From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V8 #74 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Saturday, March 19 2005 Volume 08 : Number 074 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [idealcopy] Comebacks [MarkBursa@aol.com] [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V8 #73 [RLynn9@aol.com] Re: [idealcopy] Comebacks [Derek White ] Re: [idealcopy] Comebacks ["Keith A" ] [idealcopy] Re: NO NO NO! (Was Comebacks) ["Glenn & Cecile" ] Re: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! [CHRISWIRE@aol.com] Re: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! ["Keith A" >New Order have fallen down the trap of getting too many producers in again, when their best stuff was always self-produced and sounded like it could all fall apart at any minute. Not heard it yet, didn't like the single at all. Is Peter Savilles sleeve some witty comment on the contents of the album? Its the word 'No' rendered in a rather derivative, old-hat factory style. Wire are one of the few bands who managed to come back with the same spirit and attitude intact. I wonder if that is anything to do with the fact that Wire probably snorted a lot less coke than New Order have over the last 15 years or so?<< Part of the problem is technology - it's too good now. In the 80s, NO were absolutely cutting-edge - pushing limited sequencers & drum machines to their limits - and beyond. Now, you could program Blue Monday into a laptop in half an hour. So the technology aspect of their sound seems to have lost any challenge. As a result, they resort to doing the other thing they do - gtr/bass/drums rock. Hence Rock the Shack, and other execrable tracks. The best post-comeback track is Behind Closed Doors (B-side of Crystal), where they DO address modern sequencing technology, and come up with an update on their electro sound. Also Barney now believes NO are a big mainstream rock band rather than a cult band - and should therefore have female backing singers, acoustic ballads, cod-reggae tracks etc. As a live band, NO still cuts the mustard. Their comeback gig in Liverpool 2001 was superb. But the new albums haven't been made with the same rigour as Send was. And judging by the Hook/Sumner waistlines, considerably less coke is currently being snorted than previously.... Mark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:56:52 EST From: RLynn9@aol.com Subject: [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V8 #73 In a message dated 3/18/05 3:38:32 AM Central Standard Time, owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org writes: > - ---Surely more amazing is the fact that Mr Wilson put Lamb lies down on > Broadway at number 3 and has escaped all criticism ;-) > > Perhaps, as it was practically a solo Peter Gabriel album, it isn't as badly > thought of as the others... > aside from the title track, Lamb is too tedious for me (and that's saying a lot) ....i prefer Foxtrot and Nursery Cryme ......but oddly enough, my favorite pop single by Genesis is sans Gabriel: "Follow You Follow Me" RL ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:12:43 -0800 (PST) From: Derek White Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Comebacks I reckon the point that where once NO pushed the available technology to it's limits and thus made work that was challenging, whereas now they work well within it's capabilities is bang on the money. Although, let's be honest, you'd have to push really hard to get today's computers & software creaking with the strain, unless you were going to do stuff with lo-oonng samples at stupid sample-rates with loads of pitch-bends and stuff on top. Certainly, if they're going down rawk cliche road , with a chorus of female backing singers, accoustic ballads etc, then it appears terminal bloat has set in, which is sad. I didn't find the new single *that* execrable:- just somewhat bland, and could have been taken from any NO late-period session. Also, (and I realise this may be contentious) far be it from me to do a commercial for 'peruvian marching powder', 'cos the damned stuff is gradually turning estates in my hometown into near-warzones, as feuding gangs from nearby cities vie for custom, but I can think of a goodly number of artistes who's best work was fuelled by such 'contraband' , and when they 'cleaned up their act' they started making po-faced records of astounding mediocrity, but with career-structure most in mind. So don't automatically blame 'substances' for poor records....... (Prototype is probably Lou Reed, but see also Iggy Pop, David Bowie, and a whole raft of others) It's a shame that a band such as NO who can reasonably be said to have re-invented contemporary music not once, but twice with then-revolutionary approaches have hit staid middle age, but 'twas ever thus. Wire's vital rebirth is exception, rather than the rule........ MarkBursa@aol.com wrote: Wire are one of the few bands who managed to come back with the same spirit and attitude intact. I wonder if that is anything to do with the fact that Wire probably snorted a lot less coke than New Order have over the last 15 years or so?