From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V4 #159 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Friday, May 25 2001 Volume 04 : Number 159 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars [Chris.Ray@medas.co.uk] RE: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars ["giluz" ] Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars [HeySean@aol.com] [idealcopy] big black the butcher!! [matt pare >As to New Order, I always thought of them as being the 80's Pet Shop Boys >>giluz As opposed to the 70's Pet Shop Boys? ;-) The Pet Shop Boys had two or three good songs. That's it. New Order were a very good band but decided to use the same sounds as Pet Shop Boys and, in my opinion, screwed up. In fact it sounds like Bernard nicked all the PSB gear and used it on the Electronic albums. NO were always a better or rather more consistent band than PSB. And they didn't record Go West. C The Information in this communication is confidential and may be privileged and should be treated by the recipient accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient please notify me immediately. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose its contents to any other person. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:01:43 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars > >>As to New Order, I always thought of them as being the 80's Pet > Shop Boys > > >>giluz > > As opposed to the 70's Pet Shop Boys? ;-) Oh right - I completely forgot PSB were also an 80's band. > > The Pet Shop Boys had two or three good songs. That's it. > New Order were a very good band but decided to use the same sounds as Pet > Shop Boys and, in my opinion, screwed up. In fact it sounds like Bernard > nicked all the PSB gear and used it on the Electronic albums. > NO were always a better or rather more consistent band than PSB. And they > didn't record Go West. Objectively you're probably right - NO were better, but it's no big deal to be better than the PSB. The basis for my comparison, though, is the way these two bands were referred to as making quality electronic music despite the fact that they were crap. Didn't hear any NO track which wasn't synthetic pop. Probably two of the most overrated acts of the 80's, alongside Madonna. giluz ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:12:05 EDT From: HeySean@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars Electronic music always seems to polarize music lovers it seems to me. In, I think, 80 or 81 OMD played here in so cal and I thought they were just great...a few years later anything they did set my teeth on edge! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:20:45 -0700 (PDT) From: matt pare Subject: [idealcopy] big black the butcher!! My experience in bands is that if one doesn't play or record a cover tune EXACTLY how it sounds, then it's butchery. What about interpretation for the basis of ART? Where the Stones, Led Zep. Beatles or any band from the 60s criticized for making somewhat obscure songs their OWN? Many of us grew up unaware that our favorite bands where copying tunes because we didn't bother reading the info on the album. We just assumed that they wrote them all. I'm sure some of you read everything and did know. No one butchers songs simply by recording them in their own style. cheers _____________________________________________________________ Get your free email and join a great 3D Sci-fi community ---> http://www.cybertown.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 15:40:33 -0000 From: Alistair Tear Subject: [idealcopy] New Order on Mars heysean wrote >> OMD played here in so cal and I thought they were just great...a few years later anything they did set my teeth on edge! I can remember when Simple Minds were way cool, around the time of 'Empires & Dance' and look what puerile, stadium fodder they turned out to be... BTW a big Happy Birthday to the Bobster 'sooner or later, one of us must know...' Alistair ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:01:05 EDT From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Roxy couldn't make it...so heres James?!?! Actually maybe a few of us should go to a Roxy show and chant 'Wire....Wire...Wire' during the quiet numbers, in retaliation for the 'Roxy.....Roxy.....Roxy' chant during the D&E version of Heartbeat! ///// an excellent idea , but the NEC shows are (i think) #38 a go so it'd be an expensive joke. wonder if they'll reappear on this week's later? still curious to see what roxy 2001 might sound like. > > > God knows what planet the producer of Later is on, the selection of bands > has been worse than ever this time. Its a shame because they usually get > terrific performances out of whoever is on.....and the concept of having > all the bands in a circle in the same studio is great. /////// until the last series i thought they did a pretty good job of getting at least something worthwhile on each week , and a good variety of stuff too. but somehow last series the wheels fell off and they just seemed to get in a complete pile of mediocrity. this series did appear a bit better (nick cave , orbital , REM , "roxy") but that last show was really bumping along the bottom. i guess some of those acts were last-minute stand-ins for bri and co. so we shouldn't be too harsh on the booker. > If I was Wires manager I would have demanded they go on the show. They > would be perfect for Later, and it would be an ideal showcase for them to > reach an audience who would remember them but may have switched off in > the mid 80s but would be pleasantly suprised by the 2001 version of Wire. > //////too true. they should