while you put the responsibility to the man who doesn't understand what information could even be added there! Why do brainless moderators have the power when they have no mind no brain no intelligence? Criminals —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.157.64 (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Fan site

I removed the newly added fan site from the external links section of the article, because our guidelines on external links expressly states that such sites should not be added to articles. The section titled Links normally to be avoided, it states, "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc, controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)" While guidelines are, of course, flexible, I have never known an exception to be made for fansites of musicians. That link definitely does not belong on Wikipedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

useful forum. policy isnt strict. should make exseption + keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.68.192.193 (talk) 09:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Why would we make an exception for that one specific musical artist? Every artist has a fan page, some of which are as good or better than the artist's own page from a web design perspective. Why should we make an exception in this case? It can't be just because it's "useful"--by definition, fan sites are always useful to fans. That's not enough of a reason. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

forum.watmm.com and xltronic.com belong in the links. aphextwin.info looks promising but doesnt have many users. get more users or relevant content such as exclusive interviews then you can add it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.170.210.82 (talk) 04:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

You haven't explained why these forums are somehow an exception to a very widely recognized and accepted guideline. I remove fan sites on every music, musician, actor, or tv show page I see them on, because the guideline is extremely clear. I've never once seen a successful defense for a fan site. Thus, you need to provide an extraordinary rationale why this should override our normal behavior. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

beatles have none. sex pistols have two or three. the guideline is only a guide not a firm rule. consensus on invidual talk pages is the best route. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.173.15.21 (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

No. Editors on individual articles cannot override guidelines or policies. For example, editors on a page can't decide, "Eh, we don't need NPOV, because this person is obviously evil, so we can write anything we want." Exceptions need to have a clear, specific reason for being overridden. Think about it in this case--if editors at pages could choose to add fan pages, what musician's page would be without them? So, again, please provide a reason why we should violate not only the guideline, but also widespread practice. As a side note, thanks for mention Sex Pistols--I'll go remove the fan sites there as well. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

one of the existing discography links was to aphextwin.nu (the previous name of xlt) - i've removed that, as well as another external link. we definitely don't need three links to discographies, when the entire discog is more or less replicated internally. it doesn't add any value to the article. Kaini (talk) 00:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

infobox

I think that parts of the introduction, i.e. labels and aliases, should be contained in the infobox. It could be contained in both, but priority would be infobox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.92.9 (talk) 08:07, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Odd redirect

Why does Karen Tregaskin = ? Redirect here? Conkern65 (talk) 04:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

karen tregaskin is listed as half of The Tuss, which is an RDJ alias. Kaini (talk) 16:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

That is a theory. I deleted the page nonetheless.

Conkern65 (talk) 15:49, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

it's not a theory, it's a fact. BMI entries like that one list who the royalties go to for a track. Kaini (talk) 15:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Gear

He also used synthesizers of his generation, the Synton Fenix, and the notoriously difficult to program Roland MC-4 sequencer (a sequencer with a reputation for excellent timing), as well as the famous Roland TB-303 for his trademark acid melodies.

hrm... who is hyping up ebay items, huh? analord features over 100 machines. imo move the sentence to analord article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hexagonmoon (talk • contribs) 22:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

perhaps you could tell us some more of the 100+ machines? These (except 303) feature on the analord labels, so do Electrocomp sequencers on analord 9 The idea of someone needing to hype a Synton Fenix in this way, or at all, is proposterous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.243.124 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

agreed. i'm trying to WP:AGF but i just cannot see how someone would interpret this as 'ebay hypery'. --Kaini (talk) 23:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Conkern65 (talk) 17:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)== Aphex twin covers? ==

I wonder would it be relevant to make a short list of songs covered by other artists..

I can only think of one off hand: Flim is covered by american jazz trio The Bad Plus on their album "these are the vistas" (2003 columbia records)

but if anyone can think of any others and get references i think it might be worth a quick mention.. or it could be put in the influence on others section.. 89.125.107.20 (talk) 22:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

well, there's an entire album of covers by Alarm Will Sound, as well as a cover of come to daddy by Dillinger Escape Plan. but i dunno if it warrants a new section. --Kaini (talk) 00:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I was only listening to Alarm Will Sound when I remembered I posted this here. Perhaps that at least deserves a mention in the influences on others section? That section could probably be tidied anyway. 89.125.106.70 (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, Covers are only relavant in the specific album that they were covered from.

Conkern65 (talk) 17:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Phlegm EP

I keep reading About this EP, which I can find no evidence of. http://www.aphextwin.nu/learn/98136141045227.shtml http://www.answers.com/topic/james-richards both contain this. ? Conkern65 (talk) 17:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Early Years

"Richard David James was born to Welsh parents Lorna and Derek James in St. Munchin's Limerick Regional Maternity Hospital, Ireland." Is there any evidence or source for this? I have hearsay that this is hearsay. Robin726 (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Which part are you concerned about? Here's a book reference for Limerick. I'm pretty sure those are his parents' names, and they might be listed in one of his albums liner notes somewhere. I'll check that later. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 18:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

His parents are mentioned by name in a couple of tracks from Druqks. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 22:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's exactly the album I was thinking of. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

1985-present

What qualifies as still presently being a musician? He hasn't released an album under a confirmed Moniker since Chosen Lords. He still tours, but I am not sure if we should change that or not? Conkern65 (talk) 01:12, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

I would say Aphex Twin is synonymous with Richard D. James, and as long as he is making music under any moniker, he is still active. Unless there was some official announcement that he had retired the name or something, it would be original research to try to guess at when he was no longer active. If he's still touring, I'd definitely count that as active. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 05:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Computer generated

What exactly is a 'computer-generated acid line' ?

Does this mean that his computer wrote the acid line by itself? Because computers don't work that way...

I think that many people feel that to make electronic music, you just turn on your computer. Dispelling this notion would be a good idea, in my opinion.Michaelphonic (talk) 04:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps it refers to algorithmic music. Jarble (talk) 02:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

it's quite possible it's there to distinguish it from, say, an acid line made by a TB-303 which is the usual bit of kit used to make acidy sounds. Kaini (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd be very surprised if he made his acid sounds on anything as notorious as a TB-303. He's reputed to be a very skilled programmer. I think Kaini and Jarble mean to say that he's gone beyond just analog instruments to a certain extent. Lighthead ^þ 23:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi, you can change that line. What wiki articles need is exciting english prose, and that's policy. We have to take care that the interesting language is factual too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.47.191.62 (talk) 08:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Article title change?

