Jump to content

Talk:Muse (band)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Style section?

Could some of the info on Muse's musical style be lifted out of the history section and placed in it's own section? And expanded? Could include info on such things as Matt's guitar playing style (and custom guitars), Chris' bass sound etc. It'd also be nice to acknowledge the discussion(s)/arguments over how to describe their music. A cursory look at any articles written about Muse would provide some good research material.

I've neatened up the External Links section. It had become a bit of a mess, with sites being added and deleted all the time. Perhaps it could do with more Official Sites, e.g. record labels, but I'm not sure. 86.135.177.189 00:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

WHY was my information on Morgan Nicols deleted? - Me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.33.15 (talk • contribs)

qua@aol.com - who said this is no longer active? It is definitely used; either by Matthew Bellamy or by a very very good imitator. -crafty bison

Isn't there way to much text clumped together? Can't this article be neatened up some?

Yeah I've wondered about this before. Perhaps we can divide it in a few sections.--Biekko 21:30, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Way too much text clumped together"? Are you kidding? It's not a very long article and, as such, the addition of subheadings would probably only succeed in making it less neat! I think Gdr has the right idea regarding layout if you'd care to read. Anyway, don't you think the correction of any discrepancies in my original article (as a number of wonderful people have, thankfully) and the addition of important new material are far more important things for people to consider than upsetting the lovingly sculpted narrative flow I created?.. Ok, now I’m kidding! But seriously, I think you have your priorities wrong. --Drunkston 00:17, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

I think it reads well. As an aside, I am wondering about an addition to the discography; I have an Australian Live Bonus CD containing a collection of 6 live tracks recorded at The Big Day Out, January 23 2004. It's an official release, included with Absolution, but I imagine there's probably other variants of these collections from other countries and am wondering if you'd like me to add it to the Collections portion of the discography? --Adam J 02:39, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
There are several versions of Absolution Album. I'm from Argentina and I bought it in a local store, and in this edition track number 7 is Hysteria and track number 8 is Interlude. There are lots of small differences like this. I've also found CD covers with Matt and DVD covers with the guy from the video Hysteria doing google searches, although those may be photoshopped or sthg. Tharos 03:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I notice Collections has been replaced by a Compliations section. Fair enough - I think that's reason enough to leave out the live stuff. --Adam J 09:51, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Eh? The names "Fixed Penalty" and "Rocket Baby Dolls" are lugubrious (I'd consider myself fairly well read but had to look that one up!). I'd describe the former as quite mundane (as in a Fixed Penalty Notice) and the latter as quite chirpy really! Jezze 22:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

MUSE ARE ACE In my opinion i think muse are ace , i have got two of their first ever albums , from a friend called Matt that they have been playing for only a few years , in other words they are young the track citizen erased and screenager are two of my favourite songs. the guitar solo at the beginning of citizen erased (BRILLIANT) and the long good voice in between the song screenager (ACE)

FROM Chris

Kenji Kawai

What is Kenji Kawai's relation to Muse? I have heard he was the original 4th member of the band but the article doesn't mention a thing —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.76.30.78 (talk • contribs) .

I did a bit of googling and it appears that there was a Japanese fusion rock band called Muse of which Kawai was a member. It is so obscure and non-notable that it isn't worth a mention. BigBlueFish 12:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I just cleaned up the Fansites section of links. In the process I removed the following links:

Could someone confirm whether or not it is Wikipedia policy to link to sites with bootleg media, which is probably of dubious copyright status? BigBlueFish 19:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Muse allows bootlegs, I believe. Legally, you may make and distribute a bootleg if you have a band's permission, but you cannot sell the audio. Also, the band has rights to take that bootleg, copyright it and distribute it for money if they like it. At least, that's what I've heard. Iffer 22:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I did some more cleanup of the list, inluding sorting them alphabetically for NPOV. I added the above links back but haven't mentioned the bootlegs except for muselive who confirm that they have permission to distribute them. If this is the case with others we can label accordingly. Also removed some rather funny POV descriptions left by an anonymous user, and the lyrics link which only actually has lyrics to Showbiz, so not the most useful of pages. BigBlueFish 11:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Just confirming Shrinking Universe (fansite) has been authorised by Tom Kirk (Muse manager) to distribute bootlegs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Psychoticmonkey (talk • contribs) .

An unsigned comment from a newly-registered user doesn't count. Per WP:CITE the onus is on you to cite your source, which more or less has to be either on the Muse site or on Shrinking Universe to be verifiable. If a source isn't cited soon I'll remove it again. BigBlueFish 14:58, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, OK - sorry. I'll sort it out next month, but infuriatingly our bandwidth limit has been exceeded this month thanks to hotlinking. (I'm the admin by the way!) If it helps, Shrinking Universe is on the same server as Muselive (as is Muse Syndrome, in fact), so the whole server is already cleared for bootleg hosting. Psychoticmonkey 23:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :) I removed the tag for now since it's not currently accessible, but look forward to seeing it back! BigBlueFish 11:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I am the owner of muselive.com and the bootlegs are only permitted for authorised distribution on muselive.com. Just because your sites are hosted on our server, this does not give you permission to distribute them legally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.7.46.132 (talk • contribs)

I thought this may be the case, if you really are the owner of muselive. You might want to get yourself a username ;). As it is, muselive is currently the only one with bootlegs mentioned, and it'll stay that way unless another website comes forward with similar claims. BigBlueFish 15:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

What about Russian fans? We did not bad site I guess: www.joinmuse.ru Wishera 09:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

i really want to settle this once and for all

have you guys ever noticed how the page's genre info is constantly edited? here is my personal opinion on accurate genres of muse: My opinion: New Prog Alternative Rock Any other form of progressive rock

What i'm ok with: indie rock experimental hard rock any other form of prog rock

I'd just stick to Alternative Rock, and Progressive Rock because that's what it is, really.--punkromance 12:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

yes, but the thing is, they're not true prog rock. as much prog rock influences as they have, they're new prog, a blend of alt rock and prog rock, but not true prog rock. Itachi1452 00:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

New album

The speculation section about the new album is currently a bit disorganised. Has anyone got any sources they could link to explaining what we know? BigBlueFish 17:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes Muse posted information on their website, www.muse.mu, on 2/23/06 and saying that they were just mixing the album. They also report that they will have a release date and tour plans will be anounced in a few weeks. Half the message was very cryptic. Most likely a puzzle from Bellamy for his fans to decode. Joe McFugal 21:19, 24 February 2006

I have put in a breif paragraph in the new recordings section about that 2/23/06 letter on their website. It has some new and exciting information. Chickenofbristol 16:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It'd be nice to put that cryptic stuff back in the article, I think, since it does actually describe each track in the new album, in order! Mr8131127126 08:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Order

Maybe the article would look a bit better if the "cryptic messages" and "trivia" sections were before the discography. It does look a little unneat right now. Also, some bands (like for instance Iron Maiden) have a box at the end of the article showing the members, discography and dvds as a quicker access (so you don't have to read the whole article if you're lloking for something in particular). Wouldn't it be good to add that here too? Tharos 03:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

Well I just removed the whole of the trivia section. After an anon IP posted a link to a midi of the Top Gear theme, I listened to it and essentially the only similarity to Bliss is the arpeggiated riff at the beginning and under the rest of the track. Everything else is different - the key, the chord sequence, the inversion and everything apart from the arpeggiated riff. Not really notable. As for George Bellamy being in the Tornados... this isn't relevant trivia to the group really, it's either a personal thing about Matt (his article already says so) or a musical influence on the group, which it isn't really. BigBlueFish 20:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I would disagree, but I think we need to remember that they are different songs and so will not sound identical The synthesized bass-line featured throughout is rhythmically, very similiar. The arpeggios themselves are played across the same range of notes as Bliss, which makes it more likely that influence was drawn from this song when Muse wrote Bliss. It's tricky to tell, without a doubt.

