This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Yes (if you'll pardon the pun} and no, mate. The basic origins of the Art Of Noise are highlighted into the splendid booklet that accompanies the recent box-set 'And What Have You Done With My Body, God?' - Langan, Jeczalik and Dudley were part of Trevor Horn's production crew (as Engineer, Programmer and Arranger accordingly). Horn, as a previous member of Yes, had left the band as a full-timer but was hired to mix the 90125 album; Langan and Jeczalik were the main collaborators on this project. When the mix was rejected by Yes, Horn bitterly stomped off back to his team... who turned round and presented him with a tape of a little thing the two of them had cooked up with a rejected drumloop from the Yes sessions and a VW sample. Horn was galvanised by this recording to launch the ZTT Label under the auspices of Chris Blackwell's Island Records (a man who on first listen of the tape, insisted that they should be ZTT's first band - "...then you'll have a label.") So, it was a whole collage of sounds (including some that had been cribed from the Yes sessions) that made up the foundations of the Art Of Noise - the band itself however, was pretty much in place as a working concern already. (Indeed, it was this undermining belief that Langan, Jeczalik and Dudley were really no more than Horns 'house band' that led to them splitting away...). Hope this clears it up --Thumbsucker-UK , 05:31, 20 Sep 2006 (UTC)
This page seems to be full of POV, let the people determine if they like the albums or not.
Just wanted to add a note of agreement on this. Too much POV on the albums. Jfransella 04:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It reads like Paul Morley wrote the thing. Well, Morley? Fess up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.17.98 (talk) 17:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The band is considered to be among the pioneers of electronic music.
I might have thought of Karlheinz Stockhausen (for example) as being a pioneer of electronic music. Art of Noise very much the Johnny-come-lately. This statement seems too broad and naive. Perhaps pioneers of electronic pop? --Wm 21:28, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
The thing is not many have heard of Karlheinz Stockhausen, but in the 1980's and early 90's the Art of Noise was very big, and very different than most of the music out there. Since electronic music didn’t really become popular until say the late 1990's, most of the artists where relying on music they heard as younger adults or kids, namely the Art of Noise. Also the Art of Noise tended to do a bit more computer generated sounds than Stockhausen, which is the real pull of the modern electronic music scene, but I while I am not totally familiar with all the works of Stockhausen myself, please correct me if needed. Also you may be right in classifying the electronic music of today as electronic pop--67.0.140.167 07:45, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Whether or not people have heard of him is not really the issue. The issue is, was he a pioneer of electronic music? - perhaps, he certainly pre-dates the Art of Noise and he has been well known internationally for several decades. The fact that Stockhousen pre-dates the use of computers and manufactured electronic instruments only emphasises the extent to which he was a pioneer. I feel this quite strongly, when I was listening to Stockhausen in the 70s, it was considered quite strange by many of my peers, some years later, the electronic textures became mainstream - suddenly the bizarre had become normal. Whatever role the Art of Noise played, and I really do enjoy their work it, the above statement does seem to me to need some sort of qualification. The Wikipedia entry for electronic music says that artists at this time: developed entirely new ways of making popular music by electronic means. - which is a reasonable statement.--Wm 08:31, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
How about something like: The Art of Noise are noted for their innovative use of electronics and computers in pop music and particularly for innovative use of sampling --Wm