Although James is best known for his Aphex Twin work, he has also been creative under numerous monikers and I am wondering if we should swap the redirect and the article title, so that it is an article about "Richard D. James", which is more all-encompassing than "Aphex Twin". I cannot think of an accurate comparison at the moment, but, for example, Roddy Frame and Aztec Camera are two separate articles, even though Frame was the sole member of the band for most of its existence. I am not suggesting two separate articles, but, as James is an artist who is more expansive than the "Aphex Twin" moniker, the change may be warranted at this point in time.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Reconstruction Album

At the bottom of the page under the unreleased albums section there is something called "Reconstruction". I've never heard of this and want to know if "Reconstruction" has even been confirmed to be the work of Aphex Twin? If not should't it be removed? 2604:2000:FFC0:1F9:4BE:10F9:EAC4:E40D (talk) 08:58, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Aphex Twin

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Aphex Twin's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Amy":

• From Crowdfunding: Amy Phillips (19 September 2012). "Amanda Palmer Starts Paying Musicians". Pitchfork. Pitchfork Media. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
• From Syro: Amy Phillips (21 August 2014). "Aphex Twin Reveals Amazing SYRO Album Artwork and Bio". Pitchfork. Pitchfork Media. Retrieved 22 August 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 10:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Tregaskin+Tregaskin=James

Both Discogs.com and Rushup Edge's Allmusic Guide Review claim that The Tuss is, in fact, another name for Aphex Twin. What should we do with the The Tuss article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Weasel (talk • contribs) 03:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Well it's still not 100 % certain. I would however just include whatever you to write about The Tuss in the Aphex Twin article and state it's still uncertain it is in fact Richard D James but that credible sources think it is, and cite that Allmusic article. Biggiesmartypants (talk) 13:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Every track from Confederation Trough EP and Rushup Edge is registered with BMI as being written by Richard David James. (BMI Repertoire Search, search for "james richard david" as a composer/songwriter) You can't get much more officially confirmed than that. —Eclipsed Moon (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah - how much longer are we going to have to wait before we can put The Tuss as a confirmed RDJ alias? If the BMI Repertoire Search says it is him - it is him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.128.11 (talk) 00:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Right now we just have it linking to The Tuss saying it's unconfirmed, which seems good enough. Once (if it ever) gets officially confirmed, we'll change it. Rtyq2 (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty much officially confirmed. BMI is the most factual of a source you're going to get, unfortunately you can't say the same about Richard. ChunkyStyle (talk contribs) 04:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

mention BMI facts backed up by source. quote rephlex sayin' 'tuss is not aphex. who cares. music more important' = balanced + sorted (aka the wikipedia way) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.214.216 (talk) 08:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I added a section called "rephlex's denial" to The Tuss. Hopefully that should balance out the article. And feel free to add more to it. Rtyq2 (talk) 18:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Following the merge guidelines, I'm placing a merge document on the top of the page. If you haven't heard the news, in an interview RDJ has claimed authorship of The Tuss. --Akhenaten0 (talk) 01:59, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The Aphex Twin name

The section about Aphex' name claims that the Aphex portion of the name is derived from Aphex Systems Limited. However, official unofficial aphex twin faq (section A:2) has a different opinion and quotes a printed magazine source:

The "Aphex" in Aphex Twin is actually a registered trademark of Aphex Systems, Ltd. a manufacturer of pro audio and broadcast sound processing products (most well-known for their Aural Exciter). Some recent releases include the line "Aphex is a registered trademark of Aphex Systems Ltd and is used by permission" somewhere on the package. But, according to the February 13, 1993 issue of NME:
"Richard came across the word by accident, using the 'A' in Aphex for the acid element in his sound, and the 'ph' as the pH value of acid. He hadn't even heard of an Aural Exciter until he'd had a few records out. He is, let's face it, the last person who'd name himself after a piece of gear made by somebody else: he was constructing his own synthesisers at 13."

However, even if this source is deemed unreliable, the claim that the name comes from the hardware company is still unsubstantiated and probably an inference from the fact that the name is used with permission. I think the claim should either be changed or thrown out completely. Nitro2k01 (talk) 21:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I always thought he was merging the words "Effects" and "Apex" (which means the same as pinnacle). The Apex of Effects as it were. Not that I ever heard that from any source, it just seemed blatantly obvious etymology. Probably where Aphex Systems got the word from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.142.54 (talk) 03:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Personal life

James does not have children. He is not married, either, him and his girlfriend just like to joke around and pretend like they are and like they have children.

Quote:

»dave: […] Also been checking some of your interviews that have started coming out, really cracked me up, all your lies about having kids and wives !

rich: Well you know you gotta play with the conventions ain't ya, also though, I always kinda fantasised about what it would be like to have kids and get married etc, I know I probably will never do that, so I guess it's nice to pretend that you've done it, my russian girlfriend was flattered when I started pretending we were married, a lot of people now think we are married which is funny and we just play a long with it most of the time, we had an imaginary wedding and have imaginary kids.«

Source: http://noyzelab.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/syrobonkers-part1.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.226.41.126 (talk) 18:37, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Grew up in Lanner?

Is this actually sourced? I am pretty sure his family home is is in Carharrack. I've forgotten his parents' first names but pretty sure they are listed in the phone book as Carharrack. Anyway, if Lanner isn't sourced it should be removed (from here and the Lanner article) for now I think. Kernow (talk) 18:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about his childhood but he's confirmed that the house he was living with his parents in during his teenage years (the one he left when he finally moved out on his own) was 36 Clissold Cresent in Lanner, England. He even used his address as a song title ("36 Clissold Cresent, Above the Kitchen" was one of his soundcloud songs). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.125.182 (talk) 03:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Genres

So, Richard has made numerous genre's of music, and I have noticed that it keeps getting changed, I think we need to agree on a series of Genre's that encompass his music production. I know hem refused the Term IDM and prefers his Braindance, but other then that, Ambient, and Experimental are definatly important. is there anything else? Conkern65 (talk) 21:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC) IDM shouldn't be there at all. It is a false genre made and spread by American fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.183.34.71 (talk) 09:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC) Personally I have always used the more general genre of "Electronic" (which is how a record store would file it) rather than bothering to think of sub-genres. If he stuck to a single sub-genre it would be different but so long as an artist actively explores different sub-genres on every album I prefer to be general about the genre. His next release will just add more to the pile of sub-genres anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.125.182 (talk) 03:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Birthplace

As he was nominated for Choice Prize in Ireland, myself and friends have been researching his nationality deeply. Today I went to the national archive and found no evidence of him born in Ireland at all from 1968-72. Have photographic proof.Jclarity (talk) 00:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jclarity (talk • contribs) 00:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Where does this leave us? Does it invalidate him from the award? Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 03:28, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Award organisers have been contacted .Jclarity (talk) 05:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Considering this is a possible BLP issue, has proven to be contentious and lacked any reference in the text or infobox, it should not be included again unless verified. Karst (talk) 09:59, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

It would be great if we could get a volunteer in Cornwall to do what I've done with the physical records there. In our research in free BDM databases we have found a Richard Leigh James born in Truro, Cornwall in 1971. Mother's name Hancock. https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVWN-GPQH Jclarity (talk) 10:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Oxford University Press say he was born in Truro, Cornwall. http://oxfordindex.oup.com/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.47229 Bodrugan (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hooray for a well-respected, reliable, objective source! --Akhenaten0 (talk) 19:56, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

There is no evidence that Aphex Twin was born in Ireland. I believe the original document pointing out Richard's ancestry as Irish was a compilation of other people's interviews. The man who wrote the document had never even met Richard James before. If you have the evidence that Aphex Twin is Irish then please provide it so we can have a looksy. Until that time, please visit youtube and watch the video of a song called 'There's no one as Irish as Barack Obama' to get a sense of the Celtic sense of humour that has affected this Wikipedia article.