Hypertone 20:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The Tornados is a bit of influences now, I found! On the MuseWiki, Matt admits to looking to his dad's music for inspiration for Black Holes and Revelations, if I remember correctly! I think it's on the Matt Bellamy page on there! Mr8131127126 08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Influences

Rachmaninoff is mentioned as an influence already, but might it be an idea to elaborate upon this point, given that at least three Muse songs quote his music? I only suggest this because all three quotes that come to mind come from the first movement of Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto no. 2, which is decidedly unusual. Also, does anyone else think there are too many internal links on this page? I noticed a few irrelevant ones ("Christmas," a number of the location names, etc.) that could probably be safely done away with. Any thoughts?--Macabre Deified 20:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Macabre Deified! I was wondering whether to put it here or not aswell, since there's already a large amounth that I wrote about in the Matthew Bellamy section on it. Does anyone else reckon it should be put here too? Maybe the two passages could be switched to make it more balanced? Mr8131127126 08:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

"etc etc. loads more influences to be mentioned here e.g. supposed use of human bones during percussion recordings for Origin of Symmetry (copied from T. Waits)."

I removed this section from the article, as it is highly speculative and very incomplete. Third 13:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd say its fairly obvious Pink floyd are an influence

You may also like to mention that Knights of Cydonia is obviously influenced by The Tornados "Telstar" which is probably in tribute to Bellamy's father, George.

Unfortunately, however obvious it might seem, there must be a reliable source supporting any claim of an influence, or else it is original research which is not allowed. Trebor 14:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Songs?

Where's "Thoughts of a Dying Atheist"? Didn't they do that song. I didn't see this song anywhere in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.158.40.20 (talk • contribs)

"Thoughts of a Dying Atheist" is a song on the album Absolution. It's listed on there. Every track on every album would be an unnecessary addition. Incidentally, if you search for "thoughts of a dying atheist" in the search box, the album's article comes up third in the list. Second is the live dvd of the album as well. BigBlueFish 14:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

""New Born" (from the previous album) make reference to a hypothetical future where technology has a detrimental effect on society." What the hell? I see no link between that song and the future whatsoever. I'm sorry but soulless is everywhere can be applied at anytime, so can someone tell me where this detrimental stuff was found?

History header

I was trying to think of a better header for the Black Holes And Revelations section of the history, but can't think of anything effective. I was thinking something alluding to the fact that they're now experimenting with other genres in this album, now that they feel they have "made it" (headlining Glastonbury, etc.). It'll have to change when it's not a future album any more. Any ideas? BigBlueFish 20:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey again, Bigbluefish! Maybe something to do with their new move towards this electro genre? Something along the lines of 'The electro-rock shift' if you see my trail of thought! Mr8131127126 08:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure naming a specific genre is a good idea only because I don't think this means Muse have actually moved towards a different style. It's more them experimenting mixing other things into their established formula (in my opinion anyway). We'll only see when they release their next material (if it's a cover of Prince's latest hits I will have second thoughts). Of course saying this doesn't bring us any closer to a heading that does work. Hmm... BigBlueFish 10:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


Not sure if I like the rather biased writing of the battle of the bands competition; a few weasel words are in there and plus, it was written by someone who defaced a lot of the rest of the site. There is no proof that that was what happened, and I suspect it didn't, so why is it still there?

The reference seems a bit, erm, unfactual, and not entirely relevant in my opinion :/ Just seems to be a student slandering their album back in 1999, and doesn't seem to actually state anything on what Radiohead have said about Muse. Shall we change it? Mr8131127126 08:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I actually think the current mentions of Radiohead are fine. The first bit says they are experimental like Radiohead and the Verve... a couple of people have removed Radiohead but leaving the Verve which is just stupid... but it's a fair point. If we were to remove that, we would have to remove all their influences. I think it would be better to find a source which identifies what the band does say they are influenced by. Then the only other mention concerns Showbiz, and links a perfectly valid example of the press panning it as a Bends clone. It also says Thom Yorke criticised it, though that bit doesn't have a source to back it up. But neither does a lot of stuff in this article, that's something that needs work. BigBlueFish 10:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Labels

What's the relationship between Mushroom, Taste Media and A&E? I was wondering whether labelling all their releases as Mushroom was correct (thought they all link to Mushroom right now, which certainly ISN'T correct!). And where does Warner come into the equation? BigBlueFish 15:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bigbuefish. I think they're the various publishers that Muse use. Warner do the american publishings, I think, but I could be wrong. Mr8131127126 10:32, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

With the intention of using them as sources to cite to help back up quotes, etc, I just wanted to add these two interviews I found on a Vancouver, Canada music journal;

  1. [1]
  2. [2]

-- Xinit 23:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Next (next) recordings

Bellamy has stated in three interviews now that the next album will be a Dark Side of the Moon style progressive rock album[3]. I'm not sure how to put this though (without it sounding like an afterthought), perhaps someone else can have a go. --Tene 22:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Could you link the other two interviews? As a lone comment, it's not all that notable, but with three (or even maybe two) you could begin a new paragraph in the new album section with something like "Muse are already speculating about their next album after Black Holes and Revelations...". It should probably also stress that this won't be for ages though, as I've heard them say this album sets them up for "years of touring". BigBlueFish 14:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[4] There's one, the other's don't haven't been transcribed, only summarised or mentioned on MuseLive. Another one is in The Times, could be helpful if you buy it / read it. --Tene 15:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[5]Here's an interview of Bellamy saying he "has vague plans for Muse to write and perform an extended classical-inspired instrumental piece." Although it's very early to speculate, everything now points towards a much more progressive Muse. - MuseZep

Starlight

Now its been named as the next single, is it time to "undelete" Starlight and rename it? --Tene 16:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure you could give the lineup of singles in the UK 3 mobile has given us(Supermassive Black Hole, Starlight, Map of the Problematique, Knights of Cydonia). Muselive also now says Starlight will be released as a single Sept. 4 - MuseZep

Britpop? WTF?

"While some describe them as a post-Britpop band..."