<< Part of the problem is technology - it's too good now. In the 80s, NO were absolutely cutting-edge - pushing limited sequencers & drum machines to their limits - and beyond. Now, you could program Blue Monday into a laptop in half an hour. So the technology aspect of their sound seems to have lost any challenge ...............The best post-comeback track is Behind Closed Doors (B-side of Crystal), where they DO address modern sequencing technology, and come up with an update on their electro sound. Also Barney now believes NO are a big mainstream rock band rather than a cult band - and should therefore have female backing singers, acoustic ballads, cod-reggae tracks etc. ....the new albums haven't been made with the same rigour as Send was. And judging by the Hook/Sumner waistlines, considerably less coke is currently being snorted than previously.... Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:57:31 -0000 From: "Keith A" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Comebacks > Well they've been around for nearlly 30 years what do you expect? Look > at what the Rolling Stones were doing in the 80s! Start Me Up. Described by a youngish Birthday Party era Nick Cave at the time as 'performance of the year'. Great record! And what's wrong with female backing singers, folks? Anything that drowns out Barney's voice is surely a good thing!! Still bought the new single though ; ) K. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:55:37 +0200 From: "Glenn & Cecile" Subject: [idealcopy] Re: NO NO NO! (Was Comebacks) > Part of the problem is technology - it's too good now. In the 80s, NO were > absolutely cutting-edge - pushing limited sequencers & drum machines to their > limits - and beyond. Don't want to start a riot, but NO weren't particularly revolutionary with their use of technology. They certainly never stretched it by any means. Any number of bands had taken it further by that stage. Commercially, Depeche Mode, went (at least) as far, a couple of years earlier. Extremes ? Try TG, The Residents, or even Neubauten around the same time. I don't think technology can EVER be blamed. It seldom sticks around long enough to be fully realised. Blame that on the people who use it. Of course there are exceptions. Does anyone remember when Kate Bush, Pink Floyd and Genesis were about the only people in the world who owned a Fairlight ? I remember that at the time, the major fear being expressed by the creators was that the buyers were going to ignore the possibilities and use the factory pre-sets ! It happened. Incidentally, it will be of no surprise to hardcore Wire fans that this same machine is still employed by Thorne, that stupendous Producer of the seminal 154. Blame it on the brains which apply themselves to using that which is available. Without apologies for using superlatives Glenn. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:56:22 EST From: MarkBursa@aol.com Subject: Fwd: [idealcopy] Re: NO NO NO! (Was Comebacks) >>Don't want to start a riot, but NO weren't particularly revolutionary with their use of technology. They certainly never stretched it by any means.<< And let the riot begin... So Blue Monday, conceived in late 1982, doesn't stretch the technology of the day?!? >> Any number of bands had taken it further by that stage. Commercially, Depeche Mode, went (at least) as far, a couple of years earlier.<< Not so. DM around that time employed three musicians to manually play synths. And that was what Kraftwerk was doing in 1975. What NO did was integrate the gtr/bass/drums stuff and the electronics in a totally original way, while constantly upgrading their gear - and then performing it live. >>Extremes ? Try TG, The Residents, or even Neubauten around the same time.<< TG were certainly innovative in that they used alot of home-developed gear. But equally a lot of TG's noise was treated analogue instruments and tapes. Ditto residents. >>I don't think technology can EVER be blamed. It seldom sticks around long enough to be fully realised. Blame that on the people who use it. Of course there are exceptions. Does anyone remember when Kate Bush, Pink Floyd and Genesis were about the only people in the world who owned a Fairlight ?<< Don't recall much meritorious mid-80s output from PF or Genesis, regardless of the expensive gear they had. Shite, superannuated rockers buy expesive toys, and do nothing with them. Quelle surprise... >> I remember that at the time, the major fear being expressed by the creators was that the buyers were going to ignore the possibilities and use the factory pre-sets ! It happened.<< Of course that would happen! The Fairlight was by all accounts a horrible, complicated contraption. Complex 80s technology was often a creativity killer - - look at Kraftwerk - shall we spend all week trying to decipher the manual, or shall we just go cycling? NO seemed to be able to master 80s gear in a way that hasn't really dated. They achieved great results when pushing new technology, rather than now, when the "New Order sound" can be very simply achieved. >>Incidentally, it will be of no surprise to hardcore Wire fans that this same machine is still employed by Thorne, that stupendous Producer of the seminal 154.<< Thorne used an Oberheim poly synth on 154 - very advanced kit for 79. Whereas a Fairlight today is a clunky bit of unreliable 80s gear? Surely using a Fairlight today is purely a retro statement? Why bother? You could emulate it on a Mac or PC, with better reliability... Mark Return-Path: Received: from rly-yi05.mx.aol.com (rly-yi05.mail.aol.com [172.18.180.133]) by air-yi02.mail.aol.com (v104.18) with ESMTP id MAILINYI21-7cd423b2b3bcd; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:26:11 -0500 Received: from smoe.org (jane.smoe.org [199.201.145.78]) by rly-yi05.mx.aol.com (v104.18) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYI51-7cd423b2b3bcd; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:25:47 -0500 Received: from smoe.org (ident-user@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smoe.