Richard David James was born on August 18th 1971 to mother Lorna James (no idea what her maiden name is). His father is Derek James (which is why the drukqs track of his parents singing him happy birthday on his answering machine is titled "lornaderek"). I couldn't tell you what country the birth took place in, but narrowing it down that much can probably help your search. His birthdate is the reason his current Soundcloud account name is "user18081971" (18-08-1971). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.125.182 (talk) 03:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Discography (the abridged one on the main page)

The criteria for what gets cut out of the abridged discography seems to not make sense. Personally I hate that a 40 disc discography is cut down to 12 or so things but I can understand leaving eps out (even if I disagree with it). But the policy on compilation albums seems to be leaving some albums out while including others (Ventolin isn't included, Caustic Window Compliation is). I'm making changes now to include ALL full length albums. Of course the regulars should feel free to make changes to my changes, just make sure any rules you follow in doing so are applied equally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.125.182 (talk) 04:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Since someone decided to undo the changes based on mistaken info on their part I feel further discussion (point by point) is warranted. The criteria I used for the changes is: MUST BE A FULL LENGTH ALBUM NOT AN EP OR SINGLE. That includes compilations since they were already included on the old list (Caustic Window Compilation and Chosen Lords were on the old list despite having no new tracks and missing tracks, just because they're full length and what they reprint isn't). To be clear:

1. ANALOGUE BUBBLEBATH 3 is over 50 minutes. There has never been a justifiable reason for leaving it off this list.
2. VENTOLIN is a full length album. Yes it is true that SOME of the printings have it as 2 EPs instead of 1 album, but other printings (the US printing) have it as all one album. Thus it is a full length album because ONE OR MORE of the versions of the album are. The fact that one of the printings isn't full length does not invalidate the other printings, especially because they came out at the same time (the US and UK first printings) rather than the full length one being just a later printing.
3. CLASSICS is a full length album reprinting some of his most notable early releases (his 3rd and 4th EPs). The only justification for leaving it off the list is the fact that it's a compilation, but so is Caustic Window Compilation and Chosen Lords and they're on the old list. You can't say that it's because they're more notable releases because Classics is far more notable than either of them.
4. HANGABLE AUTO BULB is a 2005 compilation 35 minutes in length (so long enough to count as an album but damn close to the limit) that reprints the EPs "Hangable Auto Bulb 1" and "Hangable Auto Bulb 2". We are not talking about the EPs (which are NOT long enough to be considered albums), we are talking about the 2005 reprint which has a different title (no number) and IS just barely album length (about the same length as the UK printing of "Richard D James album").
5. 26 MIXES FOR CASH is a 2 cd set consisting mostly of remixes he's done over his entire career. Only 2 justifications come to mind for leaving it off, either "it's a compilation" or "it's not one of the notable releases". The first doesn't work because of Chosen Lords and Caustic Window Compilation, the second is actually a decent point.
6. EXPERT KNOB TWIDDLERS is a full length duet album with Mu-Ziq. I can't see any reason it was left off the old list.
7. Analogue Bubblebath 5 is a 1995 album whose release was canceled. It's full length but probably left of the list because it's "unreleased". In fact copies were printed and mp3s based on those copies made it to the internet back in the 90s. Then in 2005 a few new copies were printed and given to fans whose orders of Analord got screwed up (as a way of apology). I'm counting that as a "release", even if it was limited to a dozen copies and wasn't available to intentionally order. Perhaps I'm wrong to count it this way.
8. Come To Daddy was a full length album on the us printing and 2 EPs on the UK first printing. All later UK printings have it as all one album.

As an aside, so far as I know there has never been a printing of On that collected both EPs on one album. Some people's mp3 collections have it like that but I've never heard of a proper printing of it like that, thus it's not added to this list. 24.68.125.182 (talk) 05:01, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

just because it's a full length album doesn't not mean it's a studio album. compilation shouldn't have been/shouldn't be on something that says Studio Albums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8084:200:2300:596A:702:2192:97D (talk) 10:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Irish/British EDIT WAR

Please let's stop this STUPID and COUNTERPRODUCTIVE edit war. The article explains that he was born in Ireland, grew up in Cornwall and has lived in London for years. I'm not aware of any statements by him about Irish independence or anything like that. Just let the reader decide for themselves. We really don't care how much some editor hates England or whatever. Doctorx0079 (talk) 21:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

i could not agree more, and if i see consensus i'm going to add an invisible comment to the article to that effect (not that it's done any good in the past *sigh*) --Kaini (talk) 21:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My friend's son was born in China but has British nationality and carries a British passport. He is not Chinese. I can think of many British celebrities who were not born in the UK. Joanna Lumley, and Spike Milligan for a start. Ian Hislop was born in Wales, but he's not a Welshman. I agree with the two users above. By the way, there isn't actually a decent source that proves that Richard James was born in Ireland. Yawn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leprachaun2010 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Considering that Chinese and Irish nationality laws are completely different, your comparison is a waste of time. 130.235.100.25 (talk) 13:12, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

It seems to have started up again, sadly. Given his mix of Welsh and Cornish heritage, time served in London and reported current residence in Scotland, 'British' seems the only sensible descriptor of nationality. The whole Irish thing is an obvious red herring - although Richard seems to write enjoy those, to be fair... Garibaldi do Biscotti (talk) 10:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)\