Yeah, no one would ever say that. --Macarion 19:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem is at one stage the article stated that Muse's early output was "a reaction against the Britpop movement which was hugely popular at the time." Someone has tried to neaten it up, losing the meaning in the process. The counter-Britpop assertion holds and there are sources to corroborate I'm sure, but perhaps this detail isn't vital. Macabre Deified 22:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

meh, most people who argue a band isn't pop are huge fans of the band, and won't admit it. there's nothing wrong with pop. muse is a britpop band for sure, and lots of sources cite it like AMG. Itachi1452 00:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Muse isn't pop?!? Try comparing Muse to Mika or other lame pop artists. There's no resemblance. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 01:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
They're pop. pop is still a diverse genre, and it extendes farther th an mika. all of those popular glam bands are heavily influenced by pop like motley crue. classic rock bands like the who and queen are pop. there's nothing bad about being a pop band, and with muse songs sounding like prince songs, muse is britpop for sure. Itachi1452 11:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

man this is POV

whats up with the last section about hidden messages?. Muse did not pioneered in doing so, its as old as 70s prog-rock and even older if we go back to the beatles or bob dylan. That section makes either no sense or makes very little importance as it is greatly exagerated in its importance. All in all, this page has been written by fanboys, and it shows. Im a fan of Muse, but this is one of the worst wikipedia articles ive seen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.215.167.137 (talk • contribs) .

I agree, what with the new album various additions of news-cruft have dragged it into somewhat disarray. I've made a start with a good cleanout of the latest biography section, but the cryptic messages section still needs addressing. Don't forget that you can help too! BigBlueFish 21:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


GENRE dispute

Should Muse really be put as hyper rock? i am unsure of the real definition of it :S would someone be able to help me? i think alt. rock should be 1st, then prog or neo-prog, but i don't think they are britpop!Gingwaffler

They're not prog. The only real progressive rock song they've done is Citizen Erased (as in, proper, full on "classic" progressive rock). Most of their material is neo-prog, of which the boundry isn't exactly well drawn. They're definately not brit pop. Whether alt rock or neo prog should be first is a pretty controvertial thing, personally I think neo-prog should be first. I've never even heard of Hyper rock, I certainly can't find any articles on the Wikipedia about it. --Tene 20:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
mmmm, yea good point they aren't full on prog, though i feel they are prog-gy enough to warrant the neo-prog badge... you've convinced me that neo-prog should be first as i feel that alternative rock is just a term used for rock bands that are hard to categorize, also because i feeel most of their songs have some prog elements to them... someone has added space rock, again im not sure what that is!!! Gingwaffler20:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, so the introductory text now describes it as "an British band who blend many different genres of music together, their most recent album combining classical, modern and even Latin themes into songs."
This is not particularly helpful for someone who haven't heard Muse, so I think that we should instead say that it's a "rock" band (in the "not Britney Spears" sense) and then mention that there's no agreement what genre does the band belong to. --asqueella 19:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I added neo-classical to the genre-list because uhm, I think it's neo-classical. the definition of neo-classical is classical inspired rock music so erm, looks like this comes pretty damn close! NJlo 19:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

"Neo-prog"? Muse are many things but neo-prog they are not, neo-prog refers to a movement that occurred in the 1980s. I think the term that best fits Muse is "new prog", a term used to refer to alt rock bands like Mew who draw influences from prog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.238.170.154 (talk • contribs)

"Their idiosyncratic style is a blend of indie rock, electronica, progressive rock, metal and classical music" Very well put whoever did it! 89.240.138.44 17:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure about whether or not Muse should be considered "Metal". I would think maybe hard rock is a more accurate description. JAK2112 01:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

yeah i was thinking about this one. what about 'progressive blues rock'? probably within the hard rock area and somewhat rock&rollish or something... and no they arent metal, but i dont doubt theres metal influance in their sound.--Lygophile 15:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


Wikipedia Article: "Progressive rock acts often combine elements of jazz and classical music, folk and world music influences with rock formats, often rejecting specific genre norms, and instead utilising relatively uncommon musical structures and ideas."

  • Jazz = Feeling Good, some b-sides are partially jazz (Host?)
  • Folk = Much of their first album has many folk elements
  • Classical = Butterflies and Hurricanes, Stockholm Syndrome, Blackout etc
  • World Music = Darkshines, Knights of Cydonia, Blackout, Hoodoo, City of Delusion etc
  • Uncommon structures = Citizen Erased, New Born, Knights of Cydonia, Take A Bow, Invincible, Ruled By Secrecy, Filip etc

    I think that Muse fit the "progressive" rock genre. Their music certainly includes many progressive rock elements.--Hypertone 22:59, 17 December 2006

    In essence, I agree with Hypertone. However, the problems lie with peoples' ideas of what progressive rock actually is. Although you have said what it correctly is defined as, most people don't define prog. rock as actually meaning that. I think that the current description of "Their idiosyncratic style is a blend of indie rock, electronica, progressive rock, metal and classical music" fits the bill for now, and without Muse themselves defining exactly what they are (which will happen when pigs fly), it should be left as. Mouse Nightshirt 16:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
    Hi! I just saw an ad for Muse's Discography in MTV Southeast Asia and they called Muse a Dance Rock band. --Janyu86 22:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

    I don't think Muse should be labelled as Hard Rock or Indie Rock. Progressive Rock and Alternative Rock should be sufficient, maybe New Prog, which kind of comes in under Progressive anyway. They may have Hard/Indie Rock influences, but it shouldn't be in the genre. Muse have too many influences to name, so there's no point in putting all of the influences under the genre. Alex G 03:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

    Muse's sound contains many elements of different genres. They can't exactly be classed as on genre, as theres not much else to compare them to.Their music does contain elements of hard rock and metal, but very little to be actualled labeled as a 'hard-rock' band

    Cleanup

    Parts of this article require cleanup as some of this information needs to be updated. Lordofchaosiori 23:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

    Morgan Nichols

    What do we think of including Morgan Nichols in the 'Members' section of the infobox? I don't think he should be included without qualification of his actual roll in the band. As I understand it, he is only being used as a live member for some of the more complecated live tracks. He is/was not present for the studio recording of any of the albums. Diddy Didds 23:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


    As he wasnt present, i don't believe he should be mentioned under band members, though i think a mention in the first paragraph is neccessary User: Gingwaffler19.18 7 August 2006 (UTC)

    We could put him in the info box as a touring member... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.247.110 (talk • contribs)


    Cryptic Messages?

    should it be moved? i don't like where it is, i think it should be below the discography 89.241.52.22 13:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

    Does this section even make sense? It seems like half of it was deleted, because it refers to developments in a contest (?) but doesn't explain what the contest (again, ?) is. I would suggest deleting the entire section if it can't be substantially cleaned up. 24.60.196.65 11:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

    I don't think it should be deleted, as they are a fact about Muse that should be retained, IMO. It should definitely be moved above the discography section if kept as nobody really looks below that, do they? SomethingWittyHere 08:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

    Yeah this really reads as though part of it is missing. If it can't be fixed, it needs deleting. 124.184.222.97 11:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Jacob.

