From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #93 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Saturday, April 8 2000 Volume 03 : Number 093 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Non Wire, but .... [paul.rabjohn@ssab.com] oh, where to begin... ["MackDaddyD" ] Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut ["Michel Faber" ] Re: Gang Of Four ["ian barrett" ] RE: reissues ["Holstein, Brian" ] Re: reissues ["Stephen Jackson" ] RE: reissues [Paul Pietromonaco ] Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut [MarkBursa@aol.com] Associates [MarkBursa@aol.com] Re: reissues [geoffry ] Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut ["tube disaster" Subject: oh, where to begin... Whilst my all time fave remains 154, where to start really depends on where you are. But enough of that.. To continue the OT thread evern further off... Anyone share my fond memories of Alan Winstanly and Clive Langer from Deaf School through The Planets and Original Mirrors, until they became hotshot producers of Hall and Oates? Goon Hilly Down epitomizes the best and worst of 80s digital guitar sound. A shout out to the person who name checked the Passions, and... is anyone else as excited as I am that The Associates' Sulk is to be reissued soon. We can only hope that the origib\nal track sequencing is restored. What an abortion the US album (and subsequent EU CD) were. (a gramatical conundrum). And finally for all you squonkers out there, check out Basta's reissues of Ramond Scott's electronica. Really astounding to consider the historical context - and really nice to listen to irrespective of said context enough! d __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 10:45:14 +0100 From: "Michel Faber" Subject: Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut MF wrote: >There is good reason for Morrissey to be bitter. He has been >treated shamefully by the British music press, who have subjected >him not just to their usual build-em-up-then-knock-em-down tactics >but to a sustained hate campaign for ten years or more. Paul wrote: >>>well he couldn't do a thing wrong from 83-89 , hardly just "build >him up to knock him down". few people were more loved and >respected than he was then , and few got more coverage. "ten >years of hate" is a little much , "ten years of sniggerring" might be >a little closer to the mark. MF: OK, how about a compromise - something halfway between hate and sniggering? Ten years of derision, maybe. Ten years of contempt... And when you say Morrissey "couldn't do a thing wrong from 83- 89", you're really referring to the Smiths. The press were willing to accept Morrissey's first solo album because it sounded almost exactly like a Smiths record, but once he 'strayed'...SLAM! ______________________________________________________ Paul wrote: >>>>> a lot of the dislike is from stuff like the court case where the >judge basically concluded morrissey and marr were telling a pack >of lies , and had ripped off their colleagues hugely. and also a lot >of mediocre albums. and flouncing off the bowie tour. and whining >on endlessly in interviews MF: The court case was interesting for similar reasons to the recent Phil Collins "hey, I've overpaid royalties" debacle. See also the case last year in which an ex-member of Oasis fired for being dead weight took the band to court and, looking a complete berk in a suit, managed to score himself a big pay-out. In all of these cases, the issue is what should be done when some members of a group call all the shots musically and others just tag along. It was TRUE that Morrissey and Marr wrote and arranged all the Smiths songs and that the other two just played on them, and that technically this should be reflected in far smaller royalties from the sales. The mistake that Morrissey made is the same mistake that Phil Collins made - showing himself to be spectacularly ungenerous as a human being. Morrissey and Marr made more money from the Smiths than they could ever have dreamed of making when they were a bunch of unemployed Manchester lads, so it seems terribly mean to deny a decent slice of it to their comrades in success. Similarly, Collins' old side men are in the wrong technically but everyone knows that the royalties he's overpaying them represent a drop in the ocean to his vast wealth. Morrissey, though no Phil Collins in the wealth stakes, is I imagine very comfortably off and could well afford to be gracious and generous to his old band mates - yet he fought them very unpleasantly. However, I don't agree that this court case accounts for "a lot of the dislike" expressed towards Morrissey by the British press. That case happened only a few years ago, while the hate campaign - sorry, derision campaign - kicked in almost immediately he embarked on his solo career. As for his decision to leave the Bowie tour, Bowie is notoriously protective of his star status and has a viciously effective team of tour managers whose job is, among other things, to make sure no support act is in any danger of upstaging The Dame. In subsequent interviews, Morrissey has hinted at this, while making clear that he still respects Bowie's music enormously. As for all the "mediocre" albums, we can indeed agree to differ. Whatever the shortcomings of Morrissey's solo work, though, I'd suggest that he has yet to make an album as mediocre as the wildly applauded efforts of Oasis, Travis, Manic Street Preachers, Auteurs, etc etc etc etc etc... When will so-called Britpop finally roll over and die? Or more to the point, when will people finally wake up the fact that it's already dead? _______________________________________________________ Paul wrote: >>>>i never said he was a racist , i suggested he flirts with >nationalism. what did you think of his genius move to come out in >front of a madness crowd