He is an Irish citizen automatically since birth according to Irish nationality law, unless you can show that he has given up his Irish nationality. Wales, Cornwall, London and Scotland are all in the UK (i.e. British), yes, but the Republic of Ireland is not. Seeing as he holds both British and Irish citizenship, "British-Irish" is the factually correct description. Obviously that's not the consensus view on here, but consensus opinion is not always correct. 19:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

irish, english, british, cornish

are we talking nationality here, as in what goes on someones passport? in that case then then answer is british. though irish-born, this fact has little relevance to the well known musician aphex twin's career and thus has no relevance in the lead paragraph. cornwall seems to have more of an influence as track names and some artwork are based on cornish language, beaches and culture. i say, keep "irish-born" out of the lead as it is not very relevant drive-by vandalism. cornish has a stronger case to be made but there is enough room in the detail of the article to discover this fact. british is the guy's nationality therefore it is relevant to the lead so that people know aphex twin isn't from china or the north pole or argentina. can we get some consensus here to stop this continual vandalism? - Mr Self Parody — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.135.82 (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Cornwall is not an independent nation with its own citizenship/nationality. Britain (i.e., the UK) and Ireland are both independent nations, both with their own citizenship and both with their own passports. He has both citizenships, because anyone born in Ireland before 2004 is automatically an Irish citizen and both the UK and Ireland permit dual citizenship. It never ceases to amaze me how difficult it is for many people on Wikipedia to comprehend that a person can hold dual citizenhip. Due to population statistics, there are far more British people on Wikipedia than Irish people, and many of the former go around Wikipedia removing the dual citizenships from many famous people who hold dual Irish and British nationality. 130.235.100.25 (talk) 14:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:OPENPARA, "Irish-born" should be removed from the lead. Although it's likely RDJ had an Irish passport, it mentions "previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." And I'd be inclined to keep British as his nationality; sure, it's generalising but unless there's a reliable source where he identifies as English or Cornish, it's best to keep it "British." Idiotchalk _(t@lk) 16:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense, Idiotchalk. I like that signature... Lighthead...KILLS!! 07:05, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

There isn't a good source for the Irish-born thing in the first place. If there is, please reveal it. I'd bet it was a typographical error in a magazine that has been accidentally spread as truth by wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.183.34.71 (talk) 09:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Speaking from personal experience, huh? Let me take a look. Lighthead ^þ 23:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

He's right. There's nothing solid from any interview or anything saying that he's Irish, much less from Limerick. I straightened out the intro. Lighthead ^þ 23:57, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Except for the fact that he was born in Ireland before 2004 and is therefore, as defined by the law of the Republic of Ireland, automatically an Irish citizen since birth. But don't let facts get in the way, this is only an encyclopaedia after all. Since he is automatically entitled to Irish citizenship since birth, the burden of proof falls on those who don't think he should be listed as Irish in the article: i.e., find me an interview where he specifically mentions that he renounced his Irish citizenship. Until such proof is found, the correct way to describe the person in the article is as "British-Irish", because those are the two nationalities he holds. 130.235.100.25 (talk) 14:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Find me a source (that doesn't reference wikipedia) that says he's Irish. Go on. On Wikipedia, we back up our facts with sources. I know he's Irish (and I'm from Limerick), but we need a source. Kaini (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

He was born in Ireland before 2004 so holds Irish citizenship. My source is the nationality law of the Republic of Ireland. 130.235.100.157 (talk) 12:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

You need to find reliable proof that he was. An article in a music journal or a newspaper, for example. Kaini (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I have changed it to read "England-based" to avoid an inaccuracy in the Lead, even though Limerick is in the Infobox. How does this sit with people?--Soulparadox (talk) 04:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Why are some people so keen on associating RDJ with Ireland anyway?? I doubt very many Irish people care about him. He isn't THAT famous and probably never will be. His roots in Cornwall are much more relevant to his music. The impression I get is that some editors are going around with an "up with Ireland" mentality. I wish they would stay out of this article. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 14:17, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it has anything to do with an "up with Ireland" mentality. If any lawyer or civil servant were tp follow the nationality laws of both Ireland and the UK, then they would very quickly come to the conclusion that RDJ holds dual nationality. The problem is that the majority of people in the world (and on Wikipedia), were born and lived in the same country for their whole life. And, unfortunately, many of these people simply cannot grasp the concept of multiple nationalities. Therefore, there is an element on Wikipedia who insist on assigning a single nationality to persons. In this case, it involves constantly reverting RDJ's nationality back to a single nationality. 130.235.100.25 (talk) 13:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I went to the General Register Office in Ireland. He wasn't born here. I checked from 1968-72. See the new entry below I added specifically about birthplace. We have a possible in Truro, Cornwall but need help to investigate https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVWN-GPQH Jclarity (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

If it helps Richard's date of birth is August 18th 1971. It's why he changed the name of his Soundcloud account to "user18081971" (18-08-1971). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.125.182 (talk) 03:39, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

The Aphex Twin has spoken: http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/ontherecord/2015/01/14/the-aphex-twin-has-spoken/ 82.171.253.241 (talk) 19:14, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Various collaborations

This may or may not be redundant, but it'd help expand the biographical sections.

Is it worth mentioning things such as this within his "gaining success" section/others: a remix and an original track of Richard's appeared on the NIN remix album Further Down the Spiral, via Nothing Records (which I believe distributed for a few artists on Warp within the US) prior to appearing on 26 Mixes for Cash - I normally wouldn't see the need to mention all the remixes he's done for notable artists as those alone would constitute half the page - an original track though?

I only bring it up as I know so many avid fans of his who, without internet connections and unfortunately any presence in a community where word of mouth mentioned anything worthwhile that wasn't celebrity, had no idea who Aphex Twin was or what he sounded like, only learning of him by hearing his work accompanying much more high profile artists at the time (i.e. finding ICBYD through NIN). Worth mentioning along with anything else as notable, at least up to the strong international following he gained before and after the impact of Windowlicker.

72.200.69.99 (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

IDM is a FAKE genre

IDM was a massive fraud perpetuated on the public by an American gang at the Hyper Real website and IDM list. There are American websites that have graffiti scribbled their American garbage ideology onto British electronic music. IDM was denigrated and attacked by Aphex Twin, Mike P, and Luke Vibert. But some trolls have gone through the main article removing references and quotes from Aphex Twin's friends regarding this false genre name. Clearly, the trolls have used Wikipedia in order to promote this fan created genre name. It is associated with websites such as WATMM and XLTRONIC nowadays. Anyone with the slightest bit of decency should do the right thing and keep IDM out of the Aphex Twin article. What a fraud on the public! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoideredByDaUkGuv (talk • contribs) 08:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

So it is, but for anyone concerned enough to write something like this, it is what it is and understandably so unless you were not yet born/a child still uneducated on the matter or simply privy to a far more fortunate climate of electronic music at the time of its creation than those across the pond who felt it applicable. That isn't in defense of such an archaic term, it's in response to the staggeringly long, equally archaic childish banter over it. If most of it isn't remotely "intelligent" or seen as dance music, a lot of today's disdain for the term is undoubtedly one result of pressure about appearing naive by using it. Seems unless someone is specifically concerned about the term, nobody seems to either know or care what it stood for anymore in discussion. Its continued use is for convenience, used when trying to tell someone who likes x about y. Labels we consider legitimate like "ambient techno" or [insert 'proper' variant of DnB here] are fine if broadly correct about certain artists lumped into "IDM" until someone mentions something like BoC and the discussion shifts to things like "dark ambient" and "downtempo" being thrown around and everyone argues endlessly. Whole thing only serves to remind us why genres are stupid to begin with 90% of the time. If it were up to me, the infobox would omit them in favor of actually having a detailed "musical style" section, but it's not up to me. What *is* "IDM" ~22 years later? Just three letters that ostensibly mean "electronic music by artists on Warp, [other shit not on Warp that somehow got thrown in there like Dntel or FSOL, whatever sounds close enough to Aphex or Ae and referred to as such enough times] other 'IDM' labels and [bandcamp artist 200,204,830,303 feels his music is IDM as fuck doood] anything else of relation" and fortunately/unfortunately, the only time I ever hear it being associated with its original meaning is whenever contentious things like this pop up. Maybe dropping it is the key to its eventual elimination, hmm?