    Half of the section did appear to be missing (Quoted 'This second wave of fans', without any reference to a first wave in the section), Also placement was disputed. Have deleted the section until someone wants to re-write it in full.

    Grammar

    Can anyone clear up the grammar for me? There have been a lot of changes and reverts concerning 'Muse' being plural or singular. I more or less agree with how it looks now, but I'm not a native speaker. anyone know?NJlo 16:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

    Generally, 'Muse' should be considered plural, although it does depend on context. This is because, when you refer to Muse, you are referring to a band consisting of 3 people. Makron1n 19:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
    Muse should be considered singular. It refers to the band, not to the individual three people. It is exactly the same as collective nouns. When you refer to a flock of sheep, it is singular. However, the sheep in the flock are plural. It's just basic English - there is only one 'Muse' even if there are 3 members...

    Thanks, Jonabofftalk

    23:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

    Image

    Is there any reason why this article's image seems to change every few days? Battle Ape 06:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

    People think they find better pictures for the article. I'd rather them use promo shots, though. I love all. 20:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
    Promo shots should only be used if there is no free (or even fair) use substitute available. I've uploaded some self-taken photos... all available on the public domain! --Madchester 16:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

    Emo?

    Erm... I don't know where you guys get your information from but since when were Muse an emo band? They're not connected in any way with that genre. The offending word has been removed. - Liquidus219

    Emo is a stupid name for a genre anyway. ALL music is emotional. Battle Ape 05:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
    Although emo (music) 'officially' refers to a "subgenre of hardcore punk", so definitely not applicable for Muse. Trebor 18:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
    By the way, I removed New Prog Indie Rock Neo-Classical Electronica Metal from the list of genres. I think nobody minds? -- lucasbfr talk 00:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

    "How many members?"

    I don't think there is really any need for this section. It's useless, pointless information. And it's no fiercely debated either, its just a handful of Muse fans who cant understand the REAL reason why Morgan is there, and now they think they are a 4piece band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.77.91.84 (talk • contribs)

    Glorious

    Although only on the Japan release, Glorious was available as a download on iTunes if pre-ordered. This should be included and i'll try to find a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.213.14.101 (talk • contribs)

    Complete lack of refs, dubious content, cruft etc

    A whole lot of this article seems to be pretty dubious- I'm going to tag or delete stuff that looks like it's either rumour, speculation, guesswork or in need of reffing up. I don't like band bios that seem to be written entirely by and for fans, they don't belong in an encyclopedia. Hyperspacey 03:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

    Okay, on closer inspection most of it seems to follow with what I've heard about the band, but dammit Jim, we need about 60-70 references. Muse for Featured Article, c'mon, if we get it cited up it'd probably qualify for at least GA. Hyperspacey 03:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    No problem with you pointing out flaws with the article, but use some tact, dude. JMalky 14:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    I really should stop editing at Cranky O'Clock, I wind up making a tit of myself. Sorry! Hyperspacey 16:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

    MUSE or Muse?

    I've seen it written out in all-capital letters everywhere else but here, including the bands website and their MySpace. I believe the headline should be changed from "Muse" to "MUSE". Does anyone else agree? These7enthprophet 04:46, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

    The official website is calling them Muse (look at the news section) so I think it is safe to leave it this way ;) -- lucasbfr talk 07:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
    Muse is often typed (incorrectly) as MUSE to match their official logo, the same happens for Korn (often typed KoЯn). Logos are graphic, typography is not and correct English rules should always be followed (especially in an encyclopedia...) See MusicBrainz.org, not too sure where i haven't been on the site for a while...

    Thanks, Jonabofftalk

    23:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

    Nintendo

    I've removed a paragraph speculating about similarities between Bliss and the theme tune to a Nintendo game - it was close to accusing Muse of plagiarism, and was unsupported by references other than a link to a YouTube video of the game. [[User:Squeezeweasel|Squ

    (im putting it back in, its interesting and its not just a random video, its a video of the game which has the similarly sounding song being played for a few minutes, im putting it back in so that people can make u their own mind, ive been trying to find the youtube link for ages to see what people are talking about) - anon user.

    I removed it again as per WP:OR. Find a REPUTABLE source to cite and we can reintroduce it. mattbuck 11:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

    Order of Singles

    The article says that Starlight was the first single in the US, followed by a radio only single of Knights of Cydonia. The first singles to come out in the US was deffinitly Knights of Cydonia accompanied with the video. Then came Starlight. Maybe there should be a chart that organizes the diff. between US and UK releases. DevelopmentArrested 22:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

    Heavy metal?

    How are muse influenced by heavy metal? I know that they are influenced by grunge bands like nirvana and pearl jam and I know that they are influenced by alternative rock like Radiohead, but metal. DavidJJJ 12:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

    agreed they owe a lot of theyr influences to heavy metal like the heavily distorted guitars but realistically they dont come close to it

    I think they do. Some songs are influenced by Metal. Guitar-wise not vocal-wise. --80.57.37.106 23:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

    Awards

    Why in the awards-section only Brit-awards are mentioned, while the band has got many of other awards? Wishera 10:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

    I agree; either include other awards, or if this will take too much space, create a new page solely for Muse's awards. Sharak 11:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

    I favour removing the awards section. I think any notable awards can be given a mention in the relevant time period (e.g. Awards won during the BH&R era should be included there). Muse have won too many awards for there to be a list. Diddy Didds 15:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

    Perhaps give it it's own page, or moving them about throughout the article isn't a bad idea. What about Bellamy's awards, such as NME's sexiest man? --82.163.236.254 15:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

    Clearly that would go on Bellamy's page, not Muse's. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.71.212.122 (talk) 09:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

    Failed GA

    The sections on their first two albums are unreferenced, some of the article reads like a trivial list and only one image without copyright information. A poor show. WikiNew 16:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

    "The Feeling" cover Time is running out?

    I couldn't find any evidence that the band "The Feeling" ever covered Muses "Time is running out". It wasn't on itunes, or listed on the wikipedia page, or on the bands page. I also couldn't find any information about it possible being a live cover. JAK2112 03:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

    It's true. There is some information about it on Microcuts and it's up for download on Muselive.com's SYS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.71.212.122 (talk) 21:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

    Singalong - advertising?

    The whole section seems to read more of an advertisement and self-promotion. Should it be either removed, or tidyied up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.71.212.122 (talk) 21:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

    I quite agree. I think this session about an upcomming and unconfirmed event, moreover added on the 1st of April is poorly referenced, and should either be deleted or brought to a single sentence. -- lucasbfr talk 08:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    removed after reading the website, it appears to have had minimum press coverage, no participation of Muse and to be organisated by a single person. -- lucasbfr talk 10:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

    The UK sales awards on the main page (and on each album page) differ from what is stated on the BPI website. They say: Showbiz (Gold), Origin Of Symetry (1xPlatinum), Absolution (1xPlatinum), Black Holes And Revelations (2xPlatinum). Could anyone clarify this? 213.122.43.177 16:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

    Cryptic Messages section

    It needs to be deleted. It made no sense just plonking it at the bottom of the article ... it isn't even anything major, it was just something that kept the official board entertained for a bit during the 2005 US tour.

