# Talk:Clocks (song)

The article states that "'Clocks' is in the key of E flat Major".  However, the leading tone D seems to be lowered to D-flat the entire song, which actually suggests E flat Mixolydian. Locrian 06:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
I've completed the change.  This is based on evidence that can be found in the music itself, which is as reliable a source as any. Locrian 00:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The list of other versions/remixes seems incomplete.  I think that there is one by Lorie Line on the album Now and Then.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.123.30 (talk) 17:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC) 

Does anybody know where this comes from?
"Popularised by television commercials, it holds the record as being the highest selling song on Apple's iTunes music store."
I think this is in dire need of a citation.
DigitalSorcerer (talk) 03:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to find. But if I fail, I'll remove it. --Efe (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Clocks (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Background
"The band's vocalist, Chris Martin, came in studio late one night. A riff popped in Martin's mind and wrote it on piano." Consider re-writing this as one sentence. At the very least it needs "in studio" changed to "into the studio" and "in Martin's mind and wrote ..." to "into Martin's mind and he wrote ..."
"During the writing of "Clocks", the band had already made 10 songs for the album." This isn't quite what you mean. During should be before.
"With this, they thought it was too late for the song's inclusion in the album. So, they recorded a demo version of the track and saved it with other unfinished tracks, labeling it "Songs for #3"" Again this really needs re-writing or changed to one sentence.
"Martin assumed on further developing the track." This is fairly poor English, it needs re-writing.
"The last song included in the album, Coldplay recorded the song very fast." Again very poor.
Any idea? I have no better idea. --Efe (talk) 09:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
On the face of it, change it to something like "Because it was the last song included on the album, Coldplay recorded the song very quickly." However, this sentence really does ask a lot of questions which could improve it anyway. Why didn't they just delay the album? How quickly was it recorded? Did it have any impact on the quality of the song/recording? Did they later wish they had left it off until the next album? Peanut4 (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
"By the time Martin recorded his vocals, a few people inside the studio felt the song "is something special"" The tenses are wrong.
"According to Martin, "Clocks" was inspired by the English rock band Muse." This seems a trivial fact tagged on at the end. Consider adding it further up to tie in with Martin initially writing the song.
Release
Second and third pars are unreferenced.
"A music video exist in support of the song." Consider changing "exist". Make it more dynamic.
Reception
A few references are needed for the first paragraph.
Reworked versions
"On November 13, 2006, the album Rhythms del Mundo by the Buena Vista Social Club was released, featuring a reworked version of "Clocks"." Do you have a reference for this?
"Another remix has surfaced by The String Quartet." Or this?
"A single cover, created by Sølve Sundsbø, depicts lead singer Chris Martin with his hands folded on a glass table. The drawing perspective is looking from below the table." Not sure why this in this section?
I'll put it on hold for the time being. The main things that need doing are a good copy edit of the "background" section - I would possibly even suggest asking for an independent edit; and a good deal of referencing. Peanut4 (talk) 00:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Background
I've reverted an IP edit regarding Martin's friend who convinced him to finish the track. My initial feeling was since it was not said who the friend was that the info wasn't readily available. Are there any reliable sources which can be used to point to the identity of the friend, or would it be too much rumour to add it? Peanut4 (talk) 13:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I haven't found a source regarding Martin's friend. --Efe (talk) 06:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Lead
Sorry to butt in here but I think this sentence in the lead should be cleared up: "The song has existing several mixes..." Think it would be better to say "several remixes of the track exist" if that's what you mean. Cavie78 (talk) 10:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Fixed as suggested. --Efe (talk) 06:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Perhaps a couple more appropriate images but everything else looks in decent shape and meets the GA criteria. Peanut4 (talk) 21:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

There are actually a lot of free images of Coldplay performing live; however, I do not know if its "Clocks". Anyway, still hunting images to beautify/enhance the article. Thanks for the review and for passing it to GA. --Efe (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The popularity that television commercials brought to "Clocks" have led the single to hold the record as the highest-selling song on Apple's iTunes music store.
On November 13, 2006, the album Rhythms del Mundo by the Buena Vista Social Club was released, featuring a reworked version of "Clocks". It follows a son guajiro  style, with a slightly altered piano riff. In July 2007, the remix started receiving major airplay in Puerto Rico, making the song re-enter rotation on popular stations KQ 105 (reached number three) and Mega 106.9 (reached number four). Another remix has surfaced by The String Quartet.
--Efe (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Am I the only one who relates this song's lyrics to Friday the Thirteenth? Namely, how Jason drowned and was brought back by Satan? 77.99.90.217 (talk) 13:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Uh, if you have to ask, yes. Daniel Case (talk) 03:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Clocks has been on the Peter Pan trailer
It has also been in a promo for nickelodeon!
--Joshua H-Star-R (talk) 16:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Before I heard the rest of the album, I had heard the (non-vocal) piano intro section countless times every evening on BBC TV adverts for the upcomming shows (in Scotland) while I was touring the the UK... only to find the full song in the US once I returned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.111.62 (talk) 06:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC) 

What is the source for this? RYM shows only a promo release in 2002. NjtoTX (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Discogs only has promos released in 2002: http://www.discogs.com/Coldplay-Clocks/master/26980

Should this article include a discussion about the mashup of Clocks with Sufjan Stevens' Chicago?  I also wonder if Chris Martin has commented on Chicago and the mash up.
Miranda Meagan Keefe (talk) 19:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm deeply skeptical about the description of the emphasis implying polyrhythm. There are various ways you could describe putting an accent on the "and" of beat two and again on four: the three side of a clave, or a tresillo, arguably... although that would maybe suggest a latin flavour, which certainly isn't present here. To my mind it's really just a syncopated rhythm and talk of polyrhythms implies a great deal more complexity than is present. But i'm not bold enough to edit the page, perhaps someone else has thoughts?Silvertone953 (talk) 12:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree. The song's rhythm is syncopated with a sort of "3+3+2" pattern, however this isn't a polyrhythm. I'm confident in this, but I'm unconfident in my editing ability, so I too am hesitant to make the change myself. But if nobody else steps up, I'll do my best to change it while meeting all the standards and such. Camcookie2 (talk) 21:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Silvertone953: A bit late but I removed the mention. Not only is it factually inaccurate but it also isn't supported by either of the two references given. Thanks, also to @Camcookie2:, who brought this up again. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I think the genre keeps changing it is britpop.

I think the genre keeps changing it is britpop.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.89.236 (talk) 22:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC) 

Yes, I can hear the similarities to that riff, but WP:OR requires that a reliable source see it, not us. Citing the YouTube video someone made, where some people imply this in the comments, won't cut it.
If someone doesn't provide one, I'll be taking that sentence out. Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, it's been the better part of a week without any response here or edits to the article. I took that out. Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Someone changed the genre to psychedelic rock, is this information right? Bugg Bulborb (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

So when was the single actually released in the uk? It says both 17th and 24th March 2003? 2A00:23EE:1310:D165:3296:B7E2:19D0:8AC4 (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

odd that there are none on lead but plenty on rest DanTheMusicMan2 (talk) 01:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)