Anyways, removal of his quotes about it should be undone. Label an artist and disallow their dismissal of that label if notable to appear in the page describing it? Absurd. Doesn't need to be mentioned on RDJ's page(s) either, at the very least not in the infobox where genres are listed. That said, who cares? Find better things to be angry about. Any appearance of "IDM" within his article if sourced is going to relate to negative statements he's made, to things publications have written and to groups, forums and communities like the IDM mailing list and WATMM. It says absolutely nothing about his work. "What a fraud on the public!" What a waste of time. Yes, I agree it's nonsensical; not letting yourself get over it isn't the solution. Swim Jonse (talk) 20:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Removal of soundcloud tracks

I noticed someone stuck a "citation needed" on the fact that he removed all his soundcloud tracks. Here's the most direct citation possible, the empty page where the tracks used to be: https://soundcloud.com/user18081971/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.8.10 (talk) 08:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

That is both WP:PRIMARY and not a WP:RS. Karst (talk) 09:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Aphex Twin

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Aphex Twin's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "allmusic-review":

• From Whole Numbers Play the Basics: Bush, John. "Whole Numbers Play the Basics – Casino Versus Japan". AllMusic. Retrieved May 21, 2015.
• From Succour (album): Swan, Glenn. "Succour". Allmusic. All Media Guide. Retrieved November 2, 2014.
• From Quique: Swan, Glenn. "Quiquie - Seefeel". AllMusic. Archived from the original on August 4, 2013. Retrieved 20 December 2013.
• From Amber (Autechre album): Raggett, Ned. "Amber - Autechre". Allmusic. All Media Guide. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
• From Richard D. James Album: Bush, John. "Richard D. James Album – Aphex Twin". AllMusic. Retrieved 23 April 2015.
• From Throbbing Pouch: Cooper, Sean. "Throbbing Pouch". AllMusic. Retrieved 20 July 2015.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:02, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aphex Twin. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140805223851/http://www.brits.co.uk/artist/aphex-twin to http://www.brits.co.uk/artist/aphex-twin

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:31, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Cheetah EP has been released. Please update the article

Also please expand on "Computer Controlled Acoustic Instruments 2" EP, such as saying its reception and what not.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C0C6:98B0:3157:88DC:556E:D59C (talk) 17:52, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Why not WP:BEBOLD and do it YERSELF?? -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 01:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Braindance?

Should we have "braindance" under genre? The artist is supposed to have invented this term for his music. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 01:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Aphex Twin. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://xltronic.com/nostalgia/aphextwin.nu/v4/learn/98494129834161.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://xltronic.com/nostalgia/aphextwin.nu/v4/learn/98136154898147.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131008100124/http://www.rephlex.com/artists to http://www.rephlex.com/artists

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 10:15, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Moving article to "Richard D. James"

Aphex Twin is the most notable alias of Richard D. James and as served the vast majority of his fame. However, James has produced many releases (and has had a history) with many other aliases, which the article records. The template for James was named "Richard D. James" because of the many links to articles from releases by him under other aliases such as AFX, Polygon Window, etc. So would it not make sense to name the article "Richard D. James" alike?

Lazz R (talk) 11:29, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Aphex Twin. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://arts.guardian.co.uk/fridayreview/story/0%2C%2C734809%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0%2C%2C2100257%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080603074638/http://xltronic.com/nostalgia/aphextwin.nu/v4/learn/98136154898147.shtml to http://xltronic.com/nostalgia/aphextwin.nu/v4/learn/98136154898147.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://music.guardian.co.uk/electronic/story/0%2C%2C2088396%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.villagevoice.com/music/0731%2Cphelan%2C77377%2C22.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://soundcloud.com/meds-label/sets/noyzelab-16x16-cell
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080611121559/http://www.furious.com/perfect/aphextwin.html to http://www.furious.com/perfect/aphextwin.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://arts.guardian.co.uk/fridayreview/story/0%2C%2C734809%2C00.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 23:28, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Aphex Twin - Syro main press photo.jpg

File:Aphex Twin - Syro main press photo.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 non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Aphex Twin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905122824/http://www.thewire.co.uk/articles/425/print to http://www.thewire.co.uk/articles/425/print
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080313162926/http://www.themilkfactory.co.uk/music/rephlex.htm to http://www.themilkfactory.co.uk/music/rephlex.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 08:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

fr.wiki translation

Hey guys ! Huge AFX fan from France here. I just wanted to let you know that I've been translating this article for fr.wiki from last december onwards, with some minor tweaks, like for instance, different sources. I'll keep track of further changes on this page and will possibly translate them into french as well. Keep up the good work ! Best regards, Insane Stamina (talk) 13:52, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

laws of Ireland

Are the laws of Ireland relevant to the nationality listed in the article? Or not? -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 20:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC) The article on Sam Neill says "Neill holds British and Irish citizenship through his place of birth, but identifies primarily as a New Zealander." Maybe something like that would be helpful here. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 20:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Information on nationality, properly sourced, is probably notable, though not in the lead. Popcornduff (talk) 02:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

James' early work and route to emergence from free party scene

This is highly relevant and sufficiently notable that it belongs in the lead. Do not remove it without discussion. Do not pretend your choice of what to include is "compromise". Cambial Yellowing❧ 12:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Once again: for a lead, mention of his emergence from free party DJ gigs doesn’t also necessitate a detailed classification of the distinct types of raves and the exact locations they took place—“Raised in Cornwall, became local rave DJ in the free party scene" would be more than sufficient as a summary for all that.

And, once again: there is no justification to include mention of a “local party organizer” and one-off indie label association that you can’t even be bothered to name outright (an implicit admission that it’s not noteworthy enough for a lead). These elements need to reflect their emphasis in the article body or in critical overviews about James' career, and currently there’s undue emphasis being put on his early career. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 17:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

The lead should be a summary. That does not mean we need to cut word count at all costs. I think the rest of it should also be longer, and intend to flesh it out, given that it's currently basically just a trainspotter's list of his releases and which alias was used. There is a discography page for that purpose; it doesn't need rehashing in prose.