So the argument here seems to be that electronic pop is not electronic music(?) Face it, they occupy a very unique place in the history of electronic music, simply by virtue of giving said music pop appeal. Perhaps some of us should tone down our snobbery...--Tednor 00:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are coming off snobbish yourself with that post. Maybe you should tone down your ability to be offended so easily by simple talk. If you don't agree fine, no need to call insults.--63.167.255.231 02:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kraftwerk, Giorgio Moroder, The Human League, Fad Gadget, Yellow Magic Orchestra, and Gary Numan were pioneers of electronic pop. It was a pretty well established genre by 1983.(169.233.73.151 01:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Is it "Art Of Noise" or "The Art Of Noise"? Even their own releases aren't consistent about it. I note that the page, as it stands, votes for "The Art Of Noise". --Larry Hastings 12:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One might ask if is Pet Shop Boys or The Pet Shop Boys, Pretenders or The Pretenders, (etc...).--Tednor 00:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In initial releases, the band called itself The Art of Noise. Recently, the band has called themselves Art of Noise (sans "The") in their last few major releases. Anne Dudley (AoN's composer and musician) herself refers to it as Art of Noise[1]. I consider the voice of one of their members to be canonical. I vote to move the page to Art of Noise. pbryan 06:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to move the page to Art Of Noise as well. I recently contacted J.J. Jeczalik (another AoN musician and programmer for the Fairlight CMI) through a good friend of mine and every time Mr. Jeczalik mentioned, "Art Of Noise" it was without the article. --Mr. Sinistar 21:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's enough support to rename to "Art of Noise". If this becomes contentious, please continue discussion here. pbryan 08:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected the implication that the band started out using The, which is not entirely true. Here is a photo of the cover of the second 12" single and the word THE is nowhere to be seen, whereas 'Into Battle' and 'Who's Afraid' both use 'The'!!! Briantist 09:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Your changes look great (and supported by difficult to acquire evidence!), thanks! pbryan 17:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Album and single covers are not produced by the band but by the record company's art department, hence they are by no means the final arbiters on whether the band's name includes the definite article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.172.212 (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering whether it might be worth adding as trivia that The Prodiy's no 1 'Firestarter' samples Close to the Edit ("Hey, hey, hey"), and that the Art Of Noise get co-writing credits.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.20.43.232 (talk • contribs).
The fact that it was a #1 makes me say maybe, but the sample isn't a very important component of the song, so I'm leaning toward no. —mjb 07:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of what I can remember of the song, the sample was used at the end of every line, making it a pretty fundemental part of the song, and the rythem. It's also somewhat ironic that they probably made more money from the success of their own 'sampled' song being sampled in another song, than the original itself. - Gary 28th July —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.27.96.39 (talk • contribs) .
If you'd like to write about the song, it has its own article at Close (to the Edit), and it could use some improvement. - EurekaLott 04:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now, is this true? ""Moments In Love"—a ten-minute, downtempo, instrumental ode to sex that appeared on both Into Battle and Who's Afraid—was remixed and released as a single in 1985"
Yes, the version that appears on both "into battle" (except the cassette version) and the album is ten minutes. But it's not really instrumental, it features a lead vocal, singing "Moments in Love", "In love, in love", "in, in" and various other permutations thereof. "Close (to the Edit)" is closer to being an actual instrumental. And is it an "ode to sex"? The Art of Noise were faceless and bodyless, and the song proceeds at a snail's pace. The vocal line is angelic; I don't think I hear any breathing and moaning ... maybe Paul Morley said it was about sex in an interview once (sources, please?), but the record sounds positively etheral; "in love" with nothing and no one in particular; fully clothed in Victorian garb and floating through the air. 85.165.5.149 13:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"we were voted the second best new black act."[edit]
I've just been trying to track down this story of how "we were voted the second best new black act." I can't find any specifics whatsoever. I remember the story at the time (1984 or 1985) ... but not with specifics. What award, given by who, verifiable third-party references? Is there any evidence this wasn't just a PR story? - David Gerard 12:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So close but no cigar. It's something that's missing from the article but I need the time to do the proper research (and I'm a DJ and it's approaching christmas and I dont have time to break wind - and if someone wants to do it for me...!!)
