Talk:Marvin, Welch & Farrar

Untitled

I want to add something like: "They were augmented in their recording sessions by Alan Tarney on bass guitar and Trevor Spencer on drums" But I can't remember if it was those two who played on both albums. Can anyone confirm this please? DavidFarmbrough 09:26, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Just purchased a 2nd-hand copy of 'marvin, welch & farrar' (sic as per the front of the gatefold sleeve and the lyric sheet - it's in all-caps inside the sleeve) and came here for further information about the group. If it helps, here's the data from that album . . .

Label - EMI Regal Zonophone; Catalogue No. SRZA 8502 (IE 064 • 04715) stereo.

Pressing codes (in the vinyl of the run-offs - Side 1 SRZA 8502 A-2, Side 2 SRZA 8502 B-2.

Side One

1. You're Burning Bridges (Marvin) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin

2. A Thousand Conversations (Marvin-Welch) Lead Vocalist - Bruce Welch

3. Brownie Kentucky (Marvin) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin

4. My Home Town (Marvin-Welch-Farrar) Lead Vocalists - Hank Marvin-Bruce Welch-John Farrar

5. Silvery Rain (Marvin) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin

6. Throw Down a Line (Marvin) Lead Vocalist - John Farrar

Side Two

1. Baby I'm Calling You (Marvin-Welch) Lead Vocalist - John Farrar

2. Faithful (Marvin-Welch-Farrar) Lead Vocalist - Bruce Welch

3. Mistress Fate & Father Time (Marvin-Ferris) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin & Bruce Welch

4. Take Her Away (Marvin-Welch) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin

5. Wish You Were Here (Marvin-Welch) Lead Vocalist - Hank Marvin

6. Mister Sun (Marvin-Welch) Lead Vocalist - John Farrar.

(P) 1971

String arrangements by John Farrar and conducted by Graeme Hall.

Drums - Clem Cattini.

Bass Guitar - Dave Richmond.

Occasional organ and piano - Alan Hawkshaw and Peter Vince.

Tape operator - Richard Lush.

Engineer - Peter Vince

(who did all the work)

Produced by Marvin, Welch & Farrar

All songs published by The Shadows Music Limited

Cover design and photos by Hipgnosis

All capitalizations, spelling v numerals etc and punctuation as printed (barring my errors). Hope some of this is useful. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

"Enormity" vs. "Enormousness"

Nasnema,

As I explained on your talk page, this all too common English usage error, has nothing at all to do with "local dialect." Given that you are evidently British and have displayed over your history of edits here a very marked preference for your own "local dialect," I refer you to the entry for "enormity" in the highly respected (British) Compact Oxford English Dictionary:

enormity

1 [mass noun] (the enormity of) the great or extreme scale , seriousness, or extent of something perceived as bad or morally wrong:a thorough search disclosed the full enormity of the crime

(in neutral use) large size or scale:I began to get a sense of the enormity of the task

2 a grave crime or sin:the enormities of war

Origin:

late Middle English: via Old French from Latin enormitas, from enormis, from e- (variant of ex-) 'out of' + norma 'pattern, standard'. The word originally meant ‘deviation from legal or moral rectitude’ and ‘transgression’. Current senses have been influenced by enormous

Usage

Enormity traditionally means‘ the extreme scale or seriousness of something bad or morally wrong’, as in residents of the town were struggling to deal with the enormity of the crime. Today, however , a more neutral sense as a synonym for hugeness or immensity, as in he soon discovered the enormity of the task, is common. Some people regard this use as wrong, arguing that enormity in its original sense meant ‘a crime’ and should therefore continue to be used only of contexts in which a negative moral judgement is implied. Nevertheless, the sense is now broadly accepted in standard English, although it generally relates to something difficult, such as a task, challenge, or achievement

The sentence in the Marvin, Welch & Farrar entry that I'd edited by inserting [sic] to flag, as per Wikipedia's Manual of Style, the incorrect usage of "enormity", because it did not use "enormity" to relate "to something difficult, such as a task, challenge, or achievement," so its usage to apply to a distance was incorrect as a matter of standard English, even in its least prescriptive BRITISH application:

'Originally, we planned just to record. But the enormity [sic] of John's move across the world and the good reception our album received changed that'.

I will await your response for 24 hours before taking further action on this, at which point, if I have not heard from you or you have not undone these changes, I will revert your reversion to this page and file a complaint with the Administrative Noticeboard. Ravinpa (talk) 04:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

But it's a direct quote. It doesn't have to be correct. Binksternet (talk) 13:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Binksternet. Thanks for the reply. I understand that the error was in the original quote, which is why I hadn't corrected the error itself. I'd instead inserted [sic] to flag it, as per Wikipedia's Manual of Style, in order "to show that the error was not made in transcription." I hope that clarifies the issue for you, but I'll wait another 24 hours or so before reverting Nasnema's reversion of my edit to hopefully ensure that it has. Ravinpa (talk) 04:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I would not tag it with the sic template. Enormity in this case is not outside of standard usage—it is simply exaggeration. Binksternet (talk) 15:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

No, it's outside standard usage even if it's being used as an exaggeration. Even if used to mean "very, very, very super-duper extra ULTRA huge" -- rather than its traditionally accepted sense of "heinous evil" -- it's still considered incorrect usage to apply "enormity" in that sense to anything other than "something difficult, such as a task, challenge, or achievement," which is certainly not the case here. The Oxford Dictionary's usage guideline, in fact, is the most expansive and generous on that point of all the major dictionaries -- many of which consider it very poor usage still to characterize "something difficult, such as a task, challenge or achievement" as an "enormity," and yet the usage in this case -- a measure of distance where no difficulty is implied -- would unquestionably fall outside even Oxford's very generous guideline.

Nasnema's original objection had been that she was under the mistaken impression that I'd made this edit in an attempt to "Americanize" the usage, which is why I'd cited a British dictionary (and the one with the most generous usage guideline, to boot) to make absolutely clear to her that this is not a matter of "local dialect" but rather accepted, standard usage worldwide even today. She now appears to have accepted that and suggested I make the reverts myself of her reverts on anything that doesn't fall within the scope of "something difficult, such as a task, challenge or achievement", which I'm willing to compromise on. Ravinpa (talk) 23:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Must be a slow day. I'm sure there are many more heinous wrongs to right at Wikipedia than this mild misuse of enormity. Binksternet (talk) 06:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)