waving a union jack? irony? MF: Yes. But that doesn't mean it was a wise thing to do. This is a complex issue. Laibach are clearly ironic anti-fascists, yet when I say "clearly" I have to qualify that, by admitting that there may be some fascists somewhere who adore their jackboot sounds. Does this mean Laibach should give up? I don't know. Irony is a tricky thing. One list member wrote a wickedly funny spoof of Phil Collins' "generosity" a couple of days ago - another list member took it at face value (no pun intended). Some people just aren't tuned in to irony and this will be the case everywhere - including at Madness gigs. _______________________________________________________ MF wrote: >Please, can we try to rise above the ignorant sniping that passes >for music journalism in Britain and show these artists some respect >for trying out lyrics that go beyond the "Everything I do, I do for >you" brand of sentimentality. Paul wrote: >>>> are you calling me a bryan adams fan? outside , now ! MF: I would never call anyone a Bryan Adams fan unless I had the written statements of three independent doctors to corroborate the assertion. Instead, I am pleased to call you a Wire fan... Best wishes, Michel Faber ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:15:58 +0100 From: "ian barrett" Subject: Re: other bands Strange coincidence.... I just got back from a couple of weeks in Argentine/Uruguay (no evidence of anything Wire related - although the 280 emails from the list that I had waiting for me kind of made up for this; the Backstreet Boys have made quite an impact over there though), and in the course of running out of conversation with the guy I was travelling with, Gang of Four somehow cropped up. Neither of us could rmember much about them but I remembered the story of "...Tourist" and the dropped appearance from Top of the Pops, which I very probably was relating to my mate at the same time andy and sheri were sending this email. Apparently there was an attempt to reach a compromise about the line "rubbers you hide in your top left pocket" - the TOTP team suggesting "rubbish you hide". The original version was played quite regularly on Radio 1 (Kid Jenson, Anne Nightingale, John Peel) and not surprisingly, the damage sustained by the yoof of Britain as a consequence was at worst minimal Ian - ----- Original Message ----- From: andy and sheri wiseman To: wire Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:04 AM Subject: other bands > though not i'm not keen on the other bands listed i would > recommend the gang of four to anyone.the first 7" "damaged > goods" is a gem and the follow up"at home he's a tourist"is even > better.the story goes that they were booked to perform on "top of the > pops"(mimed early evening pop music show)but refused to drop the > line".....rubbers in his top left pocket."so they in turn were dropped > from the schedule."entertainment" is a must,it's chanted left-wing > politics are not to everyone's taste but the sound is exhilarating,angular > and stunted.there's a fine compilation available probably mid-priced. > yours > a.w > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:20:34 +0100 From: "ian barrett" Subject: Re: Gang Of Four Sorry for boring everyone after you'd all read Michel's more detailed exposition. I jumped the gun somewhat before having got up to date with my backlog. At least you all now know who's big in Montevideo though. Ian (207 emails to go) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Michel Faber To: andy and sheri wiseman Cc: Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:59 AM Subject: Re: Gang Of Four > Andy Wiseman wrote: > > >the story goes that they (Gang of Four) were booked to perform on > >"top of the pops"(mimed early evening pop music show) but > >refused to drop the line".....rubbers in his top left pocket."so they in > >turn were dropped from the schedule. > > The story as Hugo Burnham (Gang of Four drummer) tells it is > slightly more complex than this. The band were well aware, in > advance, that they wouldn't get away with singing "the rubbers you > hide in your top left pocket" on BBC television. > So, specially for the TOTP appearance, they pre-recorded an > alternative to the problematic phrase - "the packets you hide", which > they felt was suitably suggestive but subtle enough not to offend > anyone. However, when they turned up at the studio on the > afternoon of their mime/performance, they were confronted by a > producer who had a brilliant plan to get the BBC off the hook from > any accusation of censorship. 'Lads, how about re-recording the > vocal a second time, and having 'rubbish' instead of 'packets'?' > That way, the fans and critics could imagine they'd heard 'rubbers', > while Mrs and Mrs Normal having their tea could hear 'rubbish'. > At this suggestion, the band's tolerance snapped and they walked > out. > > Dan wrote: > > >Second album, Solid Gold, is quite a comedown, though What We > >All Want is about as good as anything they've ever done. Third > >album marks a pretty nice comeback, with I Love a Man in a > >Uniform being an actual semi-hit in the US. Fourth album, Hard, > >was empty dross. A couple of comeback LPs in the '90s, > >Mall & Shrinkwrapped, were better than Hard, but nothing to get > >esp. excited about. Couple of good tracks, though. > > I haven't heard Shrinkwrapped, but I think Mall is a great, great > album, which just happened to come out at the wrong time. It does > everything that U-2's Zooropa does, and does it better, a few years > earlier. Also in my opinion Hard isn't as bad as all that, though > calling it Hard was a perverse move given that it was softer than any > of the other Gang of Four records. Compared to Entertainment it's > not much chop, but compared to the dance stuff that was coming > out at the same time (which