Talk:Whipping Post (song)

Who plays the middle

I don't think Dickey Betts plays the "memorable" middle section. You can clearly here the second (Betts) solo give way to the noodly abstract, rhythmless segment at 10:15. After this Betts is still playing. Isn't that Allman coming back in at 13:24? RR 2/19/07 [74.64.12.82]

I know what you're saying ... that entrance sounds more like Allman's tone. However to my ears it's still coming out of the right channel, which is Betts' (it doesn't help that the other guitar goes quiet during this time). Moreover everything I've read credits the entire stretch between the second and third vocal parts to Betts (which doesn't mean it's right, of course). Anyway, I've greatly expanded the description of the performance, but I've left your language in related to this question and elsewhere. Wasted Time R 22:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Later update ... the Randy Poe book Skydog, which is the most thorough account of the song's performance I've seen, says Duane doesn't take over the lead a good deal later, after the next vocal part and the "Frère Jacques" segment. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Who introduces the song

On the At Fillmore East album, is that Duane introducing the song? I have the recording, and it sounds like Gregg to me. Cubs Fan 00:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Poe's Skydog says it's Duane. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Slavery

This Wikipedia entry doesn't talk about what this song is about. Someone needs to say what a whipping post is. [racist comments expunged] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.246.185 (talk) 23:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The Pillory article describes what a whipping post is. It has a long history that has little or nothing to do with slavery. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Advertisement?

As much as I love the song, and as much as what is in the article is effectively true, the article reads as an advertisement, especially in the "At Fillmore East" section. Statements like "a much more gritty, passionate vocalization culminating in the anguished chorus" doesn't sound very objective to me. I notice that a number of these sets of adjectives are sourced - should we at least make sure that these lines are in quotation marks? -Aristotle28 (talk) 20:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It's not an advertisement, it's an attempt to explain how a 23-minute song got onto two of the most prominent '500 best songs of all time' lists and a got a lot of radio airplay. As far as I know there aren't any entries on those lists of comparable length, except maybe "Alice's Restaurant" which is of a completely different nature. So this performance recording must have been really, really special, and this article tries to capture what about it that was, just like some of the sources (especially the Poe book) try. As for the adjectives, writing about music is hard, but 'gritty', 'passionate' and 'anguished' are all accurate characterizations of Gregg Allman's singing on this song, as you yourself seem to acknowledge. As for quotes, there are some here, but I don't like WP articles that are just quote farms. Most of the text is in our own words, which is what we are supposed to be doing – paraphrasing is better than quoting. And plenty of sources have had more lively wording than this article, witness the "endless climb of heightening drama staked out by the twin-guitar exorcisms" snippet that I did include. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The Fillmore East section of this article is my favorite thing on Wikipedia. I just e-mailed a cut and paste of the entire thing to a friend across the country after discussing it on the phone. Reading it from time to time is almost as much fun for me as hearing the recording, and it has greatly enhanced my understanding and appreciation of what might be the greatest live musical performance ever recorded. Maybe it is a bit florid, but so is everything else ever written on the subject, and for excellent reason. I would hate to see all the passion stamped out of this page, Captain Hook style, in the name of form. Joe Suggs (talk) 06:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, but although the article is cited to sources, there's too much puffery and peacock terms. I would write for the opponent - what would somebody who doesn't really like the Allman Brothers (or whose knowledge extends as far as "that band that did the Top Gear theme tune") expect to see here? Just state who plays what and when. (Personally, when the drums die out after about 10 minutes, I lose interest). Oh, and directly quoting the entire lyrics of the chorus might be a copyright violation. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

It's definitely not a copyvio. Brief excerpts of lyrics are allowed by fair use provisions - see WP:LYRICS and a number of examples given there of FA/GA song articles that quote lyrics in various ways. (Indeed, you can include a 20-second audio clip of the song itself - lyrics, music, arrangement, everything - as fair use, and a number of FA/GA song articles do.) As for writing for the opponent, to me that's misguided when art is involved. In particular, here in WP it leads to song articles being dull as dishwater, with boring lists of chart positions and instrument credits and covers and little else. Art works by bringing about passion in the audience, and articles about art should reflect that. Of course, some people won't like a given work - for example, "Hound Dog", "Johnny B. Goode", and "Satisfaction" are all in Rolling Stone's top 20 of their greatest songs of all time list, but all three leave me cold. But I don't want the articles written on those songs to be written to my level of liking. I want them to describe the meaning and the passion that they brought about in the large numbers of people who do like them. I want those articles to explain why they ended up in the Rolling Stone top 20, so that readers can understand, whether or not they personally like it. Of course, if there are significant critical or commercial objections (some pop number one hits have been hated by millions, or been lambasted by critics) that should be included too. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood a bit. I said it might be a copyvio, depending on whether or not you consider the entire lyrics of a chorus to be a "brief excerpts", (Talk:Crass/GA2 was one example where we decided they might not be) and I think the audio snippet is a good idea. But let me point out areas I have for concern : "None of this fully anticipates the At Fillmore East performance" is personal opinion, one could argue that since that version has the same structure for the intro, verses and some of the solos, the studio version does anticipate what the live version might contain. Are you sure the time signatures are 6/4 and 11/4, not 6/8 and 11/8? Without a reliable source, we can't say for sure. Or "here the band takes an unexpected turn" - unexpected for whom? Stopping the song mid solo and saying "we're bored of this, so we're going to play I Want To Hold Your Hand instead" - that's unexpected! Anyway, I'm kind of exaggerating to make my point, which is - by all means make the article interesting, but it must be based on what the sources say. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Music

What instruments were played 92.234.110.40 (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)