    The bit about warner at the bottom is rubbish too .. it was just an april fools joke by the muse board admins .. nothing to do with the band.

    The anagram saga can be included in the article I think, but it should be integrated into the Absolution section, when it happened. Pettythug 17:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

    House of the Rising Sun?

    I downloaded this track that was credited to Muse called "House of the Rising Sun". It sounds a little bit like them, and the voice definitely sounds like Matt Bellamy, but it's not on Wikipedia or the Muse official site... does anyone know anything about this?

    I believe it was on some NME special disc, I have it too NJlo 23:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

    Muse did indeed record a version of this song. It was on the Warchild compilation "1 Love" as detailed in the Muse Discography Wikipedia entry. Microcuts.net attests. Macabre Deified 23:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

    Skiing in the Alps?

    "During this time Matt went skiing in the alps and met his long-lost uncle on a famous slope." Is that even true, more the point, relevant to the sub-section about Black Holes and Revelations? It might be vandalism, but I just wanted to make sure if it's on the article for a reason.Le.Kwyjibo 00:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

    Lyrics

    Does anyone think song lyrics should be added? Besides it being nice to find them here, it's something else to add to their individual pages alongside any other information. X-acious 05:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

    I think the convention is not to have song lyrics in pages - maybe for copyright reasons, or maybe because they're not really encyclopaedic information.

    Unencyclopaedic, irrelevant, unnecessary, and illegal... Plus why should Muse lyrics go anywhere near the individual member's pages? And Muse have released 4 studio albums + many b-sides and covers and live performances... including all lyrics is highly impractical and ugly.

    Thanks, Jonabofftalk

    23:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
    I hope you're not calling Muse's lyrics ugly. That would call for serious trouble.

    --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 06:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

    All the lyrics of their songs are here http://www.musewiki.org/Category:Songs I think posting a link to it on the page will be more practical

    Age

    To quote from the page - "The members of Muse were in separate bands at Teignmouth Secondary School in the early 1990s. The formation of Muse began after 29 year old Matthew Bellamy successfully auditioned for the part of guitarist in Dominic Howard's band."

    Matt Bellamy is 29 NOW, so how was he also 29 then? I assume he was closer to 19, but I don't know the dates for sure.

    Formation

    Was Muse formed in 1996 or 1997? Both dates appear in the article. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 06:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

    And why was the image removed? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 07:40, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
    I just changed it myself. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 22:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

    Shrinking Universe ?

    Is Shrinking Universe by this band ?--Brown Shoes22 07:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

    Yes, track 2 on Hullabaloo and also track 2 on the Newborn single -- M2Ys4U (talk) 14:26, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

    Oxegen

    I've removed the following from the article: Whilst at Oxegen, the Snow Patrol front man, Gary Lightbody, introduced Muse to 80,000 fans as possibly the best live act you will ever see, "so don't go anywhere".[citation needed] All of the searches for sources I've tried have just turned up mirrors or forks of this page. If you can find a source, feel free to add the statement back in -- M2Ys4U (talk) 18:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

    Muse Logo?

    Why is he logo taken out and replaced only with the letters "Muse"?

    Probably because there was noe fair use rationale used. 80.202.211.236 13:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

    Studio

    Is "Sawmill's in-house Dangerous label" in the converted water-mill studio? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

    The label is just a company basically, but that's where they were based as far as I know. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

    Knights of Cydonia Trivia

    In my opinion, the KoC trivia that's being placed in this article should not be placed here, but rather in the Knights of Cydonia article. I've removed the trivia on 3 separate occasions (Which is why I'm now discussing it, as I do not want to get into an edit war).

    I pasted the info on the KoC Talk page for somebody to incorporate into that article.

    Thoughts? -- M2Ys4U (talk) 20:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

    Italics and quotation marks

    It seems to be quite random whether a title of a song or an album is written in italics or within quotation marks. I think this article needs to have it either way. Also, the Black Holes and Revelations section needs to be cleaned. There's no need to enumerate the prizes they've won in the article itself and in the table. See Quotation mark#Emphasis (incorrect). --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 16:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

    The article obeys (As far as I can see) the WikiProject Music Manual of Style - Album names are in italics, song names are in quotation marks -- M2Ys4U (talk) 18:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

    Genre

    Every single time I view this article the genre's been changed. Can't you people agree on it? I'd say they were "Hard Rock" too. Songs like Stockholm Syndrome and Deadstar aren't Alternative rock, are they? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 05:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

    Is Muse heavy metal? I'd say Metallica is heavy metal and Muse is hard rock. Maybe we should vote on it or something. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 04:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


    No, Muse is new progress, a band is not rated by the sound of their music but how many people and What they PLay mostly but its not Focused ON the music, Thats just partly it, The band is New progress,Thats their Genre, Its a not so popular genre right now though, Thoguh muse is popular. and muse is "Hard rock" in a way but they are also 'Alternative" In a way, They arent like slipknot who consistently PLay Hard music, They have some hard and not so hard songs, thats why people have so much trouble interpretting what Genre the band is, but as I said it, They are new progress. Hoped this answered your Question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.156.80 (talk) 18:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

    Agree with the above user. Muse are a New Progressive Rock band. Someone at the top of this discussion page stated Muse are in no way a Prog Rock band, which I severely disgaree with. If you listen to nearly any of their songs, you can definately hear Prog influences seeping through, from the arrangement of their songs, the use of orchestral instruments, use of instrumentals in some songs and their complex lyrics. To say Muse is Hard Rock is a misplacement of their genre. Just because Stockholm Syndrome may sound heavy does not make it hard rock. The song does not use the characteristics of Hard Rock, such as a simple riff composed of power chords, and a heavy set drum beat. You have to take into account the stylistics and arrangement of a song in order for it to qualify as a genre. (82.28.237.200 (talk) 12:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC))

    Semi-lock

    Why isn't this article semi-protected? Vandalism it quite high here. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 00:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

    I think there's approximately one vandalism a day. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
    Personally I don't think there's enough vandalism to warrant it. It gets reverted pretty quickly anyway. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
    It does get reverted but why bother? Semi-protecting it can't harm. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 01:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
    It prevents legitimate edits from anonymous editors. That's harm. --Bjarki 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
    Well I haven't seen many legitimate edits lately from anonymous users. And now I have to revert another edit. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
    Vandalising this article seems to be a sport for IPs. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

    Does this page really need to be semiprotected? There's a few IP vandals but it's not that bad... -- M2Ys4U (talk) 02:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

    I think I counted 7 or 8 vandalisms just yesterday! So my answer is "yes" I think so. The protection will only last till 17 Oct. If the page gets vandalised many times a day after it's unprotected I will request for a permanent semi-protection. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 04:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

    Single

    I don't quite understand this line: "Knights of Cydonia" was released in the U.S. as a radio-only single on 13 June 2006 and...
    What is a radio-only single? Is it a version of a song, on a single, only sold to radio stations? Or perhaps a radio version, but sold to the public? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 05:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC) It means it only gets airplay, you can't actually buy the single.ScrabbitTheRabbit 19:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