On the release of Beatbox, it was adopted very successfully by the danceclubs in the States, so much so that the band were put up for an American magazines Best New Black Dance Act of 1984 Award - and won it. So you can imagine the surprise when a bunch of white people from England got THAT news through the post... Eep!! Thumbsucker-UK 20:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected an exta use of the word "by" that was not appropriate to the article. It occured in the second paragraph of the article.Thaddeus Slamp 01:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I remeber seeing AON being featured on a music track programme on Channel 4, the song in question was the theme to 'Robinson Crusoe' all music featured on the programme was susposed to have been availble. Anybody know?--Pandaplodder 13:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Forget that I have just found it on the'Ambient Collection' and 'Best of'--Pandaplodder 14:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone know what remix is this? I asked the guy who uploaded the video, and 4 weeks later he responded vaguely with "Beat Box". Is this possibly "Beat Box Diversion 2"? Thanks in advance!--Mr. Sinistar 22:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Beat Box (Diversion 2)" is the same track as "Close (to the Edit)" BRIANTIST (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does anybody know anything about Beatbox Diversion Four? It appeared on the NME cassette Department of Enjoyment in 1984, is it now available anywhere else...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.236.181 (talk) 13:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Never heard of this group before, so could someone write up a member's section? Arkyopterix 11:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to the "Reformation" section of the article, the band has dissolved. Thus, there is the "Former members" list in the article's infobox, with links to the members' individual articles. What else do you expect from a members section? BNutzer 12:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can see how someone could get confused with all of the members of the Art of Noise, especially if someone doesn't read the entire article. Thus, I made a Band Members section in the article. I hope everyone likes it. -Mr. Sinistar 21:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The version of In Visible Silence that I "grew up on" (unfortunately I forget the format, it belonged to a housemate) had a version of Paranoimia that included voiceover by virtual reality star Max Headroom. I have just learned that there are multiple remixes (at least two) that have Headroom voiceovers. The one I know has him saying "Is it me or is the room getting smaller?" and later crediting "the band," including such silliness as "On drums... THE POPE!" and "On mic, the lovely... CHER! (Ok, Mike?)" I am now trying to ascertain which release(s) of In Visible Silence contain which versions.
I'm sorry to do what amounts to an information request on this page, but in reality, the article as written is misleading by omission; the citation suggests to the reader there was just one version of the "Max Headroom" remix. Further info/clarification? Sebum-n-soda 22:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's the 12" Extended version of Paranoimia - ... Is it me... is it me... is it m.. .. is it me or is the band getting bigger... Okay... ... and just having a rest between bars, Peter O'Toole... - it's on one of the 'The Best of the Art of Noise' releases, Art Works 12" [1]. I did upload an .ogg excerpt of it a while ago but the 'Copyright Police' deleted it.
Please explain image deletions as I can probably fix whatever it is, rather than just delete them[edit]
Per Wikipedia:Non-free content we have to use free images. Nonfree ones are tolerated so long as they are minimal. Read the link. --John (talk) 16:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the band's official website, Dudley, Horn, and Creme (with others) appeared as Art of Noise at the 2004 Prince's Trust. Youtube currently has the video. Perhaps someone will edit to include this, since the article currently has the band defunct after 2000.Truddick (talk) 10:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Was Welcome to the Pleasure Dome actually realised on another label initially, or justreleased on it? Don't want to be bold if "realised" is the word actually meant. 72.104.150.123 (talk) 23:47, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added archive links to one external link on Art of Noise. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
I have just modified one external link on Art of Noise. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
YAn 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.
I have just modified 3 external links on Art of Noise. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
This is a terribly written article. It has been tagged for concerns about verification and original research going back to 2009. As these concerns have not been addressed for years, I boldly deleted the unreferenced parts of the artcle. My edits lasted only about 60 seconds before a senior editor reverted my edits, without any attempt to address the issues. With such protective oversight, I fear that this article will remain tagged for verification and original research concerns for a very long time. Sad. Aguswiss (talk) 05:02, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
> "This is a terribly written article. It has been tagged for concerns about verification and original research going back to 2009."
@Aguswiss, I agree with you. Like so many articles in Wikipedia, people gather up info from dodgy (un-encyclopedic) sources, write the article, then try to justify content with poor references, or none at all. As a start, I've moved all the fan site references worth keeping to the External Links section, and will start deleting unreferenced material in a week or so. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 10:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This phrase is curious: "With the Fairlight, short digital sound recordings called samples could be "played" using a piano-like keyboard . . ." There is absolutely no need for scare-quotes around the word "played." O0drogue0o (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I've "removed" the quotes. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.