The fact that it was a "DIY" operation, from within the same illegal party scene, that put out his first record, is notable and reflects what is in the body. That said, conveying the above does not necessarily need the word record label or a link to Mighty Force. If we can communicate the above fact without reference to the label, how would that be. (An Exeter free party promoter put out...) or some such? Let's discuss before implementing. Cambial Yellowing❧ 19:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Gentlecollapse6. These details (“local party organizer”) aren't really important enough for the lead. Popcornduff (talk) 10:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Like I said, your additions to the article body are great, but this level of detail doesn’t belong in the lead. Mighty Force does not need to be mentioned, not sure why you’re so gun-ho about mentioning a label with minimal association to James. The core idea "he emerged from the free party scene" doesn’t require it. And the "trainspotter's list of his releases" only mentions his commercially-successful/charting albums. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 01:06, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Why have you continued to edit war after discussion has started in talk? It is not helpful and resolves nothing. Cambial Yellowing❧ 09:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Thus far, you’ve been outvoted on the talk page, and have failed to build any consensus for your additions to the lead. The question is: why have you continued to make reversions after losing the talk page discussion? gentlecollapse6 (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I thought that the version you made at this diff was an attempt at compromise, but obviously not. What is your objection to having the lead be any longer? Cambial Yellowing❧ 19:30, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Why have you continued adding these details back in? There’s no consensus for doing so, as you’ve lost the (admittedly) small vote here 2-to-1. Unless you can drum up some consensus, there’s no precedent for these additions, sorry. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 20:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, there’s no reason to make the lead significantly longer. This is not an exceptionally long article by any means, and the lead is provides a general summary while being consistent with the length of Good Articles about other artists of comparable renown. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I will be grateful if you will follow convention and add your comments below existing discussion, rather than inserting them between earlier comments from other editors.

The section was added because you chose to stop responding and raised no objections to the lead being longer. Most good/featured articles have a lead which is significantly longer, and usually include a few sentences about how the artist's career initially got off the ground. Cambial Yellowing❧ 21:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

I’ll be getting in touch with a mod at this point. Since no one here conceded to your changes (in an "ongoing discussion" or otherwise), but actually explicitly rejected them, I don’t see how you’ve built any "consensus" for your controversial additions, which means they should be left out until the situation changes. Nonetheless, you’ve continued reverting, even after I agreed to take it to the talk page and give you an opportunity to build consensus, which you’ve failed to do. Since nobody’s removed any content—simply moved it to the body—you can’t claim I've removed any sourced material. Re: your first comment, please lay off the immature point-scoring—I responded clearly to a particular point, i don’t care about your preferred "convention." gentlecollapse6 (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

gentlecollapse6, you seem to see building consensus as something which is imperative for others, but optional for you. It is not a question of determining a winner and loser and then whoever wins does whatever they want (because editors are not 6 years old), but seeking possible ways of addressing all editors' concerns. A compromise was for example worked out on this very issue with another editor in the last day or so simply using edits and a carefully policy-cited edit summary. And hence my comment from 28 November proposing a possible compromise to you, to which you declined to respond without edit warring. Will you do so now? Or do you want to throw stones about who is "the winner and the loser"? Cambial Yellowing❧ 03:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Since it is you who is seeking to add controversial new additions to the lead which are not supported by any previously established consensus, and it is you who are outnumbered in this talk page discussion, then yes—it is incumbent on you to build consensus to support your change. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 04:14, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Your characterisation of 18 words as "controversial new additions" is a little over the top. New material, by definition, is never "supported by previously established consensus"; that is what makes it necessary to find a different one. A compromise is needed, an idea you are apparently unwilling to entertain despite repeatedly using the word, albeit only to describe you getting your own way. Cambial Yellowing❧ 10:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

As noted below, a compromise has already been reached: mention of James's start in the free party scene, and mention of his early acclaim and cult following for Analogue Bubblebath—without mention of specific locations, venues, or one-off independent record label associations. That you refuse to see this as already being a compromise suggests you want it your way or no way. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 15:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

When you use the word "compromise" to describe your edit - what precisely is it that you are claiming to have compromised on? Cambial Yellowing❧ 16:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

RfC - independent record label

This RfC is about the inclusion of the phrase "local independent record label", releasing Aphex Twin's first record, in the lead. It follows a sentence about the artist starting to perform as a DJ in the area in which they grew up. As most featured/good articles about musicians or bands include in the lead salient summary details of how an artist went from unknown to becoming a notable musician (e.g. 1, 2, 3), this aspect of how the artist achieved that is relevant, but other editor feels it is important not to include it in the lead for space reasons.

In the lead section, per WP:MOSLEAD, part of the aim is to "cultivate interest in reading on", and expanding this section slightly from merely a list of the records and various aliases that the artist has used serves that end. More detail about the launching of the artist's career is given in the body. A version was arrived at after editing by Acousmana, with the word "local" added to give narrative continuity from the preceding sentence here, but editor GentleCollapse6 feels it is important that a reference to his widening DJ career, and specifically any reference to the label which began his career and its place in the local techno community, be removed completely. This RfC seeks comments on ways to resolve these conflicting views. Cambial Yellowing❧ 04:20, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Point of information: you've neglected to mention other details of this dispute, innumerated below:

As visible in an above section, Cambial Yellowing has repeatedly fought to include details of James's early career in the lead which I and Popcornduff have found to be trivial and unnecessary. I feel the additions—mention of the specific locations of James's earliest DJ performances ("going on to play at venues around the West Country"); mention of the small label Mighty Force (which was only associated with James for his first EP); in previous edits, the mention of an unnamed "local party organizer"; use of the overlong phrase "won him immediate acclaim and gained him a cult following", instead of the more succinct "won him acclaim and a cult following"—overemphasize insignificant details of the artist's career and don't accurately summarize the general material in the body of the article. Cambial Yellowing has thus far failed to build any support for their edits on this matter (despite being constructive in other areas of the page). Any input would be appreciated.

My previous edit here is my preferred compromise—brief mention of James's early scene associations in the local free party scene, but no unnecessary detail about venues or one-off indie labels. I’m not sure why Cambial is at such pains to push the image of James as a illegal DIY indie raver, when this amounts to little more than an early phase in his career, prior to his recorded output. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 04:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

@Cambial Yellowing: Recent edits have made the statement of this RfC too large for Legobot (talk · contribs) to handle, and so it is no longer showing correctly at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies. The RfC needs a brief and neutral statement to show correctly; it will also not be publicised through WP:FRS until a shorter statement is provided. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

A brief additional note - another compromise has been proposed above but Gentlecollapse6 has thus far refused to engage with this or to offer an alternative, only repeatedly reiterating their insistence that their exact preference of wording be used. Comments putting forth alternative compromises for discussion will be welcomed. Cambial Yellowing❧ 20:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

(invited by the bot) First, it is unclear what this RFC is about. It starts out by saying "about the inclusion of the phrase "local independent record label"," but then it wanders all over the place and mentions lots of wording possibilities that don't relate to that phrase. So you are going to have trouble getting input on this. One general note.....the lead should first and foremost be a summary of what is in the article. "Cultivating interest" should not be a primary consideration, and that goal is served (where appropriate) by providing a good summary. I tried getting an overview of the dispute and vaguely speaking would lean against inclusion of that material. North8000 (talk) 12:14, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

When I put in the struck text I had looked at some debated text and saw some items that were overly detailed and flowery. I put my "vaguely" comment in based on that. I decided that I shouldn't have done that without knowing what the specific question is. I'll watch this page and if a specific question emerges I'd be happy to weigh in. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

The dispute is between two versions of the lead, specifically whether to include extra details about James's early career:

• Cambial's current version, with extra details about James' early days ("going on to play at venues around the West Country," mention of a minor indie label who only released one EP by him, the adjective "immediate" and extra phrase “and gained")
• Some variation of my preferred edit, which avoids (IMO gratuitous) detail while still summarizing the basic points: his early career DJing in the free party rave scene, the early acclaim for his debut EP). Popcornduff seemed to concur with this one.