offer their services pronto. likewise shame on them for not collaring television when they were over here last month ; what a missed opportunity. > > James make me laugh. For all their rhetoric they still sound like U2 > circa 1985. Tim Booth seemed to modelling his hairstyle on Art Garfunkel! > /////// mind you , nowadays U2 sound like U2 circa 1985 ; how many do we need? > > Does he have to do that stupid dance? > > Actually I do quite like his dancing. Only because there aren't enough > flailing limbs in popular music today. > > ////// just wait for this tony wilson movie (what happened to that anyway?) > p ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:07:12 EDT From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] New Order on Mars In a message dated 24/05/01 16:52:38 GMT Daylight Time, alistairtear@streetmanagement.org.uk writes: > I can remember when Simple Minds were > way cool, around the time of 'Empires & Dance' > and look what puerile, stadium fodder they turned > out to be... > > ////// ah , simple minds. crap new wave then cool then crap stadium band. > sadly the "cool" era was such a tiny proportion of their mostly dismal > output. that last comeback didn't really work either :-) p ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 14:16:36 EDT From: PaulRabjohn@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars > Objectively you're probably right - NO were better, but it's no big deal to > be better than the PSB. The basis for my comparison, though, is the way > these two bands were referred to as making quality electronic music despite > the fact that they were crap. Didn't hear any NO track which wasn't > synthetic pop. Probably two of the most overrated acts of the 80's, > alongside Madonna. > > giluz > > ////// ha ha mr bursa is going to love that one :-) this new order album > with all those hanger-ons sounds like a chemical brothers idea , is billy > corgan really involved? sounds like a disaster waiting to happen . what > with that and "wilson ; the movie" we'll be seeing a lot of them , i think > both projects have the prospects to be huge flopperoos. and meanwhile madonna is probably getting better press than ever. funny , that.p ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 19:51:31 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars Ian, >>Paul Morley was right. New Order *was* Rob Gretton. He's only been dead a couple of years and look what happens....they turn into the f**kin Rolling Stones.>> Gretton & Hooky I think had the spirit.... As for big bald Billy, he'll probably do a decent job (so long as he's not let near a microphone). Pumpkins' 1979 was a pretty good NO tribute I thought... More alarmingly, I had heard that they had been working with the guitarist from indie no-marks Marion, and that Billy was just doing the US gigs... Gawd help us. I could do better meself. Honest. Seriously, why not use Hooky's mate from Monaco, Dave Potts. He could make a living playing Barney in a NO tribute band. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:02:48 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: RE: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars Chris, >>New Order were a very good band but decided to use the same sounds as Pet Shop Boys >> Er...shouldn't that be the other way round!?!?! >>and, in my opinion, screwed up.>> Only on Republic, which is a lame album by their standards. Bear in mind that most of the time NO use a pretty standard guitar-bass-drums-kbds line-up. One of their most impressive features has been the ability to switch to almost 100% sequenced synths and drum machines while still sounding like the same band. Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:01:13 +0100 From: Tim Robinson Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Roxy couldn't make it...so heres James?!?! PaulRabjohn@aol.com wrote: > > wonder if they'll reappear on this week's later? still > curious to see what roxy 2001 might sound like. Me too. It would be pretty hard to murder a classic Roxy tune, unless they do them as a Medley or something. Doesn't say in my TV guide if they're on...just that the show is coming from Penningtons Variety Club in Bradford! Like the sound of that. >ty. this series did appear a bit better (nick > cave , > orbital , REM , "roxy") but that last show was really bumping along the > bottom. i guess some of those acts were last-minute stand-ins for bri > and co. > so we shouldn't be too harsh on the booker. Its still very watchable even with crap bands on, and there is precious little music TV on UK terrestrial television...too niche for them. Unless you count '4Music' or whatever its called......"And now lets spend 15 minutes in the company of DJ Seb Fontaine". No thanks. > If I was Wires manager I would have demanded they go on the show. > > //////too true. they should offer their services pronto. likewise shame on > them for not collaring television when they were over here last month ; Keeping a low profile I suppose. Maybe if this new LP materialises they might do a bit of TV and we'll have something to set our VCRs for. I'd like to see them on 'Slap Bang with Ant & Dec' or maybe 'This Morning' with Richard & Judy. > what > a missed opportunity. And maybe Jools could have tinkled the ivories on one of their numbers...wonder which one. (For non-UK listees who don't know what the hell we're on about, Later is a music show presented by Jools Holland who used to the keyboard player with Squeeze. He often accompanies the acts on Piano. Rather amusingly he joined Spiritualized on 'Oh Happy Day'! ) > Actually I do quite like his dancing. Only because there aren't enough > flailing limbs in popular music today. > > ////// just wait for this tony wilson movie (what happened to that > anyway?) In the can as far as I know. Steve Coogan seems to be piling up films and TV series but lord knows when any of them are actually going to be released. Can't walk down the street in Manchester without walking across a film set with Coogan in it....or Sarah Bleedin' Lancashire. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:22:30 EDT From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars >>>Didn't hear any NO track which wasn't > synthetic pop. Probably two of the most overrated acts of the 80's, > alongside Madonna. > > giluz > > ////// ha ha mr bursa is going to love that one :-)>> Indeed. You just tell Hooky to his face that his records are "synthetic pop". Mark ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:29:50 +0100 From: Tim Robinson Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars MarkBursa@aol.com wrote: > > >>> Tim: Paul Morley was right. New Order *was* Rob Gretton. >> > > Gretton & Hooky I think had the spirit.... Thing about New Order is that like Wire, they are greater than the sum of their parts or whatever. Their best stuff is done when its just the four of them, producing themselves with Gretton keeping a watchful eye. The Republic record with Stephen Hague (Pet Shop Producer) was lacklustre. The Beach thing they did was awful. The fact that this new record is very much collaborations with other artists, and a very safe selection at that, does not bode well. Shame because they can still do 'it'. I watched that DVD they released and the live version of Isolation got the hairs on the back of my neck going.....even World In Motion sounded good on that one! > As for big bald Billy, he'll probably do a decent job (so long as he's not let near a microphone). Better than having some session muso I agree but I think NO without Gillian is going to be like Wire without Mr Gotobed. OK she doesn't do much on stage but Gillian standing motionless to the left of Barney playing two-finger keyboard lines is essential part of NO. They are 3/4 NO without her. And I still rather fancy her! My first serious girlfriend was the image of her. Sigh! :) > > More alarmingly, I had heard that they had been working with the guitarist from indie no-marks Marion, Oh no! I hear their lead singer is now in chokey after being busted for Heroin. >and that Billy was just doing the US gigs... Gawd help us. I could do better meself. Honest. Me too, New Order guitar parts are among the easiest ever written, easier than Wire! . Actually I'd rather fill Hookys shoes! I'm a dab hand at the Low Slung Bass! Not sure about the Leather kecks though. > Seriously, why not use Hooky's mate from Monaco, Dave Potts. He could make a living playing Barney in a NO tribute band. > Yeah he would seem the more obvious choice. Nice lad actually. He used to work at Our Price Records with a mate of mine. He got my mate a job working on the Mrs Merton Show as keyboard player with the house band 'Hooky and the Boys'. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 20:48:55 EDT From: HeySean@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars ok here's a bit of sacrilege then: back in '81 when I got my new 12" of New Order's Everything's Gone Green I'm thinking "ok so it's not gonna be Joy Division ever again but let's listen" and I put it on and was grooving to it in a real cool white guy kinda way. It wasn't bad at all - then the vocals began and I realized I had the damn thing on at 33 instead of 45! Well at 45 it was terrible and I'd rather have it at 33 without the vocals... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 02:01:08 +0100 From: Tim Robinson Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars giluz wrote: > > Actually I like the Chemical Bros. As to New Order, I always thought of them > as being the 80's Pet Shop Boys Surely The Pet Shop Boys were the 80s Pet Shop Boys! (don't get me wrong here - this is NOT a > compliment). PSB are big New Order fans and Vice Versa. I don't mind the Pet Shop Boys actually. I really like Disco and Introspective, especially their cover of Its Alright. And West End Girls is a hauntingly beautiful pop record. So was Club Tropicana by Wham!. So was Party Fears Two by The Associates. So was Outdoor Miner, so was Eardrum Buzz. Its just music to me mate. Hey Graeme...I just compared Wire to Wham! and the Pet Shop Boys! Where are you?! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 02:16:31 +0100 From: Tim Robinson Subject: Re: [idealcopy] (OT) New Order on Mars Thats my favourite New Order song! Acid House was invented in 1982. Have it on CD so I can't play it on 33 but imagine it would be quite cool slowed down. HeySean, are music tastes are obviously as different as our taste in typefaces. ;) HeySean@aol.com wrote: > ok here's a bit of sacrilege then: back in '81 when I got my new 12" of New > Order's Everything's Gone Green I'm thinking "ok so it's not gonna be Joy > Division ever again but let's listen" and I put it on and was grooving > to it > in a real cool white guy kinda way. It wasn't bad at all - then the vocals > began and I realized I had the damn thing on at 33 instead of 45! Well > at 45 > it was terrible and I'd rather have it at 33 without the vocals... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 22:06:54 -0500 From: "squonk" Subject: [idealcopy] EGL in TRA magazine #4 ('83) Full Mullet In Force http://www.geocities.com/dmack2002/TRA4-egl-grass-s.jpg remove the -s for a reallylarge file ray)(0)(mac ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V4 #159 *******************************