    Good Article Review - Failed

    I count at least four {{fact}} tags at a quick glance. Much of the entire article is poorly referenced and in pretty bad shape. It needs a pretty significant rewrite for tone, and grammatical errors. A lot of work needs to be done before bringing it back to GAC. NSR77 TC 23:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

    POV issues

    This article is getting flooded with POV and other untrue information (comparing the band to the Spice Girls, for instance) from 195.92.206.243 I've reverted as much as I can, but since POV pushing isn't classified as vandalism, I can't revert anymore because of the three-revert rule, but I wanted to at least let you guys know to take a look at the article to make sure something doesn't sneak in and stay there. --spazure (contribs) (review) 08:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

    I've tried to address these issues. --John 03:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
    Good work! spazure (contribs) (review) 07:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
    Yes, well done mate. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

    But I was wondering why you removed that thing about Bellamy being influenced by Rachmaninoff and the romantic era? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 00:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

    I think the image might have to take one for the team. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 00:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

    Flag

    Hi. I would question whether the small England flag adds anything to this article. See my comments at Talk:Arctic Monkeys#Flag as I think the arguments are very similar here. --John 17:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

    I hate to say it, but I agree with the arguments there - it's standard practice (WP:FLAG is an essay, right?), and it can add some meaning. — Giggy 07:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
    What meaning can it add? Where is the extra meaning in  England over England? I don't see it myself. What I do see is a violation of WP:NOR in assigning bands a flag which they have not verifiably identified with. --John 16:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
    Here's a question for the pro-flaggers; which flag or flags should we have on Snow Patrol's entry? Scotland, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom or some other answer or combination of answers? --John 16:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
    It shouldn't be either. See flags for non-sovereign states (it basically states, seperatism or nationalism has no place on WP). If one is absolutely necessary, it should be the Union Jack. --Tene (talk) 00:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

    Fanbase and gigs

    At the start of the section First EPs and Showbiz it says: "After a few years building a fan base in London, Muse played their first gigs in London and Manchester." It makes no sense, how did they build a fanbase without playing gigs? --Bjarki 16:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

    One can build a fanbase just by promoting CDs, although it's also possible that the sentence lost its original meaning during copyediting at some point. When in doubt, I'd generally say to check the sources -- since there aren't any for this statement specifically, I suggest rewriting from the available sources. spazure (contribs) (review) 05:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

    Muse's school

    Teignmouth Community College was mentioned in the article but then replaced with "local school". I don't see any reason why it's unrelevant to the article what school they attended since they did have a hard time in that town and place. They are mentioned in the article Teignmouth Community College. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 14:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

    I've been WP:BOLD and replaced the info as I agree. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 20:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

    Image

    The image doesn't have any information with it about its copyright status, see. Shouldn't we change it prior the next GA review? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 01:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

    Discography

    Can Hullabaloo be included in the Discography section? I was surprised that it wasn't there and wondered why. It's in the main article Muse Discography so I don't see why it shouldn't be here...--Nick90210 00:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

    I don't see why not -- M2Ys4U (talk) 04:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
    It should not be there since it's not a Studio Albums. All their stuff is in the article you mentioned Nick but it's not under Studio Albums there either. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 18:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    Wiktionary defines discography as a "List of all of the releases of a certain musical act, usually with release dates, and often with other information about the releases". The Muse discography article also lists Hullabaloo, but separates it from the studio albums -- M2Ys4U (talk) 01:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    So now we're going to dump all the albumes, singles etc on the article? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 03:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    Hmm, this is more complicated than I first thought. Maybe there needs to be more discussion over the definition of "Discography", as the one that M2Ys4U mentioned clearly encapsulates EPs and singles and other releases - which is far too in depth for a small table such as this one. I don't feel like I'm enough of an authority on what should be included as I'm relatively new to this. We should get a consensus on this issue as it affects not only this article but the article of every artist - ever. My thoughts are that it should obviously only include albums - although I'm not sure as to what the term "studio released" covers (maybe someone can enlighten me?). As the Muse Discography article covers all the releases in great detail, the section in the Muse article need not include less notable releases. A good indicator of what should be included in the table is what appears in the discography on the official Muse website - which does include Hullabaloo. The soundtrack also appears in the Albums section in the discography article at Musewiki. I think those two examples are enough backing for keeping Hullabaloo in the discography table on this page. Thoughts?--Nick90210 05:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
    I'd tend to agree. We shouldn't list the whole discography on this article because it's already included in the discography article, but I think that Hullabaloo is notable enough to warrant a mention here. Anyone other than us 3 have an opinion? -- M2Ys4U (talk) 00:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
    I suggest Hullabaloo is added to the discography section. One of the two included CD's contained mostly B-sides and unreleased songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.115.238 (talk) 03:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

    "Notable" covers of Muse songs

    I think we should establish come criteria for the notability of the covers. Some band playing it once at some gig, in my opinion, does not qualify as "notable". For example:

    • Publication of a covered song on a notable album or as a single
    • Where covering the song has made the covering artist notable

    I'm not sure what other criteria would be suitable, anyone have any ideas? -- M2Ys4U (talk) 20:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    Addendum: (Adapted from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Songs#Songs):

    A cover is probably notable if it meets one or more of the following standards:

    1. ...has been reported in sufficient independent works.
    2. ...has been performed by a notable artist, band or group.
    3. ...has been ranked on a national or significant music chart.
    4. ...has been recognized by journalists, biographers, and/or other respected cultural critics as being significant to a noteworthy group's repertoire.
    5. ...has won a significant award or honour.

    -- M2Ys4U (talk) 21:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

    And if there's references. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 18:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    I think that "Staircase - "Sunburn" live in melbourne" should be removed 'cause they only seem to have played it once, according to the text there, and who's "Staircase" anyways? I've played Muse songs with my band but I haven't added myself there, yet. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 19:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    I went bold and removed those from bands that do not have coverage on Wikipedia one way or an other. -- lucasbfr talk 14:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

    Religious Or Not?

    I was just wondering, are they religous or not? The article says that Matthew Bellamy is interested in theocracy, but it doesn't say whether he is religous or not. If someone finds out, it would make a good addition to the article.Darkcraft 09:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

    I don't see how it's really important. Muse have produced a few songs about atheism, including one where Bellamy played a church pipe organ. He described the playing of that song (and I'm paraphrasing here) as a dark moment in his life. (source: musewiki somewhere). I'd draw conflicting conclusions about that personally. In any case, if you can't WP:VERIFY it, leave it out. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
    According to some interview I watch he's not religious but doesn't despise religion. But that's information for another article. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 11:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

    Bellamy has described himself as an atheist before. 86.137.116.61 19:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC) I heard he believed in some higher power, but has issues with orginized religion. 

    So he's an agnostic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.115.229.11 (talk) 07:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)



    No, that's not how it works. Agnosticism is a type of philosophical uncertainty. If he said doesn't believe in a god, but accepts that he might be wrong - he'd be an agnostic atheist (and vice verse for agnostic theism.)