Think that’s about it. More comments about these points are located at the bottom of this section in response to Acousmana. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 17:15, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. OK, if the question is to do the removals/ reductions that were done in the 23:14, 9 December 2019 edit, then I would agree with those removals/reductions. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I drafted a more succinct RFC but Cambial beat me to the punch with a rambling longer one which left things out. Anyhow, thanks for the input—that’s three editors leaning against that inclusion. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't see such an issue with mentioning Mighty Force in lead, notable label, and launched his career. I do object to mentioning the name of the label owner/promoter in the same sentence, unnecessary. Acousmana (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

This isn’t my main gripe here, but: James has released larger quantities of music on plenty of other labels too! Why not mention R&S and Apollo (for his acclaimed debut album), or Sire (for his US releases)? A one-off label EP release just doesn’t strike me as a significant association for the lead.

Anyway, I'm more annoyed by the “West Country” clarification, which just seems gratuitous. He's also played at numerous other locations around the world! Of what significance is this geographical designation beyond broadly meaning “local," which is already included? gentlecollapse6 (talk) 02:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I agree that signing to R&S, and possibly Sire, should be included. Part of the significance of the AB record to the narrative is that it's what got him signed to R&S. The lead should include a summary of his early career/how it got started, and his signing to the labels which were crucial in moving it forward are clearly some of the highlights of that story.

This is nonetheless still too much detail for a lead to me—it seems like the logical extension of your approach is to ditch the lead altogether and simply start with the article body! If you don’t want to miss any details about locations played, labels signed to, promoters involved, the lead will be longer than the article! It’s supposed to be a general summary! gentlecollapse6 (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

It is not the number of new records which he released on a label which is relevant, but how important they were to his career. In the case of Mighty Force, he was a total unknown outside of the small Cornish free party scene, and the label was basically just some rave people he knew cobbling together a vinyl release. That release turned out to be massive (sold probably 20k+ on the MF pressings alone and loads of airplay). The important points are that the label only came into existence with the release of Aphex's record, and that the people making up the "label" was just some locals from the rave scene. "Fledgling local record label Mighty Force" seems like the most concise way of conveying those points.

Regarding the use of the term "West Country": this was added because in the context of the opening clause "Raised in Cornwall", the word "local" implies "in Cornwall" in British English. So without the second part it is misleading. It is also part of the narrative - James started in Cornwall but was later being booked to play in Devon, Somerset, Dorset; this is before releasing any records. That said, I don't consider this part, which you say annoys you, as important to include as the other section. So how about this compromise:

"Raised in Cornwall, James began performing as a rave DJ at free beach parties and local clubs in the late 1980s. Fledgling local record label Mighty Force Records put out James' debut EP Analogue Bubblebath in 1991, winning immediate acclaim and giving James a cult following." Cambial Yellowing❧ 17:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

I’d broadly compromise with this, but I object to the gratuitous phrase "fledgling"—its simply not necessary whether the label was fledgling or failing or whatever, since James wouldn’t be associated with it after that point. And "winning immediate acclaim and giving James a cult following" can be shortened to "winning James acclaim and a cult following." I don’t understand the need for "immediate"—it’s his first EP, obviously the acclaim would be his earliest. Whether it took two days or two months for the record to get popular seems irrelevant for the purposes of the lead. It’s not like it shot up to #1 on the charts within a day of release, or something similarly astonishing. And Mighty Force Records can probably lose the Records, you’re already identifying it as a label. Beyond that, yeah, sounds alright. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

fledgling means "inchoate", which is far too pretentious a word to use. How about nascent? The point that is important is that at this point they were not some established Cornish label, they were just some blaggers. Cambial Yellowing❧ 17:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, this is the crux of my original point: if they were "just some blaggers" then why would they be worthy of mention in the lead?? Aphex isn’t tied to their later rise and success as a label in some significant way, it’s not like he’s tied to their renown like he is with Warp! We don’t really need to know this information in the lead—the fact that we don’t mention any major signings until Warp in 93 already implies his earlier label affiliations would have been with comparably minor/ indie sorts. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

They are worth mentioning in the lead because that *is* the specific story of how Aphex's career started. Some blagger rave people put out a tiny vinyl pressing of his music (rather than: an established dance label liked his demo tape, or an A&R person heard him DJ, or some other story); the record was hugely popular in rave/underground in UK and in Europe and had multiple repressings; his reputation grew from there and led to bigger signings. The label name I didn't originally include, but as Acousmana points out they went on to be a notable label. As you said before, why not mention R&S too as they were also important, and you're right. Not trying to tell every detail; just the most salient points of the specific story of Afx's career getting started. I don't really see how in the Aphex Twin article one can argue that the specific "A&R" story of Aphex Twin's career taking off isn't relevant to the lead. I also don't know why you're so concerned about the word count in the lead - most good musician biography article leads are much longer. Cambial Yellowing❧ 21:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Like I said, at this point my main gripe is gratuitous language like "fledging". Feel free to include the label name, but the basic idea "started out in a DIY party scene, released a record" basically implies that he didn’t have any major big-name label connections, you don’t need to spell this out. And I again don’t understand how "began performing in the local rave scene, released an EP to early acclaim" fails to basically summarize everything you’ve stated above, but alright. Also, for reference: the most obvious example of a musical artist Good Article (actually, Featured)—the Beatles—doesn’t include any information about their label signings or record deals, early or otherwise, in the entirety of the lead. And it doesn’t feel like it’s missing anything to me. So not sure why you’re so obsessed with this, beyond your fixation on a portrait of the young man as a scruffy raver. I’m basically okay with some variation of your suggested sentence with that phrase removed, however. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

we don't need an adjective such as "fledgling" in the lead, "independent label" suffices, add the fluff in the main body prose if desired. Yes, MF put out his first record, good for them, but article subject is James, not the label. Acousmana (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

