Talk:Jigsaw (British band)

Untitled

I have reverted this page because it had to much opnion in it, so it wasn't npov. Also it focused too much on the fact Jigsaw never made it amoung the biggest bands of the era. While this should be mentioned (like it is in this article) it shouldn't be the main focus of the article, it's main focus should be on the music and members of the group. Also,just because "Love Fire" wasn't a UK Top 40, it was still a hit, as it charted in other countries and therefore can still be called a hit. Like I said, the main focus of this article isn't to keep going on about how Jigsaw "didn't make it as big as they could have", it is mentioned, of course, but it's not the be all and end all. Also, success in music isn't just based on the music charts & many other articles on Wikipedia reflect this. 205.188.117.7 13:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

' Yes, well whilst I agree with you that the absolute focus should not be on Jigsaw's lack of success due to poor airplay of their songs, I do believe that it is a strand that should run through their story. The fact is that this band should have received more covergae due to the quality of their melodic pop music. It took my editing of this page to really illustrate this succinctly. I do not mind that you edited my add ons, but the fact remains that for 1970s pop bands the UK charts were very important, and were a definite measure of success. The UK was a leader in pop music and the charts were a barometer of success. Oh, and by the way, your discography should reflect that 'You bring out the best in me' was actually released in 1980. Also you had earlier stated that the band had broken up in 1981, when this was not actually true. Splash records continued and the band released their final single 'Love isn't at home' in January 1983. It would have bee useful if you had noted that Splash records was actually formed by Chas Peate himself. Finally, if you are want to keep a focus on the music, and discuss the bands Beatlesque sound, I am surprised that you failed to mention that Richard Heweson (who had worked with Paul McCartney) arranged a percentage of Jigsaw's output. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.196.201 (talk) 01:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Jigsaw DID split up in 1981, this was mentioned in the sleeve notes of their 1998 best of cd, a project which involved Clive Scott and Des Dyer. Whilst more records were released after this date, such as the "Jigsaw" LP in America, this was recored in 1981, as this article also correctly states. The charts were not the only measure of success in the 1970s - for example, the only act of the splash record label to have a hit in the uk top 40 was Jigsaw themselves, so the other acts who recored there didn't have that - yet dose that mean every act on the label was unsuccessful? Of course not, they did well for an act on a small record label in the second half of the decade. Jigsaw themseleves lasted for a total of 16 consecutive years as a band, made music for a few movies, had many records out, their music is still in print and sells on CD, they still reform for comeback records and concerts today - that is success. Also, if were wereto keep saying they should have had more hits because they were so great, this is not acceptable, as articles have to be written Npov. Just because they didn't have the chart hit's many (including me) feel they deserved, doesn't mean they were an utter failure, their is such a thing as success on the underground scene, rather that the mainstream, and therefore, their lack of chart records should be mentioned, but not again and again and again. I re-added some of the information you put after it was deleted and think some of the stuff you just mentioned such as the working with McCartney and the owner of Splash records could be added, but let's not make this article into a "Jigsaw had very little success", as the word success is always debatable and Jigsaw were more successful than most bands who only have one or two big hit records, don't see many of them leaving a legacy into this decade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.188.117.7 (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, but we will have to disagree on this. For example, you talk about Splash records as if it was a small label with hardly any backing, which is not true. Although an independent, it was backed by Private Stock in the 1970s and was distributed via EMI to begin with in Britain, so it had plenty of push. Also Jigsaw were not Pink Floyd, they were a pop group and chart success at that time for a pop band WAS important. If they did split up in 1981 as a fully functioning band, then Splash were not keen to state this fact a the time, as I wrote to the label in 1982, and was told that they were very much still going, and recording new tracks for release in early 1983. It is not unusual for the main nucleus of a band to continue in some form after others leave. Certainly the production of 'Love isn't at home' was very much an 82/83 sound, and Des Dyer continued with this 'synth' style for his sunbsequent 1983 entry into the Eurovision Song Contest heats with the song 'With Love', which was not officially by Jigsaw. Anyhow, I am very glad that Jigsaw at least have a decent overview now, as it is long overdue, and I thak you for a largely thorough overview. Although I have always loved this band, I personally couldn't care less about their lack of chart success. I just felt that it should be part of their story. To me they left a great catalogue of music which I still enjoy all these years on, and that is the main thing. Oh, and by the way, I never got to see the band live in the 70s as I was too young. I always wanted to go though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.196.201 (talk) 20:40, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, we can agree to disagree of course. I find it nice to talk to some one who, like myself, loves the music this great band made. While Jigsaw were a pop band, it still doesn't matter. Pop bands can be successful without mainstream chart success, just like a Rock band could, just because it's different music doesn't mean different rules apply. I wouldn't say Floyd were the best example of a underground band though (they had a lot of chart success). That's odd that Splash records said that, seeing as the CD sleeve notes stated otherwise (I doubt that Clive Scott and Des Dyer would have let such a error slip through). This is jut a guess but maybe after the group split, Scott and Dyer recorded as a duo but kept the "Jigsaw" name? Whilst you are right that Splash was distributed by a major company, to say it had "plenty of push" doesn't sound right. I doubt both EMI and Private Stock spent anywhere near the time or money promoting Splash releases as they did their own, my father was a manager of a record shop from 1969 to 1984 and hardly ever did he get the label reps for EMI or PS promote the Splash releases, only "Sky High" and "If I Have To Go Away" by Jigsaw and one single by Richard, so Splash, while it had backing by the majors on paper, was still one of the smallest record labels in the UK, as it was treated this way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.116.197 (talk) 12:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

For all the heartfelt emotion, and background to the case, there is not one single reference to support any of this. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources before proceeding further. The only references currently included are those placed by me; relating to verifiable chart placings and Clive Scott's unfortunate recent demise. Thank you,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC).