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j2IJImDf025356 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:18:48 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by smoe.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j2IJIm2B025355 for idealcopy-outgoing; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:18:48 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: smoe.org: majordom set sender to owner-idealcopy@smoe.org using -f Received: from urchin.mweb.co.za (urchin.mweb.co.za [196.2.24.26]) by smoe.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j2IJIjDf025349 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:18:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from pc (c1-215-1.dbn.dial.mweb.co.za [196.23.208.215]) by urchin.mweb.co.za (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F548CC7F for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:57:18 +0200 (SAST) Message-ID: <000201c52bec$64e40af0$d7d017c4@pc> From: "Glenn & Cecile" To: References: <6.41350155.2f6c4977@aol.com> Subject: [idealcopy] Re: NO NO NO! (Was Comebacks) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:55:37 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on jane.smoe.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Virus-Scanned: clamdscan / ClamAV version 0.60 X-Virus-Scanned: clamdscan / ClamAV version 0.60 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.5.8 (smoe.org [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:18:48 -0500 (EST) X-Greylist: Delayed for 00:21:22 by milter-greylist-1.5.8 (smoe.org [199.201.145.78]); Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:18:47 -0500 (EST) Sender: owner-idealcopy@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-AOL-IP: 199.201.145.78 > Part of the problem is technology - it's too good now. In the 80s, NO were > absolutely cutting-edge - pushing limited sequencers & drum machines to their > limits - and beyond. Don't want to start a riot, but NO weren't particularly revolutionary with their use of technology. They certainly never stretched it by any means. Any number of bands had taken it further by that stage. Commercially, Depeche Mode, went (at least) as far, a couple of years earlier. Extremes ? Try TG, The Residents, or even Neubauten around the same time. I don't think technology can EVER be blamed. It seldom sticks around long enough to be fully realised. Blame that on the people who use it. Of course there are exceptions. Does anyone remember when Kate Bush, Pink Floyd and Genesis were about the only people in the world who owned a Fairlight ? I remember that at the time, the major fear being expressed by the creators was that the buyers were going to ignore the possibilities and use the factory pre-sets ! It happened. Incidentally, it will be of no surprise to hardcore Wire fans that this same machine is still employed by Thorne, that stupendous Producer of the seminal 154. Blame it on the brains which apply themselves to using that which is available. Without apologies for using superlatives Glenn. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:14:12 -0000 From: "Keith Knight" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! A 25 year wait is about to come to an end - Roxy Music are in the studio working on new material. But will it be For Your Pleasure or Avalon? I'm not holding my breath. Along with Kate Bush and VdGG this is becoming something of a revival year. Wasn't Scott Walker supposed to be releasing something soon? Another the Keith - -----Original Message----- From: owner-idealcopy@smoe.org [mailto:owner-idealcopy@smoe.org] On Behalf Of Steve Loubert Sent: 17 March 2005 22:37 To: Ideal Copy Subject: Re: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! All too common these days, I'm afraid. Full-length album release dates from two of my favorites: Nine Inch Nails - 1989, 1994, 1999, 2005 Tool - 1993, 1996, 2001, (No news yet on the next one) I don't understand how they can get away with it. Five years is a lifetime in popular music. Of course, I'm still waiting for My Bloody Valentine and Sisters of Mercy. - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 6:35 AM Subject: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! > 3 years to make the upcoming New Order album! > > If your gonna take 3 years to make an album then you had better be Pink > Floyd 1975. > > - Robert Jaz ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:31:59 -0000 From: "Keith Knight" Subject: [idealcopy] Gang of Four in the US Apologies if this has already been announced and I've forgotten, but as a courtesy to US listers details of Go4's May tour is here: http://www.gangoffour.co.uk/ another the Keith ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:00:38 -0800 From: Rex Broome Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Gang of Four in the US And again, WTF with no So Cal date outside of Coachella? Surely that won't stand. - -Rex On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:31:59 -0000, Keith Knight wrote: > Apologies if this has already been announced and I've forgotten, but as > a courtesy to US listers details of Go4's May tour is here: > > http://www.gangoffour.co.uk/ > > another the Keith ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:27:18 EST From: CHRISWIRE@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! In a message dated 17/03/2005 22:54:33 GMT Standard Time, steve@louberts.com writes: All too common these days, I'm afraid. Full-length album release dates from two of my favorites: Nine Inch Nails - 1989, 1994, 1999, 2005 Tool - 1993, 1996, 2001, (No news yet on the next one) I don't understand how they can get away with it. Five years is a lifetime in popular music. Of course, I'm still waiting for My Bloody Valentine and Sisters of Mercy. If I remember rightly, The Blue Nile gaps are about 5 years at least.How do they pay any mortgage they have ?? Chris NP. And Here Is The Young Man - Martin Hannett Productions Great to hear Cooper Clarke's Beasley Street again ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:14:09 -0000 From: "Keith A" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] re Three Years!! > A 25 year wait is about to come to an end - Roxy Music are in the studio > working on new material. But will it be For Your Pleasure or Avalon? > I'm not holding my breath. Well the drummer on the tour dates was Paul Thompson, so that bodes well, though I have to say I liked Avalon anyway. But in a different kind of way. Not sure I'll get it though. His public support of that horrible little twat of a son at the Q awards could well lead to a Polly Harvey-like boycott in the Astbury camp. I'm not sure I want my pennies to finance BF's sons disgusting hobby, seeing as I'd rather like to chase that pathetic little toff around the countryside and let the dogs rip him apart. On the other hand, I'm a big Roxy fan... Decisions, decisions... ; ) On topic... Just been playing Scottish Play. The version of Surgeon's Girl is superb!! On the one hand the trrack is typical of it's time. On the other there's something that already marked it as very different. Genius. And watching Colin and Graham yell it out is a moment to treasure. K. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 02:45:58 +0200 From: "Glenn & Cecile" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: NO NO NO! (Was Comebacks) > TG were certainly innovative in that they used alot of home-developed gear. > But equally a lot of TG's noise was treated analogue instruments and tapes. > Ditto residents. My point, exactly. They utilised the available technology. > Don't recall much meritorious mid-80s output from PF or Genesis, regardless > of the expensive gear they had. Shite, superannuated rockers buy expesive > toys, and do nothing with them. Quelle surprise... You won't find me contesting that in any forum. > Of course that would happen! The Fairlight was by all accounts a horrible, > complicated contraption. Complex 80s technology was often a creativity killer > - look at Kraftwerk - shall we spend all week trying to decipher the manual, > or shall we just go cycling? Well.... Thorne RTFM, and STILL uses one! :) And that's really my point. Few people exploit the available technology to it's maximum potential. > NO seemed to be able to master 80s gear in a way that hasn't really dated. > They achieved great results when pushing new technology, rather than now, when > the "New Order sound" can be very simply achieved. Sorry, you don't have to love them to accept that FGTH and Trevor Horne were pretty much on the techno ball, and I don't think that was because of any groundbreaking stuff happening in Manchester. You even mentioned Kraftwerk, for which I thank you, as they truly deserve acknowledgement. > Thorne used an Oberheim poly synth on 154 - very advanced kit for 79. > Whereas a Fairlight today is a clunky bit of unreliable 80s gear? Surely using a > Fairlight today is purely a retro statement? Why bother? You could emulate it on > a Mac or PC, with better reliability... Ask Thorne. He still uses one. And nice man that he is, he'll probably give you an answer. Glenn. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:43:50 -0000 From: "Clements, Bruno - BUP" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V8 #73 Yes, not liking the title track has always put me off buying Lamb. The others I used to enjoy quite a bit... despite what my friends thought! B - -----Original Message----- From: RLynn9@aol.com [mailto:RLynn9@aol.com] Sent: 18 March 2005 15:57 To: idealcopy@smoe.org Subject: [idealcopy] Re: idealcopy-digest V8 #73 In a message dated 3/18/05 3:38:32 AM Central Standard Time, owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org writes: > - ---Surely more amazing is the fact that Mr Wilson put Lamb lies down on > Broadway at number 3 and has escaped all criticism ;-) > > Perhaps, as it was practically a solo Peter Gabriel album, it isn't as badly > thought of as the others... > aside from the title track, Lamb is too tedious for me (and that's saying a lot) ....i prefer Foxtrot and Nursery Cryme ......but oddly enough, my favorite pop single by Genesis is sans Gabriel: "Follow You Follow Me" RL ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.clearswift.com ********************************************************************** ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V8 #74 ******************************