re:"the Beatles—doesn’t include any information about their label signings or record deals," not a fair comparison, the underground dance music scene in the late 80s early 90s was more about labels than "artists," it was driven by DJs and labels, James grew out of that scene, arguably his success was down to his willingness to become a poster boy for a "faceless" scene that valued anonymity over "stardom."Acousmana (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Then perhaps this point is better served by a sentence specifically stating this about James's image, as supported by the AllMusic bio discussion of his going against the grain of anonymity. As you suggested, this article is about James, not a label or a scene. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 13:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Also, why have we kept this "going on to play at venues around South West England" phrase, I though we agreed this clarification of his still-relatively-local performance geography wasn’t necessary? gentlecollapse6 (talk) 13:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

re:"South West England", could lose it, have no preference on this, it's an improvement on what was there. Not a big fan of citing Allmusic generally, that's just me, but if it serves the purpose, no objection here. Acousmana (talk) 17:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Since even Cambial already suggested a compromise (above) without that part, I’ll take it as okay to remove. gentlecollapse6 (talk) 17:14, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Musical style and influences

This section is overwritten IMO:

Prior to becoming a producer, James spent his teens modifying analogue synthesisers and became "addicted to making noises" only later becoming "interested in listening to other people's stuff". James states that he spent his initial years "ignorant of music, apart from acid and techno, where I bought just about everything". He claimed to have been independently making music similar to acid and techno before encountering the styles, and subsequently became enthusiastic about them.

Elements of this are appropriate, but it focuses too much on James's early life and how he came to be a musician, information already covered in the Early life section. Specifically, information about his teenage years modifying synthesisers tells us nothing about his music.

This section should stick more to what his actual influences are:

James said he spent his early years ignorant of music other than acid and techno, "where I bought just about everything". According to James, he made music similar to these genres independently before hearing them.

Popcornfud (talk) 00:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

On the contrary, it's highly relevant and in the most appropriate place. In "style and influences" sections concerning other artists, the early influences on their music – whatever they listened to or experienced as a child/adolescent – are described. There is no suggestion that that is not relevant in those cases. The term "influences" does not exclusively mean commercial music releases, or even exclusively music. Similarly, Aphex' teenage sonic experience is relevant here, including its specific quality e.g. "modifying analogue synthesisers" and "making noises". Cambial foliage❧ 08:17, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about influences not being relevant if they were heard during adolescence. I also didn't say anything about commercial influences. I'm talking about info such as "he spent his teens modifying analogue synthesisers" which does not say much about his influences or how his music sounds.

Obviously all biographical experience influences the work of the artist - if he had been born in 1500 James's music would sound very different and yet clearly we wouldn't bother to mention his birthdate in the influences section. IMO this detail does not meet the standard. Popcornfud (talk) 12:25, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Aphex Twin.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Recent changes

Can editor Kkollaps stop removing genres, requesting (additional) sources, and then deleting those sources when they are placed immediately after the sentence referencing the genre. Cambial foliage❧ 16:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

You've removed mention of the widely-sourced genre "IDM" from the lead and infobox repeatedly and without explanation. You’ve inserted the unsourced genre "jungle" repeatedly (mentions in the body of the article only describe it as an influence or element in James's work, and there’s no critical or journalistic consensus describing major parts of his work as jungle—drill 'n' bass or simply IDM are applied much more consistently). You continue reinserting a frivolous outdated (1995) quote describing James as "MDMA Mozart", which 1) ostensibly wouldn’t describe his more recent work 2) would require explanation to a reader who isn’t familiar with MDMA or its relationship to 90s dance music 3) seems to suggest James was an outspoken advocate or user of MDMA, when as far as I know no such relationship exists.

The lead has been relatively stable for about 18 months after previous editors agreed to some compromises on it. None of these new changes are similarly justifiable. Kkollaps (talk) 16:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Also worth noting that the Fact article you keep inserting describes his work as "spanning" techno, ambient, and jungle, not being reducible to any of these. The point is that he’s incorporated and blended influences.Kkollaps (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

"Spanning" and "blending" are not synonyms. They're not even particularly close in meaning. A discussion from December 2019 has no mention of genre.

"Widely-sourced" for "IDM" is directly contrary to the facts. In fact the only cited source that actually *in reality* supports the claim, appears to a be an obscure mailing-list sourced in the article body. It's questionable whether it should even be used in the body, given the extremely poor sourcing which seems to be a self-published source.

The direct quote from mixmag makes no implication that the artist is "an advocate or user of MDMA"; that's a wildly inaccurate and fringe interpretation which no reasonable person could make. Nevertheless I've added context for its relevance. Cambial foliage❧ 11:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Aphex/Mozart

I'm happy to lay off the page with the exception of this comparison (IMO exceptionally tacky, unenlightening, unscholarly, PR-y, and Kanye-ist) occupying a place in the lead. For now, I moved it to the style section, although in its current form it still doesn't tell us anything insightful (i.e. why is he compared to his person? Is it just a tossed off honorary blurb? Or a serious comparison of artistic practice?). I'm really not sure what your insistence on this particular comparison hinges on when he's been compared to plenty of other people who are actually relevant to his sound! (Brian Eno! Erik Satie! Stockhausen!) but I don't see it adding anything except a whiff of cheese.

Simple question: what essential information does the inclusion of that Mozart sentence add to the lead for someone who is unfamiliar with subject of the article?

(Hint: If your answer is "that Aphex is considered a top/great/iconic artist by critics"... then it's utterly redundant, because the sentence before also states this already, and without having to make a condescending comparison to a "serious" classical composer (as if a 90s techno artist can't be taken seriously until such an elitist comparison is made, which I find offensive). Kkollaps (talk) 20:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

You clearly feel very strongly about it being in the lead. I for one would not want to include anything in the lead redolent of the bad rapper and sample ruiner, but I do like the presumably derogatory neologism "Kanye-ist". I recall Rich commenting on the comparison (because the press liked to repeat it so) and pointing out that it was silly as his music is more like Stravinsky: which is true, musicologically speaking. I wish I could find the quote. I added the quotes as much was made of the comparison by the press who repeat it to this day (see article from 2019, for example); that’s how it’s framed in the text (a number of publications, etc) Let's leave it in style (or maybe "Influence and Legacy"?) section. Cambial foliage❧ 08:27, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

This sounds good to me! (And Kanye was good once!) Kkollaps (talk) 15:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

pulling suggestion that a "comparison" was made.

what we have is: "the Mozart of Ambient"(in tagline)/ "Mozart of techno" (source states "as bestowed upon him by Mojo magazine some 20 years ago"),"the Mozart of techno" (also citing Mojo)/ the MDMA Mozart (Mixmag 1995).

use of the word "Mozart" in each case is to suggest he is "prolific" in his genre, nothing more, it's not a serious musicological comparison, it's journalistic hyperbole. Acousmana 14:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)