I think you will find that it is very difficult to verify any of this simply because Jigsaw received very little exposure after 1975, especially in the United Kingdom. However, you might want to consider the validity of 'oral history' and the piecing together of information from strong memories of people who are still with us and DO remember these things as FACT. This page has been revised over recent months, and I would guess that this has been by Des Dyer himself, who would be a very reliable resourse, having been ths band's singer. It is not about heartfelt emotion but simply an objective account. I am sure that Chas Peate would verify at least some of this information as he recalled to myself in a conversation a number of years ago that despite the plugging of this bands songs Radio 1 would not add the music to their playlist. It should be remembered that Radio 1 was very influential at this time. Because there is so little information out there on Jigsaw, we have to rely on oral history, otherwise their history would be lost. I would also say that there may never be any more reliable information that this account that we have. Does this then mean that Jigsaw should NOT have an entry on wikipedia?. I think that this entry is a fair and well balanced account of Jigsaw which is well written. Finally, anybody could get a chart entry and verify it from the book of hit singles, so I don't know why you are crowing on about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.218.70.160 (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Whilst I sympathise, oral history, after a point, is just not verifiable, and this is a non-negotiable policy as far as we're concerned. It isn't a case of "crowing", because WP:BAND specifically grants notability to a band that has charted on a recognised national chart, and Jigsaw clearly qualify; but that only allows an article, not unsourced detail. I've had the same problem writing articles on other bands who (in my opinion) deserve articles. Someone, somewhere must have a scrapbook of Melody Maker or New Musical Express or other cuttings that can be cited in support of this article. Until then ... Rodhullandemu 00:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Well in that case remove the article and there will be nothing of note on Jigsaw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.54.66 (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that will be necessary. I already have a long list of work to do, but I will add proper sourcing of this article to it. Fortunately I will be getting my library, which contains many rock and pop music magazines and books, out of storage within the next couple of weeks, and there should be something citable in there. Meanwhile,please remember Wikipedia is not a forum or MySpace. Rodhullandemu 14:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I think you should stop being rude. There was nothing of note before this page was put up. Yes please DO get out your pop magazines and books, although as you will know a great deal of magazine stuff can hardly be called academic in itself. And besides this 'talk' page you are very wrong to state that this is like a MySpace page. It isn't that way at all. The article is written in a detached 'third person' manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.54.66 (talk) 18:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

..but is still very largely unsourced. If you're going to accuse me of being rude when I am offering to help get this article up to our standards, I'm withdrawing that offer, as I do have better things to do. Any editor is free to remove unsourced material at any time, and I see no reason to interfere with that right. Rodhullandemu 18:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The Arrangement of Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring

One quick listen to the Jigsaw recording of Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring will remove all doubt that the Apollo 100 remake version release 2 years later is a nearly identical copy of the same arrangement. Very surprising that the Jigsaw fans who wrote this page appear not to know this. Is it because the remake was only a hit in the U.S? If you still don't believe that Apollo 100 stole the arrangement download the original 1970 Jigsaw recording here: http://robotsforronnie.blogspot.com/2007/06/jigsaw-letherslade-farm-1970.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.160.93.32 (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

"eponymous"?

The word "eponymous" is so often used incorrectly that it is better to leave it out. This article refers to an album released by Jigsaw that is named for the band and is thus itself called Jigsaw. The article reads "eponymous Jigsaw.

This is incorrect. It is not the album that is eponymous, rather the band. Something is eponymous if it has something else named for it - not the other way around. As the article reads, it suggests that the band was named after the album.

True, the use of this word is almost universally incorrect. (Same with the word "peruse". It's used in a manner completely opposite to its true meaning.) However, as many people outside the English-speaking world (myself included) rely on Wikipedia, among other things, as a guide to the correct usage of English, errant use of words should be avoided as much as possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.65.159.153 (talk) 08:19, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jigsaw (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708234116/http://davedubrow.com/my_journalfile/2009/05/don-tandler-reports-clive-scott-of-jigsaw-has-died-at-64.html to http://davedubrow.com/my_journalfile/2009/05/don-tandler-reports-clive-scott-of-jigsaw-has-died-at-64.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:27, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Dr. West's Medicine Band c/w Bullets La Verne doesn't seem to be an actual Jigsaw song.

According to the few sources I can find, Bullets La Verne is a song by Dr. West's Medicine Band. (source: https://www.discogs.com/Dr-Wests-Medicine-Band-Bullets-La-Verne/release/6650894) 'Jigsaw' is the name of the b-side it's attached to, which may have led to the confusion. I don't think that this is an actual song made by Jigsaw at any point. Unless someone else has any other record of this song existing, I think it should be removed from the page. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 02:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)