    Distrusting organized religion has nothing to do with a belief in god. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.33.127 (talk) 19:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

    Addition to awards

    Hi, just thought id mention that Muse won best live act at the Q awards again this year, see http://www2.qawards.co.uk/2007/10/best_live_act_1.html

    I'd add it myself except im blocked as a new user :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idcamron (talk • contribs) 06:10, October 10, 2007

    Okay mate, I'll add if for you. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 02:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

    Prog

    For goodness sake, what makes Muse a progressive rock band? The only progressive song they've ever done is Citizen Erased, really. 86.137.116.61 19:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

    I hardly know what prog is. I didn't add it but I see no difference between Citizen Erased and other Muse songs, that is, how their usual sound is. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 02:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
    See Talk:Muse_(band)/Archive_1#GENRE_dispute for a previous discussion about their genre. In a recent documentary about OoS, there was definite mention of prog by Matt in the interviews. I can't remember what the actual quotes were so my comment will have to remain vague. Their next album, however, is apparently going to be very prog-y so... meh. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 22:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
    As far as i know, they are new prog not prog --  61x62x61 (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

    This is the same Matt Bellamy who thinks that playing Hendrix riffs makes you a good guitarist... Let's face it, he's an ignorant teenybopper who is appealing to the 14-year-old girls. Muse don't have a progressive bone in their bodies. They are pop rock at best. Having just listened to Citizen Erased, all I heard was the same vocal scale he uses in every other song, and he even used a riff used in at least one other song. And the solo was just awful... Just because a song is seven minutes long doesn't mean it's progressive... PloKoon13 (talk) 13:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

    Plokoon, EVERYTHING you have said is wrong. He's a good guitarist because he's original, innovative, blisteringly fast and good at improvisation. He's not ignorant, he is as far removed from a tennybopper as you can get (you clearly don't know what the term means), and the target audience is not 14 year old girls, but his appeal goes deeper into society. If you think Muse aren't progressive you obviously haven't heard their second album. They are not pop rock in the slightest; you have described McFly PERFECTLY, and got everything about Muse totally wrong.

    Having just listened to CE myself, you've made another mistake; he uses a different vocal scale from other songs, and different riffs. The solo is actually brilliant, so you're wrong AGAIN.

    It's 7 minutes, and it's a progressive song. More importantly, EVERY single thing you have said is completely wrong - so I strongly suggest you do not edit an article on a brilliant band that is too complex for you to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suicidal Lemming (talk • contribs) 00:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

    I don't agree with Plokoon either, but I still think that "progressive rock" isn't a fitting genre for Muse. It strongly depends on how you interpret the term "progressive": If you see it as a quality you may be right, but "progressive rock" as a genre is usually seen more narrow by its fans and identified with more "traditional" 70s bands such as Pink Floyd, Rush, Yes, King Crimson etc., and those that more or less follow in their footsteps (and are mostly underground nowadays). And Muse clearly doesn't fall into that category, being a contemporary "alternative mainstream" band. That doesn't make them a bad band, it just means that they don't fit into the genre. I'd see them primarily as a contemporary "alternative rock" band with some "progressive" qualities. I think the term for that is "new prog" or "nu prog". 83.65.213.82 (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
    I think it would be accurate to say that Muse is a hard rock band with progressive tendencies. They are not a prog rock band in the definite sense, that they don't put out 15-20 minute musical suites like Yes, Floyd, Jethro Tull used to do in the 70s. At least not yet. There are rumours of a "symphonic monster in 3 parts" coming for the 5th album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.2.150.3 (talk) 00:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
    Hard rock? Hardly, in my opinion. If anything, they're an Alternative Rock band with Progressive influences. You could even call them, just simply, rock, because while they have a unique sound, they're really just Rock/Alt Rock with a Prog sound. 70.67.147.88 (talk) 22:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
    Plokoon13 has it right. Everything they release barely rates pop rock. The only 'progressive' thing about them is that the drummer can change time signatures. Nothing original, and their sound is completely artificial with fake emotion. All charateristics of pop rock. Catchy tunes, emotionless, extremely contrived lyrics. Pop Rock. Not metal, not progressive.99.178.100.125 (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

    My goodness, that was one of the worst posts I've ever read.

    Plokoon13 does NOT have it right. In fact, until now, I've never met anyone who's been more WRONG.

    Everything they release is either alternative rock or progressive/new progressive.

    No, what's progressive about them is their musical progression, their genre-spanning music, their time signature changes, chord progression, implementation of classical influences, jazz influences etc. etc.

    Actually, Muse's music is highly original - their sound is unique, with no other band being quite like them, or even comparable to them.

    Nothing about them is artificial, nor is the emotion fake in any way. Their music is raw, powerful, emotional, soulful and full of heart. They are one of the most authentic and passionate bands around. These are all characteristics of progressive rock.

    They are gutsy, innovative, unique, soulful and inspiring. Their music is different and new, a breath of fresh air. It's emotionally charged, honest, powerful and awe-inspiring. The sweeping melodies and thunderous guitar creates tunes that are far from just catchy, but genuinely moving and stirring.

    Their music has metal-esque guitar riffs, soaring and mind-blowing solos, time signature changes, chord progression and progression of music, a a unique sound, innovative and powerful tunes, raw emotion, soul, and heavily implements elements from classical music, heavy metal and jazz. And as if that wasn't enough, their intelligent and thought-provoking lyrics further heighten their music to a higher level of artistic credibility. All the hallmarks of progressive rock. Alternative rock too, and even metal - but certainly not pop rock.

    Do pop rock bands have metal-esque riffs, blistering guitar solos, piano solos and piano-based songs? Do they include influences of and homages to such classical greats such as Rachmaninoff and Frederic Chopin? Do they write songs that span languages as well as genres? Do they include oboe solos and woodwind sequences? Do they dabble in space rock and electronica on the same track? Do they write metal-esque tracks such as Fury and Yes Please, do they compose a 3-part symphony which infuses rock, alternative rock, metal and space rock themes with full-orchestra classical music? Furthermore, do bands with "contrived lyrics" come out with such gems as "I've had recurring nightmares that I was loved for who I am / And missed the opportunity to be a better man"?

    No. No, these are all the hallmarks of an intelligent, unique, emotional, soulful, progressive band. Stop listening to Starlight, start listening to their actual music and THINK before you post, because you my friend, are an utter idiot.


    Movies section

    The line about the song New Born previously said the song was included in the film Switchblade Romance, which is an alternate title of the film Haute Tension. I understand that the movie was released as Switchblade Romance in some countries, but it was also released as High Tension in others. So, I would think referring to the film by the original title (Haute Tension) would be the most accurate thing to do. 134.29.6.7 21:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

    Well I added the movies for new born and I chose to put switchblade romance because thats the UK title and Muse are UK band, but I don't really mind. I don't really think there should be a movies section, but if there is going to be one, it should be complete and correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.176.128 (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

    Removed The bit about Hysteria being in The Matrix, don't know where somebody got that idea from. Hysteria was written in 2002 and The Matrix was released in 1999.