it was trying to muscle in on and > subvert) it was pretty radical. > > I guess it comes down to the old argument of indie purity versus > cross-over infiltration. > Wire's 'So and Slow It Goes' is pallid and uninteresting compared to > their spikier advantures, but it did get played in places where Wire > wouldn't otherwise have penetrated. Similarly, Malcolm McLaren's > opera/disco records ('Madam Butterfly', 'Carmen', etc) may not have > challenged the music industry in the way that the Sex Pistols did, but > how wonderful to think of clubgoers in the Bronx dancing to Puccini > and Bizet arias. Similar thing with the Gang of Four's Hard. Great to > think of a motormouth American DJ introducing 'Is It Love', only to > be followed by the Gang of Four's dry, dry deadpan delivery and > feedback textures. > > Best wishes, > > Michel Faber > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:32:37 -0400 From: "Holstein, Brian" Subject: RE: reissues "Ahead" is one of my favorite Wire tunes. What is "Ahead (ll)"? How does it differ from the original? thanks, brian > Even better, The Ideal Copy *is* the 16-track version with "Ahead (II)" on > it, so I grabbed that. > > aaron ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 19:40:48 +0100 From: "Stephen Jackson" Subject: Re: reissues >"Ahead" is one of my favorite Wire tunes. What is "Ahead (ll)"? How does it >differ from the original? Just a different mix. Lots of keyboards and no drums. Not very good. Steve. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Anger is an energy. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:04:33 -0700 From: Paul Pietromonaco Subject: RE: reissues >>"Ahead" is one of my favorite Wire tunes. What is "Ahead (ll)"? How does it >>differ from the original? >Just a different mix. Lots of keyboards and no drums. Not very good. I'm afraid I must respectfully disagree with you there. I quite like the ambient feel of Ahead (II). It's not just a different mix. According to Colin, it's a version that occurred during the mixing where he and the producer realized that due to the way Ahead was sequenced, they could go back several revisions and create almost an entirely new song from the raw elements. (I'm paraphrasing here - I don't have Colin's e-mail in front of me.) I think the vocal track is unique to that mix. 40 versions, and all that. I don't know if it's worth buying the CD again, if you already have the Ideal Copy. But, I did! (^_^) Besides - you can never have too many copies of the Ideal Copy... Cheers, Paul ...who actually did a fairly accurate version of Ahead II on his 15 voice Apple IIgs a long time ago... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 21:33:57 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut Michel, << I'd suggest that he has yet to make an album as mediocre as the wildly applauded efforts of Oasis, Travis, Manic Street Preachers, Auteurs, etc etc etc etc etc... >> Whoah!! Don't lump the Auteurs in with that lot! Luke Haines' six albums (including Baader Meinhof and Black Box Recorder) were among the bright spots of British music in the '90s... Hardly Britpop either - New Wave came out in 1992.... While Morrissey's '90s albums usually have a few god tracks on them, they're usually balanced by complete and utter rubbish (I give you 'Roy's Keen'...) there's not one with the consistency of, say, After Murder Park... Now if you want REAL Britpop whipping boys, try Cast, or Kula Shaker..... Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 21:39:21 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Associates Dmack, << and... is anyone else as excited as I am that The Associates' Sulk is to be reissued soon. We can only hope that the original track sequencing is restored. What an abortion the US album (and subsequent EU CD) were. (a gramatical conundrum). >> Oh yes. And how about the original Affectionate Punch on CD too (with the blue cover), not the re-recorded/remixed version (red cover). Utterly awesome live band too - sounded nothing like any of the records. Check out the Peel session 12inch for an idea of how good they were. Again, Wire-like in their dissociation from released material. The one time I saw them (10/80) they played two songs off the Affectionate Punch - the rest of the set was all new. Much of it ended up on Sulk two years later. Why can't bands do that today? Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 21:52:03 -0400 From: geoffry Subject: Re: reissues "Holstein, Brian" wrote: > "Ahead" is one of my favorite Wire tunes. What is "Ahead (ll)"? How does it > differ from the original? > Here's a question I've always wondered about -- What is the Ahead 12" version found on the eardrum buzz single? It sounds exactly the same as the album/single version to me... g. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 23:48:36 -0700 From: "tube disaster" Subject: Re: Re[2]: Morrissey's purportedly anti-Asian rut >Michel, > ><< I'd suggest that he has yet to make an album as mediocre as the wildly > applauded efforts of Oasis, Travis, Manic Street Preachers, Auteurs, etc etc >etc etc etc... >> > >Whoah!! Don't lump the Auteurs in with that lot! Luke Haines' six albums >(including Baader Meinhof and Black Box Recorder) were among the bright spots >of British music in the '90s... Hardly Britpop either - New Wave came out in >1992.... > >While Morrissey's '90s albums usually have a few god tracks on them, they're >usually balanced by complete and utter rubbish (I give you 'Roy's Keen'...) >there's not one with the consistency of, say, After Murder Park... Amen! I'm way behind on my listening to the first 3 Auteurs LPs, but Black Box Recorder features one of my favorite songs of the last few years, Girl Singing in the Wreckage. Dan ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V3 #93 ******************************