    A wall of band posters clearly displaying the logo with band name "MUSE" appears in the 1995 movie "12 Monkeys," starring Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.196.40 (talk) 09:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

    "Supermassive Black Hole" was played in the 2008 movie "Twilight" during the baseball scene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.196.40 (talk) 09:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

    Influence

    I think Muse has been influence more by the romantic era rather than the classical era. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 00:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

    Greatest hits...

    There isn't going to be a greatest hits album, so it shouldn't be in the article. http://muselive.com/index.php?m=single&id=3436 -- M2Ys4U (talk) 22:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

    Genre... again...

    Is the any need for including "Rock", in the template, as one of the genres, since Alternative and New Pro are both sub-genres of Rock? Also, Alternative rock is mostly know as Indie in the UK and since the band is UK-ish, and the article as well, should it be changed into Indie? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 16:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

    Muse aren't Indie. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 18:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    Isn't Indie and Alternative the same thing? At least the article Alternative rock says that this genre is known as Indie in the UK. But what about removing rock from the template? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 21:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    I've always known then to be seperate, with Indie being attributed to such bands as The Kooks, Razorlight, Kaiser Chiefs etc, and Alt Rock to be stuff like Muse and Foo Fighters. I guess one could say that Indie is a subgenre of Alternative, which is also explored in that article. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    Addendum: Rock is the 'mother genre', so to speak. Muse are still rock IMO. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    Yes, Muse are still rock, so should the genre rock be added to every template for a band which plays some sub-genre of rock? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 01:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
    Hmm, I don't know, and as far as this article goes, I don't really mind if Rock is included or not (However, I do object to the label 'indie'). -- M2Ys4U (talk) 04:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
    Yea, I finally got that part about Indie rock, after reading the whole article. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 19:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


    Muse is New prog, Read the first post I made up there In the Genre..... The one before this one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.156.80 (talk) 18:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

    New Prog is already listed in the infobox :) -- M2Ys4U (talk) 21:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

    Excactly which proves my point... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.156.80 (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

    Muse aren't progressive. Their music (as is even more evident with the most recent album) is directed more at a teenage crowd and a chart-loving crowd. Thus, it is pop rock. Calling Muse progressive is like calling The Foo Fighters progressive. Show me any progressive, or new grounds they have covered with their music and then they will be progressive. All I have heard is your bog-standard six-minute-at-most pop rock songs. PloKoon13 (talk) 13:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

    ^have you ever listened to anything apart from what they play on the radio...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.63.24 (talk) 00:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

    In Other Media

    A lot of the information in the In Other Media section seems to be WP:TRIVIAl and attracting mention every single time a muse track is featured anywhere in other media. I suggest converting some the items into prose in the main sections of the article and removing the rest, unless they are distinctly notable. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

    I agree. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 12:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

    Anyone else have an opinion? If not I'll remove the section after the weekend. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

    I've removed the Book as nobody has asserted notability. Indeed, there was a significant edit that included weasel words so I thought it was best to delete it.-- M2Ys4U (talk) 17:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

    And the same for the TV entry. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 20:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

    Hmm, Are the entries about the Dior commercial and Gran Turismo notable? I certainly think not... -- M2Ys4U (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

    I removed the non-notable crap, and merged the rest into the main article prose. The section was just a magnet for NN cruft. -- M2Ys4U (talk) 13:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

    Vocals

    The intro says that Dom does backing vocals. He can't sing, can he? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 10:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

    Dom sings live during 'Supermassive Black Hole', and he also sang the "ba-da" bits of 'can't take my eyes off you'. Apart from that he never sings because he can't sing in tune. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.254.114 (talk) 14:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

    I don't think that really counts. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 22:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

    Speaking into a microphone technically counts as vocals. Mind you, I didn't say "good vocals." 65.248.164.214 (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

    Did Dom not sing in Blackout too?--Domooo (talk) 13:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

    Heavy metal?!?

    How are Muse heavy metal? Examples of heavy metal bands, taken from the article itself, are Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Deep Purple, Motörhead, Metallica, Ozzy Osbourne, DIO and Kiss. There is no resemblance between Muse and the bands I mentioned. Have Muse ever said they were heavy metal? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 10:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

    Heavy metal often includes "Guitarists use sweep picking, tapping, and other advanced techniques for rapid playing, and many styles of metal emphasize virtuosic displays." do Muse ever sweep pick, no they don't. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 10:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

    Sweep pick no, but Matthew Bellamy does do two hand tapping in "Invincible." When I heard the CD first, I assumed the effect on the solo was some sort of sequencer or other trickery...but on the HAARP DVD, it is clearly shown to be two hand tapping. Also, the lead up to the solo in "Invincible" features a metalesque section reminicient of the music from the "Burly Brawl" scene in the Matrix Reloaded. Additionally, the song "Assassin," as well as the riffs in "Exo-politics" and the last 1/3 of "Take a Bow" are very much heavy metal, IMO. Also, "Knights of Cydonia" is done in a very old-school Iron Maiden heavy metal vein, with the galloping guitars and bass, as well as the Nikko McBrain-esque drumming. Matt Bellamy works the whammy bar in a very metal way in that song as well. Let's put it this way: many bands that are called heavy metal (Ratt, Whitesnake, Warrant, for example), are not half as heavy as these examples I have cited. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 16:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


    ^HOW ABOUT NOT LISTING SONGS FROM ONLY THEIR 2ND WORST ALBUM? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.63.24 (talk) 00:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


    One more thing to add...when the intro section of "Knights of Cydonia" is repeated about halfway through the song, I can almost hear Bruce Dickinson saying, "Scream for me Long Beach, SCREAM for me Long Beach!!" That alone makes it Maiden-esque to me, as well as the galloping rhythm. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
    So by that reasoning, any song with a galloping rhythm must be influenced by Iron Maiden? You could go even further and say that the galloping rhythms of Iron Maiden were influenced by the Heart song Barracuda .... (82.28.237.200 (talk) 12:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC))

    Hard rock?!?

    How are Muse hard rock? Examples of hard rock bands, taken from the article itself, are White Zombie, The Darkness, Velvet Revolver and Guns N' Roses. There is little or no resemblance between Muse and the bands I mentioned. Have Muse ever said they were hard rock? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 10:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

    No offense, but how many Muse songs have you listened to? Hard Rock, Heavy Metal, and Funk Rock abound. I wouldn't call White Zombie hard rock, I would call it metal, due to the lyrical content and dark presentation. Anyways, the Muse album Black Holes and Revelations is chock-full of Hard Rock, Metal, and Funk Rock, as well as a little bit of dance/techno, hawaiian jazz, and classical piano. Like one of their biggest influences, Queen, Muse will use a genre like metal sparingly...to make a point in a song. So, no, perhaps not all of a song will be in one genre. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 16:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

    Which is it?

    The article says Muse play Progessive rock but the template says New Progressive rock, which is it? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 10:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

    • Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muse_(band)/Archive_1&oldid=1137027860"